China hits back with report on U.S. human rights record

[ReindeerThistle]

I don't actually see anything wrong with what China is doing. It's the Deng Xiaoping's Machiavellian legacy- countries do not limit free speech just for the heck of it, they limit or block it because they need to. If China opened up the internet and allowed free protests to take place, the government would likely fall within a week.

Hardly.
Check out The System of Multi party Cooperation in China

The System of multi-party cooperation and political consultation under the leadership of the Communist Party of China is a basic political system in China.

The system means that the CPC is the only party in power in the People's Republic of China while under the precondition of accepting the leadership of the CPC, the eight other political parties participate in the discussion and management of state affairs, in cooperation with the CPC.

Political consultation means that under the leadership of the CPC, all parties, mass organizations and representatives from all walks of life take part in consultations of the country's basic policies and important issues in political, economic, cultural and social affairs before a decision is adopted and in the discussion of major issues in the implementation of the decisions.

Political consultation takes the organizational form of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

Political consultation is the most important political and organization form of the multi-party and political consultation system.

Cooperative relations between the CPC and other political parties are based on the principle of "long-term coexistence and mutual supervision, treating each other with full sincerity and sharing weal or woe.

I applaud you for this. I had you down as a do-nothing political pampleteering type. I revise my opinion.

I thank you for tjat. I have alluded to it in my pists. I am a full time volunteer of 21 years standing who has worked with the poorest workers. It is one of the reasons I became a Red.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It's funny how the Chinese human rights reports addresses issues that have nothing to do with the US government itself, including school shootings, as if the US government did it itself. While I won't doubt the US itself has come with numerous reports mentioning Chinese human trafficking that all have nothing to do with the PRC government, human rights reports about countries shouldn't mention actions that are not in any way directly connected to the state.

They think the state should take action to stop or heavily restrict these incidents from occurring. One example would be how many Southern state governments did little or nothing to stop people from being lynched for decades, as the URL Contre posted earlier pointed out. The mere fact that Obama cannot even get basic common sense measures enacted to reduce gun violence after Newtown speaks volumes.

But many of them are due to our own government not being as authoritarian as they think it should be. From their standpoint I think it is just as legitimate as pointing out how authoritarian their own government is when we think it should be far more libertarian with far more freedom and liberty for their people.

What I find interesting is that they didn't mention a thing about the ongoing blatant discrimination against homosexuals, or the threat that far-right extremist groups pose which continues to be largely ignored.

 

[Flying Pig]

Well, China is waaaay ahead of nations in meeting the The UN Millennium Development goals

Name me one other nation who's done all that. This is what the US government calls "human rigts abuses."

The end does not justify the means.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

... China's human rights record is not crap...

This sentence was an epic lolwut post of denial.

that is why they did not even respond to the US, report

Yes they did respond to the US by putting out a counter-report and going 'neener neener'.

China is pointing to the big picture -- and is essentially calling on the US to practice what it preaches.

The US should practice what they preach and China should also stop being one of the worst human rights violators in the world.

Just like our fellow Reds, the brave North Koreans (who, interestingly enough, have also adopted market style systems to keep their economy from totally going under).

Not really.....

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

This report taught me that the effects of a recession are tantamount to human rights violations.

 

[Flying Pig]

I suppose a socialist, or a Beveridgeian (is that a word?) liberal might well agree with you there.

 

[Patroklos]

As a someone devoted full time to improving the lives of the poorest and least powerful in US society, I applaud China for putting the spotlight on the US.

Is that what they are calling sitting around discussing stuff in dorm rooms while waiting for you parents to recharge you meal card these days?

Please do qualify you grandios claim.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Please see my oher posts. I am a 45 year old with21 years of unpaid volunteer work. And Ipaid for all of my education out of pocket by workingmy own job.

 

[Patroklos]

21 years volunteering for what? I don't give a damn that you and your friends publish half readable manifestos that nobody but yourself reads, and you talking to each other about helping the proletariate isn't actually helping anyone.

Put up or shut up, your ridiculous self aggrandizing posts about how awesome you are are meaningless until you show us something concrete, until then you are just a braggart who shys away from details concerning your claims.

 

[Ajidica]

Did someone wake up on the wrong side of the naval cot this morning?

 

[woody60707]

Why do people keep replying to RT? You all know he is a huge troll or someone that has a serious mental illness.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Why do people keep replying to RT? You all know he is a huge troll or someone that has a serious mental illness.

That is what the soviets said about their citizens who did not believe in communism.

 

[Flying Pig]

If you don't mind my asking a personal and totally irrelevant question, how does a full-time volunteer support himself?

 

[aelf]

The end does not justify the means.

It's nice to say that, but the problem is usually that the end is not even shared or agreed upon. That's why little or no progress is made - the dillemma of liberalism.

Why do people keep replying to RT? You all know he is a huge troll or someone that has a serious mental illness.

Funny, I think the same about a handful of other posters, including sometimes yourself.

 

[Verbose]

Hardly.
Check out The System of Multi party Cooperation in China

Yes, well, the Soviets also claimed to be perfectly democratic citing their concept of "council democracy". Looks OK on paper. In application it still meant all power to the Party. Same thing with China.

Further Chinese problems include things like how right to private ownership is still pretty darn weak. The new Chinese middle class is progressing in lifestyle by leaps and bounds, hordes of people have been lifted out of poverty, but there's a distinction between having access to resources and wealth, and owning it. The Chinese are still surprisingly unclear about to what extent they actually individually and privately own a lot of things, to dispose of as they see fit, and to what extent they simply have access, courtesy of the Party, which otherwise tends not to fail to point out to its citizens how anything good they might be getting is due to the Party. So the Party is at liberty to take it all away in principle.

This is stuff the US cleared up in the firtst decades of booting the British out. As long and China is to be run by the CCP, it's unclear if China will ever make that transit. And if the CCP hold on power is broken, it's probably not going to be over things like internet censorship, but more likely precisely over questions about who can actually own what in today's China?

 

[woody60707]

It's nice to say that, but the problem is usually that the end is not even shared or agreed upon. That's why little or no progress is made - the dillemma of liberalism.



Funny, I think the same about a handful of other posters, including sometimes yourself.

I don't know where you set your bar at, but mine was at when RT starting talking about how he is in a "clandestine organization" that is 2/3rd's everything.

 

[Flying Pig]

It's nice to say that, but the problem is usually that the end is not even shared or agreed upon. That's why little or no progress is made - the dillemma of liberalism.

That's a seperate if valid point - mine was simply that pointing out that the Chinese government has done good things for its people does not negate its human rights abuses.

 

[Crezth]

That's a seperate if valid point - mine was simply that pointing out that the Chinese government has done good things for its people does not negate its human rights abuses.

This logic can apply, completely unmutated, to the USA and virtually every country in existence.

 

[Flying Pig]

Of course, which is why you'll never catch me saying that we should be complacent about our relatively good human rights records.

 

[aelf]

I don't know where you set your bar at, but mine was at when RT starting talking about how he is in a "clandestine organization" that is 2/3rd's everything.

You asked why people respond to him when he's either a troll or has mental issues. I'm talking about the former.

That's a seperate if valid point - mine was simply that pointing out that the Chinese government has done good things for its people does not negate its human rights abuses.

It's not really a separate point. If there is a no agreement on what the end is, how do you even argue that "the end does not justify the means"? Doesn't that depend on what the end and the means we're talking about are? Are there no ends for which every means that are not as bad are justified? For example, to prevent the death 10 people, is killing 1 by no means justified? It's an open question that the simple liberal principle you just stated ignores.