Politics – Debunking Myths of China

Before and After the Beijing Olympics: Political Change

tknauss / April 7, 2014May 6, 2015 / Politics

By Tyler Knauss, M. Baker and Cat McNeela

“Olympic Facilities,”
By Tyler Knauss, licensed with CC 2.0

Inside the city of Beijing, the Olympic facilities sit relatively unused since the end of the Games in 2008. Placed strategically in the center of the city, they are now only a place for tourists. For how grand these facilities are, as well as the fact that they are not used and have been largely dormant, it could be argued that these facilities were and are a wasted use of labor and capital for the people of China. Much can be said about whether or not it was the correct move of the world to have allowed the Olympics to be hosted in China. “The Olympics marked the beginning, it can be said, of the ascendance of the stability preservation regime in China. Looking back now, it might be that the Olympics were something [China] did that [it] ought not to have done.”

The Chinese government has used the success of the Olympics, and its ability to gather large pools of capital and resources, to assert itself over its people. Because of the spending power the government has, they are able to exert themselves greatly over the citizens of China and rule over them in a tightly controlled environment. “And he who has wealth speaks loudest,” muses Sun Liping, professor of Sociology at Tsinghua University.

With the Chinese government having so much power, coupled with the fact that it is still a one-party system, there is no room for compromise within the system. It can be said that the Olympics in 2008 were just another factor in strengthening the authority and overall ability of the government to increase their power in China. Because of the success of the 2008 Olympics, the government gained a lot of prestige for China as a whole. This prestige and success of the Olympics allowed the government to receive huge praise for the planning and execution of the games. However, the games brought on great duress to the poorer residents of Beijing. Many people there live in squalor and the funding that went towards the games could have been used to help these residents on a slightly smaller scale, but just as successfully as the Olympics. For the billions spent, the political environment brought on by the Olympics gave no cause to the government to put that money in the hands of the poor, but instead used it to support their own interests in bringing about an impressive display for the whole world to watch.

“Olympic Drummers,” by Tim Hipps, FMWRC Public Affairs, licensed with CCBY 2.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
www.armymwr.com
https://www.flickr.com/photos/familymwr/4927868989/in/photostream/

Chinese Media Censorship: The Great Firewall

jkane / April 6, 2014May 6, 2015 / Media, Politics

By Justin Kane, Conner Griffin, and Jimbo Barnes

China has the largest Internet user population in the world with 500 million users. With this absurd amount of users, the Chinese government had to raise the bar when it came to censoring what their users can access and post on the web. The video “Behind the Chinese Firewall” China’s social media gives the Chinese public the opportunity to micro-blog with 300 million other people everyday. Although social media is completely legal, the government has blocked Google, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and replaced them with sites that are only available to the Chinese. They ban and copy all of the social media sites because without their own server in Beijing, they have no control of what people put up. The Government monitors everything that goes on these websites. For example if you put on Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, that you want to meet up somewhere with a group of people, the police could be waiting for you at your destination. If there is any suspicious activity, the police can arrest the group on the spot. Also, you cannot post the name of the president of Chongqing as well as any government leaders. China’s firewall is one of the biggest in the world for a reason, they want to protect their information and prevent it from spreading anywhere.

Anti, Michael. “TEDTalks: Michael Anti. Behind the Great Firewall of China.” Films On Demand. 2012. Accessed March 4, 2014.

BBC News reports “more than two million people in China are employed by the government to monitor web activity.” (BBC News 2012) China’s “Sina Weibo” is a micro blogging website that went viral in 2010 and has collected more than five-hundred million followers who post over one-hundred million messages daily. This website is now commonly used as a source for Chinese citizens to vent and criticize Chinese governmental actions. Tang Xiaotao, a designated monitor for this site says, “he sits in front of a PC everyday monitoring negative comments related to his clients, and then reports them.” (BBC News 2012)
Few people are aware of tactics taken by Chinese officials aimed at concealing societal criticisms, but the phenomenon is becoming more evident everyday. BBC news continues, saying that there are many more websites like Sina Weibo, and many more agencies designed to sift through the postings. (BBC News 2012)
Freedom of speech and expression is a liberty that Chinese people don’t have, and great efforts are being made to punish people who feel differently.

By Jimbo Barnes, Conner Griffin, and Justin Kane

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-24396957.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chinadilemma/4641666938/in/photolist-9hfmip-9hitM7-byHuF-dURwL-7g5Sti-3NBRBG-9bbMRj-aDGtLH-85aKSj-7qPNw5-8khgqe-dXwkvD-dYYwrm-91BcEq-dUQSD-97Y9hb-hrjfLA-cm9HWW-4H4kKy-dYSRok-cWk4GY-chkczW-dyuTDu-d3wLRS-aAPTw-dAXjnd-5fo9HP-7MbpP7-dMdSr2-aHUQWn-aHUQNX-aPf2np-urP1C-5bwp4M-5aC75r-5aWFqC-4DcEkR-5Na59Q-dYYCRq-5CWrRh-5CS9vK-5CS9yZ-9s3jAR-9s6huE-9s6hzy-9s3jj6-9s6hQN-eHZ42w-dpKB5i-bPBPbg/

Rebecca MacKinnon states that 212,583 messages are deleted daily out of the 1.6 million articles checked on China’s Sina Weibo, adding up to more than 16 percent. (MacKinnon 2009) Common American social media programs including Facebook and Twitter are forbidden in China. Without these networks, Chinese citizens are forced to find other ways to express themselves. The domestic Chinese micro blogging website, Sina Weibo, has turned into China’s twitter. Sina Weibo is now a countrywide phenomenon, and according to First Monday, Chinese people are “found to be spending more time online and are more likely to contribute to online forums than people in all countries except Korea and France.” (MacKinnon 2009) The facts are simple, nobody in China has the right of freedom of speech, and even on forums and micro blogs like Sina Weibo, and they are always being watched. China’s filtering system is known as the “Great Firewall of China” because of how secure and closely watched the Chinese Internet is. (MacKinnon 2009)

By Jimbo Barnes, Justin Kane, and Conner Griffin

MacKinnon, Rebecca. “China’s Censorship 2.0: How companies censor bloggers.” February 2, 2009. http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2378/2089.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/103614698@N06/10788182386/in/photolist-9hfmip-9hitM7-byHuF-dURwL-7g5Sti-3NBRBG-9bbMRj-aDGtLH-85aKSj-7qPNw5-8khgqe-dXwkvD-dYYwrm-91BcEq-dUQSD-97Y9hb-hrjfLA-cm9HWW-4H4kKy-dYSRok-cWk4GY-chkczW-dyuTDu-d3wLRS-aAPTw-dAXjnd-5fo9HP-7MbpP7-dMdSr2-aHUQWn-aHUQNX-aPf2np-urP1C-5bwp4M-5aC75r-5aWFqC-4DcEkR-5Na59Q-dYYCRq-5CWrRh-5CS9vK-5CS9yZ-9s3jAR-9s6huE-9s6hzy-9s3jj6-9s6hQN-eHZ42w-dpKB5i-bPBPbg

Chinese Media Censorship: Not Playing By the Rules

In 2007, the year before the Beijing Olympics were held, China held the number one spot for arresting journalists. This was not just a one-year coincidence; this was the 9th consecutive year that China had been the world’s leader of putting journalists in jail. China is very strict with the rules they set on media and act on anyone that poses a threat to them. China is very strict on their media censorship but they allow the public to report on simple things like: Sports, entertainment, consumer lifestyle, and local news safety. But many subjects that the government considers “unflattering” are still highly monitored and have tight restrictions on them. During the Beijing games, the Chinese government promised to follow the rules of Article 51 of the International Olympic Committee that stated, “all necessary steps in order to ensure the fullest coverage by the different media and the widest possible audience in the world for the Olympics.” (Kine 116) But the Chinese refused to follow these rules and continued to harass, intimidate, and detain local and foreign journalists.

By: Justin Kane, Jimbo Barnes, and Conner Griffin

Worden, Minky. China’s Great Leap (New York, NY: Seven Stories Press, 2008), 115.

Chinese Media Censorship: Why censor the Internet?

With the emergence of the Internet in Chinese society, a “paradoxical relationship” between the government’s repressive censorship policies and the “freer” and “private-based” global Internet society has developed. The Chinese government views the Internet as dangerous instrument that can undermine its authority and legitimacy. China is classified as cyber-nationalist in its policies relating to the Internet, meaning that the government heavily regulates and censors what is put on the web. This stance is avant-garde to the way in which most countries handle Internet use. In the 2010 White Paper, a government publication that explains specific policies or issues, the government outlined its Internet policy, stating, “Spreading rumors” or posting on the Internet any information that may endanger “state security” or challenge “national unification” is illegal.

The government allows Internet activity as long as it coincides with Chinese economic interest, advances state nationalism, or strengthens the legitimacy of those in power. “Constant monitoring and surveillance of communications, propaganda activities…and accurate targeting of political and social threats” are tactics used to ensure that the regime remains in control. Those in power fear that an uncensored Internet will bring together uncontrollable social forces with both the means and willingness to engage in anti-regime discussion or activity.

By: Conner Griffin, Justin Kane, and Jimbo Barnes

Mueller, Milton L. “China and Global Internet Governance: A Tiger by the Tail.” Access Contested: Security, Identity, and Resistance in Asian Cyberspace (Cambridge, MA. MIT Press): 177-194.

A Picture Says 1000 Words About Google’s Censorship In China – Danny Sullivan

Chinese Media Censorship: power of blogs in today’s China

The Chinese government has allowed the rise of the Internet in China only as a means to help “business, entertainment, education, and information exchange” all the while effectively censoring Internet users from exchanging anti-regime opinions and discussion. Rebecca MacKinnon argues that in the future blogs could be a source for political change because they “enlarge the space for collaboration and conversation” about political issues. However, the Chinese government uses its vast resources to limit the scope of “participatory media” in China and she sites a 2005 study that concluded that the Chinese government has the most “broad-reaching system of Internet filtering in the world”. The Internet and blogging in particular could become a vehicle through which future political change could travel, but that it would not become the engine that powers the change. The cause for political change has to come from “charismatic and capable leaders”.

By: Conner Griffin, Jimbo Barnes, and Justin Kane

Mackinnon, Rebecca. Springer Science/Business Media. Accessed April 7, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27698209.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Han_Han_2.jpg

China Myths According to Evan Osnos

Tami Blumenfield / December 4, 2012May 6, 2015 / Politics

Just like Furman University’s First Year Seminar classes, Evan Osnos has been working on his list of myths about China. See his New Yorker article for details. Do you agree with his assessments?

The Rise of China During the Soviet Demise

akaonga / November 30, 2012May 6, 2015 / Assessing China's History, Cultural Revolution, Economics, Politics

By A. Nichols

In the 1900’s, the USSR’s GDP was higher than that of China. Today, however, it is China’s GDP which is higher. The swap was due to a multitude of reasons including better reform decisions and work culture in China than in the USSR. Furthermore, the USSR used prisoners of war as mass laborers, who did shabby work because they resented it. China’s mass laborers (who were Chinese), on the other hand, felt obliged to work for their motherland, and thus did better work.

Photo of Sputnik, the first satellite in space. By Cliff1066

The Soviet Union spent a huge proportion of its GDP on the military, reducing funding to other sectors of the economy. This reduced economic growth. China comparatively spent a small proportion of its GDP on its military. China, therefore, had enough left to spend on other economic activities, thus burgeoning economic growth. In the 1970’s, China allowed some level of capitalism in its economy and individuals set up companies, thereby expanding growth. The USSR didn’t allow any individual to establish a company, and so did not get the benefit that comes from an increase in companies: higher revenue. Also, the abundance of cheap labor in China attracted foreign investment, further expanding job creation and growth. Russia at that time lacked, and still lacks, abundant cheap labor. This discouraged foreign investment, leaving investment largely to the sole local investor, the state.

When both countries reformed in the 1980’s, China opened up to general ideas from the West about economic reform, and these copious ideas led to a greater understanding of how the economy works. China then used these to properly rearrange its economy in a way that has now made the country prosperous.

Chengdu, China. Photo by jdklub.

Russia, on the other hand, believing that the West had nothing to teach them, utterly rejected reform ideas from the West, thus, limiting the reform options that the Soviets could have had. This led to poor reform decisions, which consequently led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union also dismissed globalization, equating it to Americanization. This meant that Russia did not get the benefit of trade, more income. China, on the other hand, opened up to globalization, exporting numerous goods, and is now enjoying a high rate of growth due to the exports.

A human rights protest. Photo by hunxue-er.

However, China might collapse just like the Soviet Union did. Many Chinese citizens now resent their government for its repression, brutality, and high corruption. If these vices of the government accelerate, people could revolt. A specific example would be the repression of the Tibetans, and the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province. Just like the Soviet republics of Georgia and Ukraine started to demand secession from the Union, residents of Tibet and Xinjiang are also demanding secession from China. Simply put, despite China having achieved more than the Soviet Union, it could end up disintegrating just like it.

The High Socialist Period

khammett / November 30, 2012May 6, 2015 / Assessing China's History, Cultural Revolution, Politics

By A. Nichols

Socialist Revolution — http://www.rationalrevolution.net/images/maopla51.jpg

When first introduced to China at the end of the 1940’s, socialism seemed like a good idea.[1] During the first decade of the revolution, beneficial reforms were made on behalf of the working class in China. In the wake of these reforms came a reign of terror and death that claimed the lives of millions. In hindsight we must ask ourselves if the High Socialist Period in China ultimately benefited the country.

During the early years of the Mao Zedong’s leadership, beneficial reforms were made in the areas of new marriage laws and land redistribution. In China women were treated little better than servants. Recognizing that women were a key part of his revolutionary society, Mao Zedong “outlawed arranged marriages.”[2]

Mao Zedong also instituted land reforms that greatly benefited the Chinese people. In the early 1950’s, rural land reforms were achieved by passing rent reductions for farmers and workers, which allowed them to increase the productivity of their land.

Child of the Revolution — http://mikeely.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/expression-during-great-proletarian-cultural-revolutin-in-tibet.jpg

Many believed that the social reforms and changes Mao Zedong put in place would last and would ultimately benefit China. The myth of the new socialist order was finally exposed in 1956 and 1957 with the Anti-Rightist and Hundred Flowers movements.

During the Anti-Rightist campaign, large numbers of arrest warrants were distributed.[3] In the 1958, the Anhui province was given an arrest quota of 45,000 people. “Officials surpassed the quota with 101,000 arrests.”[4]

Following the Anti-Rightist movement came the Great Leap Forward. Ordered to produce enough iron to meet district’s quotas, communes would melt down all their kitchen and farm implements into useless lumps of iron. Communities also had grain quotas they had to meet for the Party. To gain favor, officials would exaggerate the quantity of grain their district produced. As a result, communities were left without food.

Drought, flooding, and exhausted resources led to a famine that ravaged China until 1962. At least twenty million died from starvation in what became known as the largest famine in history.

http://blstb.msn.com/i/58/DDB5C63AE123D0294BCF3B4AAA3E1E.jpg

No one can deny that during the first few years of the revolution progress was made in raising the quality of life for the men and women of the working class. However, Mao Zedong’s drive to create a Communist state led to a catastrophe in China, claiming the lives of over forty-five million people.[5] The implementation of Mao’s well-intentioned reforms resulted in the death of millions and brought untold suffering to the Chinese people.

[1] China: A Century of Revolution (Three Disc Set). DVD. Directed by Sue Williams. Toronto: Zeitgeist Films, 2007.

[2] Spence. The search for modern China, 376.

[3] Wasserstrom. China in the 21st century: what everyone needs to know.

[4] Michael Fathers. “A Most Secret Tragedy The Great Leap Forward aimed to make China an industrial giant—instead it killed 45 million.” Wall Street Journal (New York City), October 16, 2012, U.S. edition, sec. Life and Culture. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444180004578015170039623486.html?KEYWORDS=michael+father+great+leap+forward.

[5] Fathers. “A Most Secret Tragedy The Great Leap Forward aimed to make China an industrial giant—instead it killed 45 million.”