Tiananmen Square Update

I will include one article for your reference though.

Have a go at it.

Cheers

PRINT CLOSE
Tiananmen Square

Yiyun Li
Published 12 March 2009

Many Chinese no longer wish to remember the day when Communist tanks burst in to Tiananmen Square and thousands of democracy campaigners were killed. But, says the award-winning novelist Yiyun Li, to ignore the events of 4 June is to turn away from the truths and lessons of history

In March 2008, I returned to Beijing for a visit, the first in ten years. One afternoon, trapped in a traffic jam, I chatted with the middle-aged cab driver, a native Beijinger, judging from his accent. “This is no longer the city you knew,” he said when he learned about my visit. I had been repeatedly told that since my arrival.
“Is it becoming too modern for you?” I asked. The cab driver had told me that he grew up in a people’s commune next to the Summer Palace, and that his wife was a sanitary worker in the district.
“Beijing does not have its heart any more.”
I leaned forward, fascinated by this unexpected answer. The cab driver studied me in the rear-view mirror. “How old were you in ’89?” he asked. Old enough to remember it, I said. I was 16 when the Tiananmen Square Massacre happened. Did he remember it, too? I asked.
“Remember?” The cab driver raised his voice, and for a moment I worried that he was offended. “Every man in our neighbourhood went to block the tanks and army trucks. Would you be called a man if you didn’t go? My wife donated a whole month’s salary to the college kids on hunger strike at the square – not that she made much, of course.”
I was not prepared for discussions of Tiananmen Square on this trip. Old friends and neighbours whom I had seen earlier talked about, among other topics, real estate and stock-market booms.
“But what good came out of it?” the cab driver said, and honked at a car with a sudden violence. “In the early Nineties, when those provincial people came to town, my neighbours started to rent their extra rooms to them. I said, ‘Do not rent to the out-of-towners.’ Did they know what we Beijingers went through in ’89? All they wanted was to make money in this city. I told my neighbours: ‘Wait until their children grow up to take the bites out of our children’s mouths.’
“Guess what? It happened as I said. The out-of-towners gave birth to their children, the children went to school with our children, and now they compete for the best jobs, and feel they have the right to claim Beijing as their city. Let me ask you – do they care what happened in ’89? No, they don’t. All they care is about money. This city, I tell you: it doesn’t have the heart it had in ’89!”
The cab driver’s angry nostalgia moved me. I wondered if, 20 years earlier, he had been one of those young men pedalling flatbed tricycles to transport bodies on that night of bloodshed; perhaps he had helped push a bus into the street to block the tanks, had thrown bottles and rocks.
A few days later, I met an old friend, Lei, who grew up in the same apartment building as I did. Five years my senior, he was a college student when the protest broke out in April 1989. I remembered how he used to come to our apartment every week to report on the progress of the protest: parades, hunger strikes, slogans invented, new strategies of the students’ union, overnight dance parties at the square, romances between strangers. Yet, two weeks before the crackdown, he had withdrawn from the protest and announced his new goal: to prepare for the GRE aptitude test so he could go to the United States. He scored well enough in the test, but in the end he was not able to emigrate – for a few years immediately after the Tiananmen Square Massacre, only those who had relatives overseas were allowed to apply for passports, and Lei could not find such a connection to leave the country.
What did he think of ’89 now? I asked Lei at our dinner. In the past ten years he had become a successful businessman, with a consulting company and multiple real-estate properties to his name. He had gained weight, and looked like one of the plump, well-dressed men in the city, their cars and watches and clothes and wives showing off their status.
“It was all nonsense,” Lei said. “Aren’t we glad it was a failed revolution?”
Why, I asked.
“As a failed revolution –” he said, waving to dismiss the waitress standing next to our table. “There’s always that bit of history nobody can deny. Yes, the People’s Liberation Army opened fire. Yes, people were killed. But other than that . . . Let me ask you: if the college students – well, if we – had succeeded in ’89, what would China have become today? We’d have got a bunch of young, inexperienced corrupters to replace those old, experienced corrupters.”
“Was that why you left the square? That you thought it was not a good revolution any more?”
“Let me tell you this story,” Lei said, already a little drunk from the liquor he had consumed. “I was on my way from one part of the square to the other, where one of my best friends was on hunger strike. I was going to see him but the student security guard told me that I could not pass. ‘I have handwritten permission from one of the top leaders of the students’ union,’ I said to the guy, and he said the permission was no longer good, as the one who wrote it had just been ousted. He told me three other names and told me that only their signatures would count. Think about that. At the square the students’ union said that if one person refused to end the protest we would all stay with him and protest with him. See, there was no democracy there, only a wild party run by a few leaders. And innocent people died for the ambitions of those few.”
It was the first time Lei was telling me these stories. Perhaps, at 16, I had been still too young to understand the situation. I remembered people pushing buses into the street to block army vehicles in the late afternoon of 3 June. Shortly after nightfall the shooting began. My father locked my sister and me in while my mother went to the nearby intersection to gather news. At midnight she came home and cried. She had seen the body of a seven-year-old boy in his mother’s arms. A man had volunteered to drive the mother and her dead child to different neighbourhoods and military checkpoints; some of the soldiers had cried, too, he said.
“Of course I have ’89 to thank and ’89 only,” Lei said, more drunk now. He would have emigrated to the US, had it not been for the fact that he had not been allowed to leave China. “I don’t envy you because I live here, in my own city, in my own country, and I lead a good and successful life.”
I nodded, thinking about the cab driver who would not give up the memory of 1989. I suspected that most people in the country would be like Lei, ready to leave the dead behind and board the train, running towards a new, if uncertain, future.
When the exiled Chinese writer Ma Jian gave a reading in New York City last year, a young Chinese woman angrily asked him why he would not let the Tiananmen Square Massacre go. Similar questions have been put to me: why do you have to write about the 1970s when China is no longer that country, the one of the 1970s? Why can’t you let go of the past and write about the glorious Olympic Games, or the strong and wealthy country that China has become?
My answer to the questions – imagine saying to Toni Morrison: “Why do you still hold on to history and write about slavery when America has long put slavery behind?”
In the past 20 years, China has grown into the China we know today partly because of 1989, and it is both fascinating and alarming that the refusal to revisit the events comes not only from the government, but also from the people, who seem to feel more at ease when they turn their eyes away from that history. Perhaps only those who lost their loved ones in 1989 will light vigil candles now. A line of an ancient poem, written in the 4th century, offers our ancestors’ wisdom on this: “The bereaved ones are still grieving but the others are already singing in happy oblivion. What is death but a journey back to join the mountain?”
Yiyun Li’s most recent book is “The Vagrants” (Fourth Estate, £12.99). Her debut short-story collection, “A Thousand Years of Good Prayers”, won the 2006 Guardian First Book Award
Share your memories of the year of the crowd with us by emailing: 1989@newstatesman.com. A selection will appear on our website

 

The person who created this thread is a white azs kisser who hates his own skin and is constantly posting flamebaits (and, by golly, this is what we might be heading into. LOL) against his own kind to prove to whites that he isn't a spy to his host country LOL. Let's face it, this yellow doggie intends to mislead innocent people. I must admit this guy is certainly composed and articluate, though such qualities should not be confused with intelligence, the lack of which can be easily exposed via vigorous debate. Look @ how we owned his azs in the Tibet Thread LOL He doesn't have the necessary knowledge to measure up to you, mobidoo, and isscared shiettless to come out and debate with you LOL

 

These students obviously weren't the best and brightest. Not by a long shot. They were the Communist sons and daughters of Communist bureaucrats. They were a bunch of social science and literature students. Not a science, business or technical major among them.

China today was built by the capitalistic-minded Deng Xiao Peng whose family was tortured by Mao's commuinist Red Guards in the 1960s. The students in 1989 wanted Deng, who started China's CAPITALISM, to step down. Now thats fockin insane! Only communists and sons of Red Guards would want to push Deng down when China was reforming towards capitalism.

So fXck those students. It was sad they were killed. But they were all elite communist of the Red Guard school. When they died, there were no general uprising so we know the people weren't with them.

 

so much hostility towards ralphpro.

 

...and then in his sig:

I imagine he should fancy himself as being hip, urbane, and perhaps a bit black too, or more likely just another wannabe. Is being Chinese then simply not cool or good enough for him that he should pretend to be black? Who's the racial ass kisser here?

Why would people need to even smuggle in information that was already widely available? Res ipsa loquitur.

Further, main battle tanks being used to combat protesting students? Isn't that a bit overkill? Were the students armed with anything more than sticks and bricks? Did the protesters or Beijing population have any weapons? Just listening to the video gives one an idea of the absolute overkill. Close your eyes; don't even watch. Just listen to the weapons fire. Knowing that China is a state where no one has any firearms, the only people who could be shooting are the soldiers. And soldiers, especially in China, obey orders. Moreoer, bullets in the PRC cost money, so much in fact that soldiers won't shoot unless they're ordered to, or else they would have to pay back the cost of the ammunition.

And it wasn't one shot, or two shots (which could be explained as accidental), but continuous and sustained gunfire by highly disciplined troops under strict military and political control. So what does that tell you? What is says to me is that the soldiers were ordered to shoot and kill anyone that got in their way; and they spent all night long doing it.

The idea that we should just forget it because it had happened "so long ago" and China is a different place today? But is it? Protesters coming to Beijing to petition the central government being arrested and hidden from public view; protesters in villages being beaten after they had their land taken away by corrupt government officials; parents of dead children being told to shut up and not make an issue of the corruption that allowed their children to die in the earthquake? So stop and think; why are there so many people protesting in China?

China may be making a lot more money, and it may put on a good show; but in terms of politics, the landscape remains very much 1989. -detect

 

ralphrepo:

a4agent was right, you are a white ass kisser. A mindless white ass kisser I should say. Democracy are meaningless, if your population are struggle for their daily lives! Look at how screw up India is! It's a total mess! I've lost count of the times I've argued with people that China needed communism to get to where they are today. We all know Communist is not a perfect system, but communism can be a tremendous tool to rally itself of the shackles of foreign imperialism and inequality of classes, so I think if the Chinese government had lost the civil war and the KMT had remained in power, China would have today probably be another proxy or poodle of the west(little white ass kisser like you probably don't give a damn for Chinese people). Also because of the centralization of power communism can implement reforms much more effectivly and quickly than a demoracy can ever hope to achieve(whats happening in India presently is a good example) and also let's not forget the Chinese government is going to achieve a increditable feat of lifting millions of Chinese out of poverty in our lifetime!!! So I don't underestimate what the Chinese government has done for China this far. However communism also has its failings like GLF and CR, also communsim is a western creation not Chinese, in China's 5000 years of cvilsation communism only played minuscule part (about fifty years) while most of that time China was a feudal society governed by a single entity(the emperor) and there were instances where the destiny of China was inexplicably altered by the whims of this one man like the destruction of the Zheng He fleet, so centralized power is not always a good thing.

I certainly don't believe in the "instant democracy" as espoused by the west, they just want to see China turned into a fail state and little white ass kisser like you are support the cause. What the hell is wrong with you, have you been sniffing too much opium left over by the limey? I can still remember when the old soviet union broke up and the resultant chaos and destablizasation of Russian society and how Boris Yelsin had to go cap in hand to the west to beg for loans, of course the only saving grace for the Russians were their massive abundance of gas and oil reserves which have been their only vital means of crawling out of the "democracy hole" they have dugged for themselves and let's not forget china has no such luxury if it decides to follow the same route. So democracy at this present time for China is useless because there's so much left to be done yet and there are still alot of poverty in the general population and the economy has not reached a sufficient level so the Chinese government's firm hand is still sorely needed. However approx 30 or 40 years from now when China has more or less become a developed country and the people are affluent and rich do they still want the rigid centralized authoritarian rule of communism?? would they not want more accountability from their government?? do they not want more choice as to whom governs them?? when people are poor their first priority is their basic needs ie food, clothing, shelter etc but when people's basic needs are met then they will start to demand for other "needs" like multiparty politics etc its part and parcel of a affluent society!!

Capitalism essentially means to get rich as quickly as possible, was Deng naive enough to think that when he unleashed the forces of capitalism in China that there will no consequential forces ie that wealthly people will not be more demanding than poor people?? like I said when people's basic needs are met then they will start to demand for other "necessities" that are absent in their lives. I think Deng was smarter than that, he knew that once the people became wealthy their voices will become louder and change will have to come, and by that time (which will probably be thirty years or so from now) China will be prosperous and a change politically is not necessarily a bad thing. Please note I use the words "chinese style democracy" which means Chinese don't necessarily have to blindly follow the west, Chinese can come up with they own form of democracy if they want as long as if suits the people.

What Deng wanted above all was the betterment of the all Chinese people. So, don't for get that, ralphrepo, you mindless white ass kissing ignorant punk! And you can take that free Tibet ranting blob up your white ass kissing butt too.

 

Magicguitar, allow me to ask you, is the strength of your argument made stronger or weaker by your having to call me names? If you have a valid point and you disagree with me, I can respect that, and that's fine; we don't have to agree. But why do your own argument a disservice by resorting to ad hominem devices?

Hmmm... So which should I respond to, the academic debate about Deng, his decision making process and its effect on Chinese history; or the personal attack on my motivations or character? Further, it seems that I've gotten you so riled that you can't even come up with enough negative adjectives in your name calling. You're stuck on the phrase "ass kissing" or perhaps that is the sum total of your hostile vocabulary?

If you can't argue a point without the invectives, then there's no really sense in any further debate.

 

@mobidoo: wow this is a lot of stuff. i would need some time to digest it; hope you understand. Nevertheless thx.

 

More PRC government crackdown on anything related to the Tiananmen Massacre. It doesn't seem to matter that they're beating up on old men:

In a rush? For a quick synopsis, just read the red highlighted lines.

 

Dear Myer,

Take all the time you want. No worries at all.

Couple of years back, I was quite bias against China and whatever China stands for. That I admit. This state of balance I have derive didn't come to me overnight. In the Uni, I took a course in International Relation, and that open my eyes.

Fact is there is no perfect system. Deaths is at the door whenever ideology is involve. Politicians will forever be corrupt in any form or kind of system. Wars will be wage in the name of peace. That is why I would never place my trust in any politicians be it in the USA or in China and for that matter in any parts of the world. World affair in short have and will always be shape by ideological difference and resources. And most of the time, Politicians and nations will and have always acted in Self interest for self preservation. Justice ? I laugh whenever the word pops up.

If you look at the great powers in the world now, China's history is the most tragic of all. Why I pay more attention to it is simply that I am Chinese. I can't help it. The TV series I watch are in Cantonese, Mandarin etc and not forgetting the period dramas that I like are filled with China's history. I suck at writing in Mandarin even until today but I am fluent in Cantonese and a few other Chinese dialect. A distant part of my family are still in China. To top it all, I have relatives also in HK, Taiwan, Malaysia and many friends of mine have migrated to Canada, Australia, the UK etc. I speak Mandarin pretty well but when it comes to reading a book in Mandarin, I am in a perennial struggle. That frustrate the hell out of me. To be honest, I ask myself what it means to be Chinese sometimes. That is an anthropological can of worms I do not want to open up. And another long story. But we can chat about that another time, if you are interested in another thread perhaps.

In that pursuit and search of my own identity, my interest in China begin to grow. Its history, just a few years back, was a complete blank to me. So I begin to read and explore the events. And whenever I close a chapter, it was always a sigh. How much the Chinese people will have to suffer...

So do take your time. Eventually you will get to the part where you would ask yourself, how long more will China be given some respect and a chance to heal and begin to grow.

Cheers and happy readings.

P.S. You have to excuse me and I do apologise if I did sounded a tad cynical over your post about "self-determined" opinions. Clearly, how does one's own self determined opinions come about ? Self Determination have and will always be the fuel to upheavals and differences. But as long as we are humans, we are going to have an opinion. Get my point now ?

 

Anti-PRC Cambridge shoe thrower trial date is changed for fear of coincidental Tiananmen Massacre anniversary protests:

In a rush? For a quick synopsis, just read the red highlighted lines.

Ever since George Bush got the wrong end of a pair of Buster Browns, it seems that hurling invectives with leather soles is the protest thing to do; the most recent being a Sikh journalist targeting Indian Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram (one of India's top security officials), who narrowly avoided the footwear missile. Apparently the reporter was angry when he felt that the Minister was, ahem... dodging a question.

But seriously, it seems that the entire shoe throwing incident at Cambridge was given little press within the PRC. Did they not think this to be news or was it too much about 'face'. I mean, unlike Bush, Wen isn't generally considered a laughing stock and most people in China genuinely like him. While most of the world (including the US) laughed when Bush was tossed not one, but both shoes (those secret service guys should be out of a job; not just one, but two shots? Come on now, guys... that's pretty lame)
I doubt that many Chinese would consider this type of affront a laughing matter.

At any rate, the Tiananmen Square Massacre Anniversary is very obviously a date that the PRC is not fond in remembering. But why the UK government felt inclined to avoid the date based on such a vague security concern is rather odd. It almost seems as if they're afraid of stepping on PRC political sensitivities.

 

omg it's horrible

 

Hi,

eventually I got around to reading. It's an interesting article I found nice to read. It's understandable that people may want to look to the future rather than grapple with the past. But the past should not be forgotten and things can be learned from it. And I think this is what you also said and so does the article.

I agree. But maybe it's worth mentioning that an ideal democracy is so far some kind of best practice concerning forms of government. The balance of power, transparency and the vote of the people should contain politicians' inherent selfishness and corruption as good as possible. And I do know that this ideal conception is hard to achieve. As for China, I see the point that there is the need for economic growth and stabilization before one can even think of introducing democratic elements in such a huge country. The sad thing then may be the fact that only Chinese of future generations might be able to enjoy the merits of an evolved China, whereas today there is probably a certain part of the population that is suffering from the lack of genuine civil rights.

Well, that means I am likely to be even worse than you.^^ I just can speak colloquial Cantonese (so I don't understand majority of the words used in the TVB news). I think, as for myself, learning writing Chinese and/or Mandarin is worth considering, but let's just see... I don't think you have to put yourself under such a pressure, I take a more relaxed attitude.^^

I started reading books about China when I was a child, since I've always been interested in history in general.

No problem at all. I think I understand ralph's positions as well as yours. He surely have put it in a rather emotional way, which also led to emotional reactions in this thread. I'm suprised by how aggressive some replies are here.

So thanks for your remarks and the article! I will surely keep being generally critical... ^^

 

What A Bunch Of Crap !
fake picture/photos,
man, does anyone actually read this and believe the picture weres real?
only idiots believe this pictures.
because, my dad was there, no live person, except special military/party personnels, was allowed to go near 2 square-kilometer of Tiananmen the next day after the incident.





lol. phtotoshopped craps............

as for the incident, not many people knows that the military people reacted on self-defence, my dad and his unit was attacked by these so call Innocence protesters with gasoline fire-bombs, rocks and sticks.
a lot of the dead people were caused by panicking people running and stepping on top of each other.

 

LOL? See the videos; and your Dad confirmed to you that there were Chinese protesters using:

"GASOLINE FIRE-BOMBS, ROCKS and STICKS" (your words not mine)...

So inotherwords, this is not western propaganda, but the eye witness account of an actual Chinese military participant (YOUR DAD), confirming that Chinese citizens were in open combat, using any weapon that they could find, against the military units sent by the government authorities. On the basis of your words, we can see that:

1. Chinese military was used against Chinese people.
2. Chinese citizens were in open rebellion against the PRC authorities, requiring military units to defend themselves.
3. Chinese military authority closed the area to contain it from prying eyes.
4. Chinese protesters were panicked and running? Perhaps maybe a tank was bearing down on them?

Fake? No. Even your own words of denial betray you as they are filled with so much truth of the event that it cannot be hidden.

I thank you. LOL indeed. If you can get your DAD to spill a few more beans, I would certainly appreciate it; like what kind of weapon did he use, how many self defense rounds did he fire?

 

OH man..here we go again..this self-hating white ass kisser is nothing but a racist China hater. He couldn't even tell who were the commies, LOL

You think the students weren't commies? Are you nuts? They were singing the goddam Internationale when they were run down. They were young Red Guards commies being killed by the Capitalist commies.

That is the only reason you have Capitalism in China today. Those students were the communist elite from Beijing and Beijing Normal Universities. Don't talk about sh1t you don't know.

Those students wanted Deng Xiaoping to step down. Deng was a capitalist. Deng was the greatest reformer in China's modern history. Deng and hist family suffered under Mao's Red Guards. And these fooocking commie students wanted Deng to step down while his work of reforming the country was half done.

China was on the way to much more freedom and openness before these foocking students derailed the whole process.
They knew nothing about capitalism. They weakened all of China's reformers.

The reason China today is NOT as free as it would have been is because of these goddam commie students. These Red Guards wannabees.

Luckily the capitalistic wing of the Commie government killed the young Red Guard wing of the Commies. What we see
today is the capitalistic Commie system. Not the Red Guard Commie system.

Foocking lazy self-hating white ass-kisser China hater doesn't even bother to know who the commies were. LOL

 

"Don't talk about sh1t you don't know" ? Your raison d'etre of Tiananmen suggests that perhaps you need to read up a bit more. Even wiki's version of the events can be called a thesis in comparison to your rather simplistic comic book version. By the way, FYI very few students were actually killed.

And again, you don't need to insult or personally attack me to disagree with me.

 

Here's another opinion on Tiananmen, from a political insider:

In a rush? For a quick synopsis, just read the red highlighted lines.

This ought to be real page turner. As suspected, with protests increasing and rapidly spreading throughout China while the world watched, the Tiananmen protest was no longer a local student affair, but had mutated into national referendum on party mistakes, excesses, and inequality. Major cities like Shanghai and Guangzhou, soon had their own protests, initially in support of Tiananmen, but soon presented their own litany of party dissatisfaction. Many in the rural areas began boarding trains to join in, and the protests escalated. Hundreds of cities, large and small, soon had public gatherings voicing various issues of discontent.

I distinctly remember watching all of this develop on television and many family members and I wondered not if, but when the party would blink. Boy, did they ever. Deng and his fellow hard liners most likely assumed that they were about to be ousted. Indeed, after the initial failure of the Beijing's military garrison to produce results according to their edicts. Deng, having been "reformed" twice (by Mao) no doubt thought that he had to play a forceful hand to maintain control. That is, his thinking was, if he was ousted again, it would be his end. Thus, he wasn't about to let that happen, no matter the cost. Hence, using national military units (as he no longer trusted local or regional troops), Deng surrounded Zhongnanhai (the communist party's compound) with a ring of armored units to defend against his greatest fear, a coup.

This was the bad and critical miscalculation by Deng, as it cost thousands of innocent Chinese lives. That is, people who had no involvement at all in the protests, but were Beijing's bystanders on the periphery of Tiananmen. When Chinese troops fired upon them, they responded in kind with anything that they could (sticks, rocks, and gasoline bombs). Once the troops surrounded the students in the square, they quietly surrendered and were taken into custody. To this day, some still remain in jail for their having taken part in the protests.

I can't wait to read this book.

 

Seriously, why did you start this thread? To inform us, the need to tell the story or just to make yourself feel better?

Ask yourself the question: Do I know enough of what exactly happened and do I know enough about the history if China to be the one discussing about it?

If your answer is yes, congratulations .. stop posting here and start writing a scientific research journal/essay on this topic backed up with respectable resources and publish it in a journal of history.

If you answer with no, then stop posting at all and go play with your kids.

The Chinese government will have to adapt and they are doing so even more and if you love China so much that these hostorical events triggers you to "contribute" useless threads on PA ... go to China and contribute for real. Help with education, help the eartquake victems, help the advance further.

You won't right? Yes America is nice and comfortable enough to feel the need to dictate its system as a standard on the rest of the world.

P.S. You may want to put a warning on the thread subject. Those pictures can be shocking for young forum visitors and weakhearted.

 

"Discuss about the Chinese Culture, Politics, Current Issues, Past Issues, etc."

...is the the stated purpose of this forum. I started this thread to inform people, mostly the kind of Chinese that gets their doses of politics nice and tidy. But, IMHO, that's not how the world works. Political education is important, it's important for westerners and even more important for Chinese. I'm certainly not a professional political historian, just a average joe with a love of history and China (the people, culture, less the politics). But frankly, if there are discussions on this exact thing in some learned academic circle, how many of those that visit PA would ever go and listen or read? Which is my point. Mines is the equivalent of the street corner cryer selling papers. If people want more, they have to pay for it by investing more time and effort than just reading one of these threads. I'm hoping that mine's is the incentive that would propel them into more interest about China's political scene, regardless of what their views are. You don't have to like what I say, but if it causes you to read more stuff about China that you didn't know of before (ie in order to find stuff to refute my claims) then that's even better. I've become a stimulus for discussion of China and its history amongst a group of Chinese (mostly) who didn't care much for the subject before.

The US can dictate to anyone it wants to; it can even choose to dictate to China. Conversely, the PRC is free to dictate to the US and and whoever it want, like any other nation in the world. Personally, I don't really care as much one way or the other about that. What I do care about is how the Chinese government treats the Chinese people, same as I care about how the US government treats its citizens. Do I care about how Zimbabwe treats its citizens? Sure. But not to the same emotional degree that I feel about how China treats its own, as I happen to be Chinese too.

While you may feel that these threads are "useless" I certainly don't. It's not any more or less useless as a discussion on what the next TVB star will wear to whatever ball, or the way to cook congee, whatever. As for your suggestion of go to live under a totalitarian system that subjugates my fellow Chinese? No thank you, you can do that if you prefer. I love freedom and liberty too much, and I'm glad that my kid's lives are free of CCP tyranny; I only wish that my breathen within the PRC were afforded the same luxury. On the flip side, I may say the same about you living in a western country, that you don't know what you're defending; go there and first taste the sting of the CCP lash if you're so determined to stand up for their political ways.

As for your final suggestion about the warning. That's a great idea, and I'm sorry I didn't think to do it early. Thank you for pointing it out and consider it done.

My advice to you is, if you don't like my comments, you're free to not read them. However, since I'm living in a nation that respects the freedoms of speech, I don't have to worry about someone knocking on my door in the middle of he night and taking me away simply because the government doesn't like what I say. Can we say the same about the PRC? Personally, I would love to be able too, but right now, I can't. That's why I post commentaries and youtube videos that detail the excesses of the PRC government. BTW, the last time I checked (about two weeks ago) you still can't get youtube in China. IMHO, this kind of censorship hurts the Chinese; or are you suggesting that, somehow in the greater scheme of things, that it actually helps them?