关我鸟事，我出做三个俯卧撑
So the online community seems to have won another victory (the previous one was where the government admitted that the picture of the Chinese Southern Tiger was a fake) over government corruption and censorship after a bunch of Wengan officials got sacked and the case got reopened. Here’s a summary of online stuff going on at China Digital Times:
Netizens’ Anger and Wit Against Online Censorship
Even though I like it whenever government officials get a black eye (and I hope the guy who made up the Olympic cheer would get his ass kicked multiple times), I still don’t like the idea of mob justice. I mean what if the netizens gang up on someone that’s innocent (and I don’t mean that girl that got hated on because she defended the Free Tibet people at Duke since she seemed to have done it more for attention than anything else)? Or even worse, what if the government sends their agents to infiltrate the forums and stir up their anger towards their own targets?
Even though the Chinese netizens are saying that they are against online censorship, I get the feeling that they wouldn’t mind censoring people who think that online censorship is necessary. This kind of movement is not necessarily one that is promoting freedom of speech or information, but is basically a different faction fighting for dominance or power. However, the one online essay, if they actually believed and followed what was being said, is pretty good.
For the sake of human dignity, let’s rise up online!
Rising up online is not illegal. According to the Chinese Constitution, citizens have the right to freedom of expression. According to the Property Law, servers and websites are private property, and must not be arbitrarily invaded. If the Internet police believe some posts are illegal, they can indict the author and the court can make a judgment, authors should be responsible for what they write.
But in our opinion, Internet police have no right to delete our speech. Whether this speech violates the law or not has to be decided by a court. Who gave the right to the Internet police to decide? Evidence shows, the speech deleted by Internet police is not illegal speech. The brutal way that Internet police censor speech is a violation of the Chinese Constitution.
So grassroots pressure attempting to change the way China works huh? Well, it’s the beginnings of a checks and balance system and something is better than nothing, but unlike the Olympic cheer, which I am firmly against, I’ll have to sit on the fence on this battle (though I’ll lean to the side of the netizens for once).
I think this guy has a very romantic view about the free speech. How practical to bring each of the online comment thought be break the law onto court.
I am not defend the Chinese internet censors who are politically backed.
But even in the west, there are often moderators who delete or modify the too offensive online contents.
I also totally agree with you about “This kind of movement is not necessarily one that is promoting freedom of speech or information, but is basically a different faction fighting for dominance or power.”
I think you might have read the 3 threads regarding democracy in China on”Blogging for China”. “YouZi “who advocate for democracy who basically was not able to handle different opinion and wanted to dominate rather than share.
A lot of people in China who admire free speech/democracy who don’t realize they are just like dictating like others are doing. They might not intend to do so. just don’t recognize there are still more to learn than just the forms they see.
But in the west, the moderators of posts are more likely to be unaffiliated individuals rather than fascist regimes or government censors.
And the people responding to posts are more likely to be random individuals than the paid ‘50-cent army’ that Beijing is currently employing.
@BMY – Well, I think most people in the world has a romantic notion about most high and lofty ideas. It’s like people thinking that by simply believing in Communism (or God) will allow them to reach development (or Heaven). Ideas matter more in how they influence the action of the people who believe in them. Any idea has the possibility of having a positive impact, but some ideas, such as Democracy, have a greater chance than others, like Fascism.
@ashe_lives_here – Not Fascist. It’s a party dictatorship. There’s actually a huge difference, though most people like to equate anything that’s non-democratic with the Nazis.