In his op-ed of today's date, entitled "Chinese Openings", Cohen approvingly informs us that Chongqing:
"has sanctioned the preservation here of a site commemorating the numberless victims of the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/opinion/19iht-edcohen.html?hp
My response to Cohen's op-ed, if The Times deigns to post it:
Roger, how splendid to learn of your peregrinations around Chongqing and your discovery of a site commemorating victims of the Cultural Revolution. Thanks for twice troubling to advise us that "history denied can devour you" and that history "needs to be aired or it will turn on you."
Unfortunately, as goes unmentioned in your vignette, Chinese repression is anything but history. In fact, Communist China executes more persons each year than all of the rest of the world combined.
Also, no mention in your op-ed of the dispute involving Google’s decision to stand up to Chinese cyberoppression, the subject of Nicholas Kristof's recent op-ed, "Google Takes a Stand".
In addition, your op-ed does not mention Liu Xiaobo, a literary critic, writer, visiting scholar at New York's Columbia University, and political activist based in Beijing, who was recently sentenced to 11 years in prison and two years' deprivation of political rights for "inciting subversion of state power."
Given the controversy surrounding Chinese suppression of free speech, I am curious about your conversations in China. While in Iran, you used the services of a Farsi translator working for a government agency. You also don't speak the Southwest Mandarin dialect common in Chongqing, and perhaps you should inform us whether your conversations with local inhabitants in Chongqing, as reported in your op-ed, were again conducted via a government appointed translator, who could well have influenced their course and content.
It is worth noting that many of my comments in response to Cohen's op-eds are rejected, i.e. censored, by The Times. Are The Times' "moderators" capable this time of tolerating criticism or will they again seek to "protect the quarterback"?
Jeff, your op-ed does not mention the fact Liu Xiaobo has received hundreds of thousands of US government funding via the NED in the past five years. Please see the NED's China grants for Independent Chinese Pen Center and Minzhu Zhongguo magazine, which Liu heads.
ReplyDeleteIf Liu is American he'd be in violation of Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA). Pray tell, why would we lament Chinese money corrupting our political process, while sending many folds more to China, to corrupt their political process?
This is by no means a straight foward case of free speech. Liu took foreign money the Chinese government has every right to prohibit (as we do under FARA.)
My reading of the verdict is that the Chinese court decided Liu's political speech exceeded the limit of free speech, at least in part due to the prosecution evidence showing Liu received foreign remittance.
I enjoy your comments on Roger Cohen and his flowery, self-aggrandizing b.s. Keep on nailing the phoney bastard.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment.
Sure, I read the Chinese government claim that Liu would be in violation of FARA:
http://www.chinais.com/2010/01/some-facts-about-ned-and-liu-xiaobo.html
However, this isn't the case. FARA provides an exemption for "Any person engaging or agreeing to engage only . . . (2) in other activities not serving predominantly a foreign interest". Does anyone really wish to make the argument that the promotion of free speech is an activity serving primarily a "foreign, i.e. U.S., interest"? See the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948 by the UN, of which China is a member:
"Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people".
Another example: In Israel, many organizations whose declared purpose is to protect Palestinian rights are primarily funded by European governments. This does not result in prison sentences being handed down against the employees of these organizations.
Jeffrey