Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

China Blocks Web Searches About Protests

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the must-want-users-to-make-their-own dept.

China 134

itwbennett writes "China is blocking searches on Google and microblogs for Zengcheng, a city in the country's Guangdong province, where protests have erupted against local authorities. The move is part of an effort to suppress information on the rioting."

cancel ×

134 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

They also block (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443798)

Web searches about blocking web searches about protests, as well as protests about blocking web searches about protests. Web searches about protests about blocking web searches about protests are allowed, though.

Re:They also block (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443870)

Really? "Web searches about protests about blocking web searches about protests" are a subset of "web searches about protests", which are blocked, according to TFA.

(Mod this offtopic please)

Re:They also block (1)

black3d (1648913) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443902)

As ACs post is a joke, +funny would be more appropriate.

Re:They also block (1)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446036)

I find this very insightful, because from a gov's perspective, talk/publicity about a protest is much worse than the protest itself.

SHOCKER (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443816)

Need a tag-pic for China censorship so Rainmeter can show me a related icon rather than the Great Wall. Although I must say any article about China these days falls into a few categories, censorship definitely being one of the more common.

Zengcheng (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443828)

Beautiful Zengcheng. Nothing bad has ever happened here. Much happiness to you.

Re:Zengcheng (4, Funny)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443854)

Beautiful Zengcheng. Nothing bad has ever happened here. Much happiness to you.

Man, if I had fifty cents for every time I heard that...

Re:Zengcheng (3, Funny)

ThePeices (635180) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444158)

...you would have 50 cents.

Re:Zengcheng (3, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444184)

But would I have 50 cent or fifty cents [wikipedia.org] ? HTH, HAND.

Who Cares? This Is Not New Or News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443840)

Stories about "China blocking" this or that just is not news for nerds. Its as old as the Internet, and not surprising in the least.

The Chinese governments blocks anything and everything that they want and really, its their business, not ours.

Re:Who Cares? This Is Not New Or News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444054)

The Chinese governments blocks anything and everything that they want and really, its their business, not ours.

So this is slashdot.usa now?

Re:Who Cares? This Is Not New Or News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445568)

... What?

Re:Who Cares? This Is Not New Or News (2)

VanessaE (970834) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444104)

It's here because, as implied by Slashdot's tagline, it's "Stuff that Matters".

Re:Who Cares? This Is Not New Or News (2)

thelexx (237096) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444298)

However, it's not news. It would be news if China suddenly grew a pair and _didn't_ censor it.

You can't trust the Chinese (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443842)

How much more obvious does China have to make it that they can't be trusted.

Free people everywhere should be preparing to confront the fascist Chinese government instead of joining them in a race to the bottom.

Re:You can't trust the Chinese (1, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443944)

Or the USians.

Evil.

Re:You can't trust the Chinese (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446246)

Or by Jeremiah Cornelius.

Clueless.

Re:You can't trust the Chinese (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445106)

How much more obvious does China have to make it that they can't be trusted.

Free people everywhere should be preparing to confront the fascist Chinese government instead of joining them in a race to the bottom.

Although I agree the Government of China sucks, please don't lump all "the Chinese" people in with them.
People don't get to pick where they are born.

Peasant revolts (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36443844)

Historically, peasant revolts have been the largest threat to whichever incarnation the Chinese government is in. It looks like the Chinese Communist Party has learned its lesson well.

Explains their use of multinational corporations (2)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443948)

Nothing better to kill a peasant revolt than a company town.

Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country there (3, Insightful)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443876)

So this is what businesses want our country to be like - where businesses can roam freely, and ask the government to cut coverage to (and search of) protests?

This is what we encourage when we send work offshore to these kind of countries. No thanks.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444216)

Do we really encourage this behavior by outsourcing work to China? It could be argued that this helps their situation.

Sure, "our" factories over there contribute to the Chinese government's budget, but it also contributes to the overall well being of the average Chinese person. More well fed, more education, and more opportunity. I can't help but think that this encourages liberalization in the long term more than anything.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444346)

Q: Why companies outsource to China? (Hints: they are not using their budget to help Chinese Citizen)

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444360)

The only thing it really does is gives maximum freedoms to business, while giving a few trinkets to distract from the non-freedom to regular people.

Still doesn't excuse sending work there, but to do everything to undermine that government.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444544)

More well fed, more education, and more opportunity.

More rioting too...

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (0)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445864)

Get it through your thick American skulls -- plenty of people will happily sacrifice some of their freedom if it means that people much worse than them won't get those freedoms, either. For example, I don't need full and absolute freedom of speech but I would like it very much if spammers and crooks were told to shut up or go to prison.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446012)

... except that living inequality has gotten much worse in China, and now you have massive inflation there as the wealthy class buy up everything in sight, or bribe officials so they can have extra children that regular Chinese can not. It's not just about the disparity, but it's about "the market" run amok.

When the US finally decides to start making things again - probably in 2015 when US and Chinese wages hit parity - god help Taiwan and Japan. China's using all these US dollars to build fleets of submarines... not missile or hunter subs like the US made... China's version is made solely to ferry troops for surprise attacks.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (2)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444388)

What are you talking about? The government, for all intents and purposes, owns these business (state sponsored). Not the other way around as found in America. You don't become head honcho of a large Chinese company without at least having some political ties back to the CCP. Either you're paying your mafia-esque dues to the CCP, or you're a bonified member of the party.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446268)

Is there really any difference between the government owning industry and industry owning the government? Either way, they are in league, and to hell with the people. It seems to me, in both cases, it's more a case of them lying in the same bed than one owning the other.

Re:Quite the pro-business, anti-citizen country th (1)

z-j-y (1056250) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444592)

Maybe you didn't read the article. Either way you are retarded.

This story is about government oppresses small business owners and the riot it causes. Yeah, you are on the side of Chinese government. Not surprising coming from liberals. How many times Obama asks us to look up to China?

The only thing missing is some liberal saying "US is much worse in censorship, and China is pretty cool."

Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darknet? (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443920)

P2P has no central server, so there is no way to shut it down, past coming to your house and imprisoning you for using it.

Instead of a central server, you'd hold a list of potential servers which is everyone you connected to last time you were online. Only one out of your list needs to be online, and they'll propogate you a new list of IP addresses and ports(don't use just one port or that can be blocked too, randomize it).

Once on, you could file trade, browse the web through proxies, or chat.

I'd do this, but I don't know the Chinese language. What other goodies would you want to load into this piece of software?

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444042)

To attract the least suspicion, I think you'd make this software look like a browser itself. Another funny side effect of this is that your ISP would have no clue which sites you visit because you'd be loading up sites for other people all the time too. Someone should just make this software in order to make it harder for governments to control their people and censor the web. I'm good at P2P, and I already wrote a Gnutella client back in the day. I knew Gnutella was the future when Napster got shutdown even never hearing about the protocol before on my own. I thought I invented it. Anyway, if any of you guys want to form an organization to write a P2P software that combats censorship, is a webbrower, is a filesharer, and proxies at a whim, I'd like to write this software with you. I can't write this on my own because I'm sort of sheltered in the knowledge of open source. I would think we'd start with an opensource webbrowser. Then we'd code a P2P filesharer to interface with it. Next we'd add proxy ability through using the P2P nodes. I can do all the P2P stuff easy myself. My problem is that I'm not good at web browsers. Is there a good C/C++ open source webbrowser we'd use. I was thinking of using the ASIO C/C++ socket library because I've written different P2P aps there. I'm kinda serious about writing this software, but only if we get a group together to do it. I mean how would we even organize?

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444272)

So now you think you invented Tor too?

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (2)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444404)

To be fair, I'm sure plenty of people came up with this idea. This is why I'm against patents so much. What makes someone a special snowflake that they patent an idea that multitudes of other people probably already came up with? Yes, I never heard of Tor before. No I do not feel special for coming up with it. I just like knowing the ideas I come up with are good ones, and not just "Hamburger Earmuffs"

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444636)

What makes someone a special snowflake that they patent an idea that multitudes of other people probably already came up with?

Nothing, because you don't patent an idea, you patent a particular method of implementing that idea.

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444044)

There already exist several such projects. Tor and Freenet being only two of them.

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444218)

Freenet seems to be pretty on with what I was expecting I'd make so I guess I don't have to worry about it. Hey at least when I come up with ideas, they're good ideas because other people implement them. I remember before windows Instant messaging, that IM would be a good idea. I remember before MMORPGS that they'd dominate the video game market. I remember hearing about the start of ebay on Usenet and said,"If they made a website for that, it would turn into a monopoly monster"

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444536)

that works against a mostly cowed authoritarian government like the US gov, the chinese government would have no problem tracking down everyone running it and shooting them, the billing their families for the investigations AND the bullet

Re:Why doesn't someone just make a P2P proxy darkn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445872)

"cowed authoritarian government like the US gov" The US government may be a lot of different things but it is far from authoritarian and the people are hardly cowed. The US citizens can and often do challenge the government without starting a shooting war and mass rioting that seems to be the norm today for a lot of governments.

Not good enough (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444974)

I am a Chinese, and let me tell you what might happen to such software, just like the fate of many similar-purpose software before it:
1. Restriction of distribution: people can't easily search for it due to keyword filtering, any local or foreign links for downloading the software could be promptly made inaccessible.
2. Technical disruption: for example, set up "watchman" peer-to-peer nodes that use the same service, which may collect the IP addresses of people using the service, monitor their online activities, then maybe perform sudden mass-banning from time to time that makes a wide range of ports on your IP address inaccessible from the Internet. I have little knowledge about networking, but I felt it might be naive to imagine there can never be any technical way to affect the service so it either becomes too slow to use, does not work all the time, or invoke fear of being monitored and caught. Especially when the attacker have firm control over the whole underlying infrastructure. It might even be harder to avoid technical disruptions if you try to make a service that is accessible to 'dummies'.
3. Bad publicity: propaganda and education could in fact make people believe they don't ever need to break censorship, that censorship or self-censorship is necessary for reasons such as protecting national security, fighting child pornography etc. Through propaganda you may give people the mentality like those in some religious conservatives who never want to read about atheist viewpoints because they have ingrained biases and negative predispositions. So people may not have enough motivation to use your software to begin with.

It is certainly worth mentioning that most useful information services that are blocked in China, such as Youtube, Twitter, etc. all have local-brand alternatives that cooperates with the government. It may also not be too surprising that the vast majority of Chinese-language information inaccessible in China are either propaganda against the Chinese government, or could be easily branded as such. This creates a situation that lead many Chinese people into thinking that the only reason to use anti-censorship is when they want to become a political activist. Then, without access to much of the information that could cause people significant discomfort, where is the motivation to become a political activist in the first place? This lack of motivation is strengthened even further with the propaganda that "political activists are trouble-makers who generates chaos and damages society". So in simple words, an uninformed Chinese may easily believe that "only bad guys who want to do secret underground anti-government business need to use circumvent censorship software."

Combining all the above, the end result is a great majority of Chinese people without much technical prowess either never gets to hear about such software, or have too much trouble making it useful, or were discouraged due to fear or simple lack of motivation. Those are some of the important reasons why anti-censorship softwares, despite having many of them been created already, never achieved truly great popularity in China except for a limited group of tech-savvy individuals, and the situation may provoke some thoughts that the problem may not totally be on the technical side.

Perhaps one of the ways for a truly meaningful opposition to Chinese censorship to happen is when someone first delivers a significant piece of censored information through hijacking of mainstream media (or when some mainstream media slips its control), THEN tell people where to find out more about it. Without first being convinced that there are some significant censored information they should be concerned about or interested in, many Chinese simply wouldn't want go through all the trouble of getting out of censorship just because you are waving a sign saying "Free Web" in front of them, and they few curious people who did peek out have never made much difference.

Re:Not good enough (1)

readin (838620) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445372)

Where are my mod points when I really need them???

Must be working (4, Insightful)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36443986)

I haven't heard anything about these protests on the news here in the US

Re:Must be working (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446172)

That's not surprising. If a story doesn't verbally fellate Owebama, then it doesn't get run by the Dinosaur media.

Not the usual news (5, Informative)

juicegg (1683626) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444092)

There are not the usual kinds of riots and protests in China. It's no longer peasants in the villages protesting against stolen land, pollution or corruption - these are formally relatively quiet urban workers going on multi-day riots that the government is struggling to contain and that threaten to spread everywhere the same bad conditions exist. Things like stagnant wage rates with high inflation, abusive authorities and employers, political repression, etc: article from the Guardian [guardian.co.uk]

What business wants again the US... (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444386)

...is what these people are protesting against. Bad jobs are still bad even if it is the only practical option.

FUCK CHINA (1, Insightful)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444132)

Really. I mean if you're a citizen of any country where you still have some freedom, any freedom, then FUCK CHINA.

Re:FUCK CHINA (0)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444214)

I live in the US: some freedoms, but not really braveheart "FREEDOM!!!" So could I then get away with just getting to second base with China?

Re:FUCK CHINA (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445934)

If you live in the US, you have more freedoms (both of things you can do, and from restrictions ie censorship) than 95% of the world. Putting in a snide comment about how you have "some freedoms [instead of lots of freedoms]" because you live in the US-- in a thread about China, no less-- is just insulting to the folks in China who would love to be able to actually criticize their government without being sent to labor camp.

Re:FUCK CHINA (0)

grainofsand (548591) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446228)

95%? Really?

I know Americans tend to be very proud of their country and its systems, but hyperbole like the 95% claim undermines all that is actually good.

Re:FUCK CHINA (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444682)

I'd think that all the toxic chemicals in China would be worse than any STD.

On the other hand, if you want to cripple their government(and the people that send work over those kind of countries) for the second time in 200 years, I have no problem with that kind of fucking.

Islam is a greater danger. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446150)

With China, it is a simple matter of will of the people. Difficult, but possible.

Not so with Islam. With Islam you have people who will willingly go to death in their desire to be enslaved, and to enslave you too. The very world "Islam" means submission. Their loyalty to this faith is disturbing. A Chinese official will eventually capitulate to pressure. A Muslim will breathe his last trying to make you submit.

If anything, we need to be educating China on the danger of Islam. Their need to have a subservient mindset in their society does half of Islam's work, which is enslavement of the mind. Then all Islam needs to do is enslave the heart.

Do you really want an Islamic China?

Re:Islam is a greater danger. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446190)

I would be paranoid about islam if it was plotting against me!

Come again? (3, Insightful)

arielCo (995647) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444134)

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

John Gilmore, quoted in Time Magazine [google.com]

Re:Come again? (4, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444208)

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

John Gilmore, quoted in Time Magazine [google.com]

That was the 90s. The Net in 2011 interprets censorship as a value-added customer experience enhancement service and downloads an app for it onto your non-jailbreakable iThoughtStation 451.

Re:Come again? (1)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446076)

Definitely the comment of the year and a major candidate for the comment of the decade to come.

Re:Come again? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444260)

That's exceptionally "Half is glass full" for slashdot. While I have no doubt some of their billion+ people will still be able to get past the censorship, I'd doubt that -most- net users in China will have unrestricted access to that information.

Re:Come again? (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444274)

Wow, did I really just write "half is glass full?" Clearly I need to do the dishes less often...

Re:Come again? (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446024)

Wow, did I really just write "half is glass full?" Clearly I need to do the dishes less often...

Half full, or half empty? Glass is easily downsized if one has a hammer.

Re:Come again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446292)

Wow, did I really just write "half is glass full?" Clearly I need to do the dishes less often...

Yoda! You speak Yoda!

Re:Come again? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445946)

What happens when the CCP decides the rest of the world's internet is undesirable, and stops peering with it? You feel like setting up a 3g uplink for several billion people?

Social stability (4, Interesting)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444262)

I'm going to take a controversial stand here and probably be modded into oblivion but here it goes. This is a good move by China. Why? It increases social stability at the cost of individual rights. How many groups of self-described smart people in America are trying to roll back individual freedoms in the name of "it's better our way"? After all, freedom includes the freedom to make the "wrong" choice, and this this really pisses the smart people off. After all, they're the intelligent ones and know what the correct choices are politically, and anyone who opposes them isn't a noble dissenter but (a) mistaken (b) an idiot (c) probably medically insane.

You have to understand where China is coming from with this. The first and foremost priority of the government is to hold the country together. Everyone thinks of China as a monolithic entity, but this is just plain ignorant. China is a multicultural society, and like all multicultural societies it is fundamentally unstable. Action must be taken when unrest occurs, lest it spread throughout the country and result in the horror of all Chinese: a fragmented, divided China. China experienced the warlord era in the 20th century and never wants to go back. Before that, China lost sovereignty over its own territory (foreign concessions) and that wasn't much fun either. If a few peasants need to be crushed to ensure the bad old days will never return, then so be it. These protesters are making the "wrong" choice. All the smart people agree, and it is stupidity or insanity to oppose the choices they make. In China, the smart people really do control the government without that pesky democracy interference. Wasn't there an article here recently about the high government officials all being scientists and engineers? So, the government WILL do what it thinks is necessary to ensure social stability. And to Chinese, stability is more important than progress.

Why are the people protesting? China has a long tradition of the central government having limited control over the provinces and even less control over cities, counties, and lower branches of government. Corruption is endemic. Beijing promotes reform, but local officials are powerful in their own princedoms. It's kind of like trying to reform the State Department or the CIA from the presidency. However, Beijing CAN enforce its will when it comes to clearly overriding concerns like keeping the country from splintering apart. When a few thousand laobaixing [wikipedia.org] get screwed over, there's really nothing to be done. Moreover, the mandarins cheating the peasants is not a pressing national integrity concern, it's been happening in China for thousands of years. So some people in flyover territory get screwed...again, the smart people agree that this is not a problem at all and in fact is sometimes a good thing. After all, who doesn't enjoy a good redneck-bashing?

How's that Chinese tea that you're gulping down? (3, Informative)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444494)

There's no excuse for what China does. You're using their excuses, their terminology, and their justifications. It reads like it was a scripted excuse instead of a sound justification.

All China did in 1980 was to find a way to cleanse their despotism. Seeing people like you, makes me think that it worked. Yes, that's a problem.

Unlike China, we like to still give the regular individual the chance instead of disappearing them, harvesting their organs for some Party member, and putting the family under house arrest for objecting to working conditions at the company town.

Re:Social stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444580)

This was really interesting to read. I wish I could up-vote you for this post.

I couldn't exactly tell if you were being facetious or not, but you raised some good points. Which is more important, social stability or bearable living conditions? I wonder how we, in America, would react if the gas prices got so high that the average person paid more to go to work than they earned?

Stability is the function of good living condition (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444638)

You can't split the two without splitting society.

Without social stability, you don't get bearable living conditions for more than the governmental apparatus. See China, North Korea, India, Vietnam, Brazil, and Russia for examples of that. These countries are split - businesses get all the freedoms to run over regular people, while regular people are silenced or disappeared for doing the same things as business.

Re:Stability is the function of good living condit (1)

cavreader (1903280) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445986)

Yet when the US pursues policies aimed at maintaining social stability they get criticized for supporting tyrants and dictators like those in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Yemen, and a whole host of similar countries. How much social stability has the "Arab Spring" generated lately?

Re:Social stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444582)

Society is the emergent property associated with the collection of individuals which make it up. all societies exist secondarily to the people composing them. the only active, real, living, rights possessing entities are us human beings, and possibly any other sentient beings. Society has NO right to exist. we as individuals DO have rights, including a right to collective self determination (ie democracy). all the talk about social stability at the expense of individual rights is pure fascist/communist bs. corporations dont have rights, govts dont have rights. anytime a govt gets the idea it has the "right" to suppress social movements comprised of self directed, self organized INDIVIDUALS, it has lost its raison d'etre, and becomes a "paper tiger". This is not my opinion, its a fact carved in the bedrock of existence. any individuals who ally themselves with paper tigers like the chinese govt, exxon, US govt (the police state, not the constitution), etc are traitors to their race and deserve whatever fate history dictates they recieve. I for one welcome my new comrades, the chinese working classes. lets take a long march out of our slavyer and take back the world for ourselves.

Re:Social stability (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444606)

Here's another controversial stand I take. China is BIG, and should have been broken up into states and placed under one federal union. The political system would be much more stable under a democratic republic system. The controversy is that we already have a nation doing exactly that. America.

Re:Social stability (0)

z-j-y (1056250) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444650)

No doubt the power of Chinese gov is liberals' wet dream.

Some liberals still occasionally bash China. Once China beheads some Americans, they'll stop, and turn to absolute reverence.

Re:Social stability (1)

Mullen (14656) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444652)

You're arguing the wrong point to the wrong crowd.

To us, the Slashdot Crowd, Individual Rights is Social Stability. Anything that hampers Individual Rights is upsetting the Social Stability. Plus, your argument is weak on its main point, upsetting Social Stability is not necessarily a bad thing and doing so does not always result in violence. As long as we are free to make our choices and not be suppressed by the Government, we are happy and content.

China may have experienced some really nasty forms of government rule, but it does not excuse the current government from its behavior and responsibilities. Your post also hints that people can not rule themselves properly and ignores that the current government in China is using Social Stability as an excuse for corruption and abuse of those, who in general, do not like the current government.

And do not give us the multicultural excuse for oppression. There are a number of multicultural societies that are stable and do not need to be oppressed to function.

Re:Social stability (4, Insightful)

Dutch Gun (899105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444868)

This is a good move by China.

It depends on whether you define "China" as the government or those who are governed.

Re:Social stability (2)

Korveck (1145695) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444994)

From reading this, I get a feeling that you are just repeating propaganda from the Chinese Communist Party. The stability (or in Chinese term, "harmony") over freedom argument is especially familiar to anyone paying attention to Chinese media. Even in Hong Kong we read that all the time from the left-leaning newspaper.

This problem is that this stability is established on suppression of dissents. It does not actually address the cause of instabilities. The unfairness in the Chinese society is well known. Inflation is high again. Government officials are corrupt. Abuse of power is common, often illegally but usually the officials are able to get away with it. All these contribute to the anger of the less fortunate crowd. To make matters worse, the media, usually controlled by the government, tend to downplay or simply ignore their plight. This effectively removes a vent for them to express themselves in the society. People don't protest because they are stupid (an false assumption you base all your arguments on), but because they are expressing their anger in certain way.

Re:Social stability (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445100)

It increases social stability at the cost of individual rights.

However, the suppression of individual rights is the very cause of social instability.

Re:Social stability (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445894)

Your arguments boil down to a few things:

"Smart" people think it's acceptable to oppress those with less power who have had less access to education and privilege. As you clearly don't fall into the class distinction of many of the oppressed, this doesn't bother you. Of course, history has shown that when human life holds little value, it's very easy to find yourself on the wrong side of the fence when the politics shift, so don't get too comfortable.

Given only two choices between a horrific past and an oppressive present, one should choose the present government. Not only is this a false framing that neglects the possibilities of an optimistic future where equality protects everyone, by promoting your viewpoint you are directly contributing to the oppression through psychological means. Some measure of "social stability" is a flimsy fear tactic that conflates alternative viewpoints with chaos, when in fact there may be other solutions that are better for all, not just the wealthy elite. In general, a free an open society promotes the exchange of information and ideas in a way that directly contributes to societal improvement. If your government requires the killing those who don't agree with you, it's a good indication that your government isn't working for the people or even in an efficient way.

Finally, you do some hand waving that attempts to shift the blame for the obvious problems away from the central government and on to every other structure of control. In truth, the corruption of local power structures is indicative of system problems with the social structure as whole. Corruption is defeated by transparency and enhanced by censorship, the exact same censorship the article is about.

I'm not saying that Western governments don't have their own problems or represent perfect societies, far from it. However, a central aspect of the improvement of civil rights and overall well being of the people has hinged on the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom to protest. Without these things, corruption is free to spread to all levels of government to the detriment of all. For your own good, open up your country.

My first thought. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444288)

My first thought was actually,"I wonder if the U.S. is doing thi and I just haven't heard about the protests in other cities against our government and it's increasingly rights-quashing ways."

Searching for them is possible unlike China (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444430)

Publishing and searching for that information is not a crime against the US, unlike China.

This just in (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444324)

China uses a giant national proxy infrastructure to censor information about the 1989 protests! News at 11.

anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36444330)

sounds like anonymous just found itself a new target....

Headline from tomorrow's People's Daily: (1)

Hartree (191324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444374)

There is no unrest in Zengcheng, and it's all instigated by subversive foreign elements.

Re:Headline from tomorrow's People's Daily: (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444758)

No, they just don't report the story, per instruction from the government.

Re:Headline from tomorrow's People's Daily: (1)

RobertinXinyang (1001181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444898)

In truth, there are two headlines on this topic. The first is: Police arrest 25 to quell unrest in S China town http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-06/12/content_12678431.htm [chinadaily.com.cn] .

The Second is: Unfounded rumor sends local crowd into frenzy http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-06/13/content_12679447.htm [chinadaily.com.cn] .

These are just the English news sources.

Re:Headline from tomorrow's People's Daily: (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445932)

Did you hear about the Jasimine revolution protests in China? About 100 foreign journalists showed up, and about zero Chinese protesters showed up. It's all about "the narrative" about China, which was written in 1989 by CNN. Foreign journalists are ready, willing, and able to aid anti-Chinese movements, it's a sad fact. Doesn't it suck when the commies are right?

If they're blocking searches for "zengchang" (1)

exentropy (1822632) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444692)

Why not use https://encrypted.google.com/ [google.com] ?

Re:If they're blocking searches for "zengchang" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445128)

Because it's blocked (at least here in Nanjing).

Re:If they're blocking searches for "zengchang" (1)

lowstz (2099834) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445616)

A lot of google services are blocked or interference.

Absolute BS (2)

RobertinXinyang (1001181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444812)

I just did this search http://www.google.com/search?q=China+Riot&hl=en&newwindow=1&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&tbs=,qdr:w [google.com] and came up with plenty of hits about the supposedly blocked subject. I am in central P.R. China.

This particular claim of censorship is nothing but lies by people who aim to discredit China. Again, the story is false, as a simple test will show.

Re:Absolute BS (1)

poity (465672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445410)

Did you try the Chinese character search?
http://www.google.com.hk/search?hl=en&safe=off&qscrl=1&q=%E5%A2%9E%E5%9F%8E+%E6%9A%B4%E4%B9%B1&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq= [google.com.hk]
I doubt the government cares about controlling the foreigners.

Re:Absolute BS (1)

prowler1 (458133) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445586)

It does mention the searches in 'Chinese' and I noticed the parents search was in English. And as you stated, I would also assume the Chinese government is only really interested in stopping wide spread riots in China and not to worried about people outside of their country.

FTFA:
"Google searches in Chinese for Zengcheng, a city in the country's Guangdong province, result in the browser's connection to the server being reset, with no search results offered."

Re:Absolute BS (1)

RobertinXinyang (1001181) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445600)

I looked on Baidu (China's version of Google). Yes, I did my search in Chinese. The stories are there. Yes, the spin is a little different; however, the facts in the stories are consistent with what is found in the English version of China Daily.

Re:Absolute BS (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445974)

Chinese don't use Google, they use Baidu.com and sina.com. Try searching on there. You're right about all the lies, though. Journalists just make shit up all the time. Out of ignorance or arrogance, it's inexcusable either way.

Re:Absolute BS (1)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36446122)

I'm not surprised. Rumors about a topic being censored is more effective than censorship itself - it discourages people to search in the first place.

War with China (1)

amightywind (691887) | more than 3 years ago | (#36444864)

War with China is inevitable. The sooner we glass the mainland back to the stone age the better.

Why China? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445034)

Islam is the real threat. Even China should be more concerned with that.

Stealth nets to the rescue! (1)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445086)

So maybe we should drop a few internets in a suitcase and some of those mobile phone workarounds from yesterdays $50M freedom non censorship project around China then.. surely they wont mind..

big brother strikes again ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36445176)

so much internet censorship going on in this country .

http://local-work-from-home-us.blogspot.com/

The Giant with Feet of Clay (1)

Phoenix666 (184391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445268)

There's been much made the past couple of years about China the Rising Superpower. On balance that's a good thing, because what happens with China this century has existential repercussions the way that Al Qaeda and terrorism has never had and never will have. If things go badly between China and the rest of the world a great many people will die and nations will fall on a scale that would put the previous two world wars to shame.

But the thing that makes China watching such a nail-biter is that it is an exceptionally fractious and brittle society with very little in the way of pressure valves. As Mao and the Communists used to say back in the day, China has 'feet of clay.' Don't like the government? Tough! Big company paid off a local official and the police threw you off your land so they can build a big factory on it, without so much as a by-your-leave? It's for the glory of socialism, comrade, so be a good peasant and go 'eat bitter' (READ: suck it up). And with so many, many officials on all levels running hard to get the bribes they need to buy a black Audi, big house, and keep mistresses, those incidents are piling up by the thousands.

It's only a matter of time before everything reaches the breaking point, and when that happens either China dissolves into bloody civil war with disastrous consequences for the rest of the world, or the Communist Party decides it's time to start a war against foreign oppressors who are trying to humiliate the motherland, with disastrous consequences for the rest of the world.

It's not a question of if this will happen, but how. And the how keeps the China watchers up at night. If the latter option comes about, hundreds of millions of people will die and the viability of the Earth for human habitation may become seriously compromised.

Re:The Giant with Feet of Clay (1)

WidgetGuy (1233314) | more than 3 years ago | (#36445656)

Well, I guess we must then hope the Chinese love their children too. (ala the Russians via Sting)

censorship and minding your own fucken business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446034)

Do you pound on your neighbor's front door decrying their restrictive internet regime for their children?
If so, please disregard my criticisms. You are a rare purist, an unstable nutjob that should be locked up to be sure, but a purist nonetheless.
If not, I suggest you shut the fuck up about what the Chinese or anybody else is censoring, and mind your own fucken business (eg. hopped up on stimulant Apache jockeys hosing civilians in Iraq with 30mm ammunition in violation of the Geneva convention, and other stuffs the west would have kept censored but for unfortunate leaks....).

Re:censorship and minding your own fucken business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446242)

Oooh a Chinese govt shill eh? Not the first in this thread either. How about you fuck off and realise we have freedom to say what ever we fucking wnat.

Asshole.

Re:censorship and minding your own fucken business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36446444)

Oooh a American govt shill eh? Not the first in this thread either. How about you fuck off and realise we have freedom to say what ever we fucking wnat.

Asshole.

Touche

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>