Where Is Xu Zhiyong?(newyorker.com)
newyorker.com
Where Is Xu Zhiyong?
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/evanosnos/2009/07/where-is-xu-zhiyong.html
33 comments
To be fair, the same thing used to happen to suspected communists in the U.S., not so long ago. We still do it today, to youths in the Middle East. No trial, no warning - they just vanish, (and if they're lucky, show up in Guantanamo Bay a year later).
Refusing to admit mistakes, assuming that power is right, paying lip service to high-sounding ideals while indiscriminately abrogating freedoms - in this, as in so many other aspects of pride and capitalism, China has learned well from us.
Of course, they have much work to do in strengthening their social institution. But to stand aghast and sling mud at the audacious oppressors across the Pacific - it's a bit rich.
Refusing to admit mistakes, assuming that power is right, paying lip service to high-sounding ideals while indiscriminately abrogating freedoms - in this, as in so many other aspects of pride and capitalism, China has learned well from us.
Of course, they have much work to do in strengthening their social institution. But to stand aghast and sling mud at the audacious oppressors across the Pacific - it's a bit rich.
the same thing used to happen to suspected communists in the U.S.
Name one suspected communist, please, who was detained by an authority in the U.S, who was denied a public hearing before a magistrate to challenge the legitimacy of the grounds for the detention or was denied a procedural right customary under English common law, such as the right to a trial by jury.
Name one suspected communist, please, who was detained by an authority in the U.S, who was denied a public hearing before a magistrate to challenge the legitimacy of the grounds for the detention or was denied a procedural right customary under English common law, such as the right to a trial by jury.
I don't know about communists, but I do know of some Anarchists, and this article I found that talks about it mentions "a large number of [people]." There were perhaps communists with them, it gives that impression; I'd be surprised if they were all anarchists.
Palmer and his assistant, John Edgar Hoover, found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects were held without trial for a long time. The vast majority were eventually released but Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, Mollie Steimer, and 245 other people, were deported to Russia.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcommunist.htm
Like someone in another comment mentioned, there's the modern day issues (Guantanamo), but I don't think it should matter much which country it happens in - the point is, our government isn't a white knight either. In the declaration of independence the words read that all men have such unalienable rights by God (not because of where they are born), and so it is hypocritical for the same political justification and claim of truth to alienate these rights when it is elsewhere.
That said, I am arguing for things that I don't think matter - I do this for clarity. I guess there's also no reason to go into why it doesn't matter here.
Palmer and his assistant, John Edgar Hoover, found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects were held without trial for a long time. The vast majority were eventually released but Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, Mollie Steimer, and 245 other people, were deported to Russia.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcommunist.htm
Like someone in another comment mentioned, there's the modern day issues (Guantanamo), but I don't think it should matter much which country it happens in - the point is, our government isn't a white knight either. In the declaration of independence the words read that all men have such unalienable rights by God (not because of where they are born), and so it is hypocritical for the same political justification and claim of truth to alienate these rights when it is elsewhere.
That said, I am arguing for things that I don't think matter - I do this for clarity. I guess there's also no reason to go into why it doesn't matter here.
In the early-mid Twentieth Century, The US detained people on various pretexts. It was bending the rule of law whereas China is breaking it entirely. I won't say one is worse than the other BUT it is worth keeping the distinction in mind.
These states might each do bad things but we should be exact when speaking about what they do.
These states might each do bad things but we should be exact when speaking about what they do.
Being exact is precisely what we can't do, because no one knows exactly what's happening in the Chinese government. So we speculate and assume the worst.
The point is well made by the case of Maher Arar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
Arar was not suspected of communism, but it's a fine example of the US disappearing someone just like China has done to Xu Zhiyong.
To be clear, I think the US is miles (km) ahead of China in regard to human rights. But, both countries need to do better, and as a US citizen, I think I bear more responsibility for the crimes committed by my government than for those committed by China.
Arar was not suspected of communism, but it's a fine example of the US disappearing someone just like China has done to Xu Zhiyong.
To be clear, I think the US is miles (km) ahead of China in regard to human rights. But, both countries need to do better, and as a US citizen, I think I bear more responsibility for the crimes committed by my government than for those committed by China.
I can't name a Commi but I can name someone from today who was illegally detained by our country: Mohammed Jawad
I'm sure others can name more people (US citizens too) for whom our country has forgotten about Habeus Corpus
I'm sure others can name more people (US citizens too) for whom our country has forgotten about Habeus Corpus
Communists did not disappear inside the United States. They were treated unfairly (fired from jobs, ostracized) but legally, they had the same rights to habeas corpus. At the height of McCarthy hearing, ostracism and loss of a career was the worst that could happen to a communist. However, this is the same treatment that was accorded (just previously) to the Nazi sympathizers in the US. In fact, HUAC was created to go after Nazi sympathizers.
Of course communism had the appeal of being a non-racist ideology, so a lot more innocent (but extreme naive) people got tangled up when HUAC went after the communists. That being said, they're both totalitarian ideologies: I wouldn't want either Nazis or Communists holding public office in the United States, nor do I have any issues with private employers firing either (at least in employment-at-will states).
At that time China was going through Great Leap Forward (mass artificial starvation, with millions dying) and (in the 60s/70s, after HUAC has died down) cultural revolution. Again, a very blood period.
As for illegal detention, I am pretty squarely against it: either these people should be held as POWs or be tried as criminal defendants. Yet illegal detention that happens on the battlefield is much different from illegal detention of a political activist working within the system. If you want to compare apples to apples, I'd look at China's treatment of US prisoners during the Korean war or their treatment of their own Islamic extremists in Xianjing province (yes-- there are real Islamic extremists targeting civilians in China and no, they're not "freedom fighters").
That being said, it's a silly comparison to do irrespective: provided US was as flagrant about human rights as China, that doesn't justify China treating their citizens in the same fashion. Nor does China treating their citizens horribly justify human rights violations by the US. The original article did not claim anything along those lines. Arguing that "two wrongs make a right" is logically fallacious and morally bankrupt.
Of course communism had the appeal of being a non-racist ideology, so a lot more innocent (but extreme naive) people got tangled up when HUAC went after the communists. That being said, they're both totalitarian ideologies: I wouldn't want either Nazis or Communists holding public office in the United States, nor do I have any issues with private employers firing either (at least in employment-at-will states).
At that time China was going through Great Leap Forward (mass artificial starvation, with millions dying) and (in the 60s/70s, after HUAC has died down) cultural revolution. Again, a very blood period.
As for illegal detention, I am pretty squarely against it: either these people should be held as POWs or be tried as criminal defendants. Yet illegal detention that happens on the battlefield is much different from illegal detention of a political activist working within the system. If you want to compare apples to apples, I'd look at China's treatment of US prisoners during the Korean war or their treatment of their own Islamic extremists in Xianjing province (yes-- there are real Islamic extremists targeting civilians in China and no, they're not "freedom fighters").
That being said, it's a silly comparison to do irrespective: provided US was as flagrant about human rights as China, that doesn't justify China treating their citizens in the same fashion. Nor does China treating their citizens horribly justify human rights violations by the US. The original article did not claim anything along those lines. Arguing that "two wrongs make a right" is logically fallacious and morally bankrupt.
> Yet illegal detention that happens on the battlefield is much different from illegal detention of a political activist working within the system.
That's only a matter of degree if you declare the battlefield to be whatever suits you.
That's only a matter of degree if you declare the battlefield to be whatever suits you.
Perhaps "outside of your civil jurisdiction, involving people who aren't your country's citizens" is a better way to put it (the only, so far, exception to this seems to be Jose Padilla-- yet even then he didn't "disappear"). However, that's odd for me to have this sort of argument, I am against extra-judicial detention. Either someone is a PoW (if they're a member of an army that follows the rules of war) or they're a criminal.
Just a note: you don't need to be a member of an army to get POW protections. All you need to do is fight openly and wear a distinctive uniform.
(Admittedly, most terrorists don't meet this criteria, and are therefore spies/saboteurs with none of the rights of POWs.)
(Admittedly, most terrorists don't meet this criteria, and are therefore spies/saboteurs with none of the rights of POWs.)
Makes you wonder how they recognize those terrorists on sight doesn't it ?
Typically when they start shooting at you from a crowd of civilians.
I probably should have added more detail but my point wasn't "China isn't as evil as we are or we are just as evil as China"
I just find it hilarious that US journalists would focus their attention on China's political infractions when some really bad #$&%! is still going on in our country. After Obama got elected he still hasn't restored the rights that Bush took away from us. Mainstream US media should spend more time on that. I don't know what's so interesting about this article; it's not like Communist China turned into a totalitarian gov yesterday.
I just find it hilarious that US journalists would focus their attention on China's political infractions when some really bad #$&%! is still going on in our country. After Obama got elected he still hasn't restored the rights that Bush took away from us. Mainstream US media should spend more time on that. I don't know what's so interesting about this article; it's not like Communist China turned into a totalitarian gov yesterday.
Mainstream US media does not usually report on the huge number of people who get detained by Public Security in China; as you say, it's a totalitarian government and these things happen.
However, this man is very important to China, even though the dunderheads who have stitched him up don't seem to realise that. His detention is a blow to China's credibility and a vast embarrasment to those in the government who are genuine about the rule of law. It is also very bad for Chinese business! His group's penetration of the poisoned milk scandal saved lives, and brought callous criminals to justice.
Hardworking, independent public defenders like Xu Zhiyong are going to be an ever more essential part of the Chinese economy in the future, and to imprison him for imagined crimes against the state is not simply unjust, it is self-defeating!
However, this man is very important to China, even though the dunderheads who have stitched him up don't seem to realise that. His detention is a blow to China's credibility and a vast embarrasment to those in the government who are genuine about the rule of law. It is also very bad for Chinese business! His group's penetration of the poisoned milk scandal saved lives, and brought callous criminals to justice.
Hardworking, independent public defenders like Xu Zhiyong are going to be an ever more essential part of the Chinese economy in the future, and to imprison him for imagined crimes against the state is not simply unjust, it is self-defeating!
Yes, Bushies screwed with Habeus Corpus more than earlier efforts. However, earlier efforts like the Palmer raids arguably involved more political repression with recent illegal detentions being more like anti-crime photo-ops.
Vicious, cruel and arbitrary anti-crime photo-ops that ruined peoples and even destroyed people's minds. But still, nearly devoid of political content, except perhaps to reinforce a certain racism.
So, let's be accurate about this guys...
Vicious, cruel and arbitrary anti-crime photo-ops that ruined peoples and even destroyed people's minds. But still, nearly devoid of political content, except perhaps to reinforce a certain racism.
So, let's be accurate about this guys...
I honestly believe there's a massive social revolution sitting squarely between China's present and its much touted Glorious Future. They have some painful lessons to learn about the explosive force of information confined. Careful now, China: the whole world's watching.
History, especially recent Chinese history, suggests that the world is willing to watch pretty much anything without lifting a finger.
As for massive social revolution, what do you think is happening in China right now? The better part of a billion people are moving out of rural poverty and into the cities in about as big a social revolution as there has ever been.
As for massive social revolution, what do you think is happening in China right now? The better part of a billion people are moving out of rural poverty and into the cities in about as big a social revolution as there has ever been.
I was thinking of revolution of a less pleasant sort, for which the urban immigration is a necessary prerequisite. There's a Tank Man streak in the Chinese psyche, which, when multiplied by a few hundred million of the recently enfranchised, well ...
As for lifting fingers (Man the Mice! Man the Keys!), our intense scrutiny may be all that's required to catalyze the reaction.
As for lifting fingers (Man the Mice! Man the Keys!), our intense scrutiny may be all that's required to catalyze the reaction.
It's pretty clear what you were thinking of, and pretty disgusting. Wishing more bloodshed on a country that has seen so much of it in the past century is the worst kind of armchair punditry.
As far as references to a 'Chinese psyche' go, that's skating awfully close to 'the Oriental mind'. You really want to generalize over a billion people?
As far as references to a 'Chinese psyche' go, that's skating awfully close to 'the Oriental mind'. You really want to generalize over a billion people?
Wow. Words are so slippery, especially for a bad writer like me. Let me be clear: I have no desire whatsoever to see a bloody revolution in China. I am by no means advocating a revolution. The "lifting a finger" bit was a joke about our laziness, not a call to action, although I see now how poorly it was worded. It would be hard for your interpretation to be more at odds with how I actually feel. I'm for peace and quiet and hacking Lisp. That said, I was calling it as I see it, and I can very easily see what I called.
As for the Tank Man bit, would it change your mind if I told you I was half Chinese (I'm not, but still)? It's like saying "there's a revolutionary streak in the American mindset" -- totally innocuous.
Damn, talk about miscommunication ...
As for the Tank Man bit, would it change your mind if I told you I was half Chinese (I'm not, but still)? It's like saying "there's a revolutionary streak in the American mindset" -- totally innocuous.
Damn, talk about miscommunication ...
I wouldn't think outside scrutiny would be sufficient. Since a revolution is going to happen from the inside out, its the people of China that would need to know whats going on and decide to act. This is difficult because of how controlled information is in China.
Separately, the size of the country may make a revolution difficult though because of the amount of coordination (explicit or not). The government can probably stop any small revolution but its (more) doubtful they could stop a large one. I guess this means that the more pleasant sort of revolution is more likely to be successful (if a revolution is going to happen at all).
Separately, the size of the country may make a revolution difficult though because of the amount of coordination (explicit or not). The government can probably stop any small revolution but its (more) doubtful they could stop a large one. I guess this means that the more pleasant sort of revolution is more likely to be successful (if a revolution is going to happen at all).
And the greatest threat to the established order is the missing women. [1]
The large number of unattached young men with little to no prospect of getting married provides a volatile substrate for almost any social movement that promises to upset the current order and bring it's supporters to prominence and power.
The traditional solution to the problem of excess males is war. But the manifestation of male frustration can take many forms. Art movements, religious or political devotion, founding startups. Given the size and spectrum of China's population I would expect to see all of these and more to be tried by young men who know that they have few if any prospects of marriage without some great success in hand.
1. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1019/p09s02-coop.html
The large number of unattached young men with little to no prospect of getting married provides a volatile substrate for almost any social movement that promises to upset the current order and bring it's supporters to prominence and power.
The traditional solution to the problem of excess males is war. But the manifestation of male frustration can take many forms. Art movements, religious or political devotion, founding startups. Given the size and spectrum of China's population I would expect to see all of these and more to be tried by young men who know that they have few if any prospects of marriage without some great success in hand.
1. http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1019/p09s02-coop.html
You mean the kind of revolution, well, attempts at revolution, that we have seen in Iran recently?
I'm not so sure about that. I think in most dictatorships most people already know that something is not quite right. Spreading that knowledge further is good - but the other guys still have the guns...
I'm not so sure about that. I think in most dictatorships most people already know that something is not quite right. Spreading that knowledge further is good - but the other guys still have the guns...
Oddly enough, the attempted revolution in Iran happened because a fraction of the ruling elite called for it. Iran up to this point has been an ostensibly democratic theocracy, odd as that may seem and the protests involve shock, shock that this democracy was being violated.
This move in China involves putting an end to the most mild appearance of opposition - it's a bad move for any efforts at mild change - which the protests in Iran began as.
Of course, since despite it's democratic form, Iran is also very repressive, the protests which began as efforts at mild change often veered towards more extreme efforts.
Indeed, I suspect that every time another repressive regime feels some heat, the Chinese communist party gets a little more nervous. But naturally neither I nor anyone else is able to read the leaderships' mind...
This move in China involves putting an end to the most mild appearance of opposition - it's a bad move for any efforts at mild change - which the protests in Iran began as.
Of course, since despite it's democratic form, Iran is also very repressive, the protests which began as efforts at mild change often veered towards more extreme efforts.
Indeed, I suspect that every time another repressive regime feels some heat, the Chinese communist party gets a little more nervous. But naturally neither I nor anyone else is able to read the leaderships' mind...
I think the big question for China's future is whether its essentially inevitable further transformation will be as peaceful as Hungary's or as violent as Yugoslavia's.
Neither of those comparisons make any sense, in my opinion. We've got the standard differences of country size (both in terms of land area and population) and time (a lot has changed about the world, especially in terms of communication, even in the past 15 years).
But, we've also got the huge difference that China, and Chinese people, are simply different. I don't even know where to begin in describing how different Chinese people in China fundamentally are from Americans in America. It's like when I see comments made by people such as "I wonder how the Chinese people can stand <insert thing here>", I immediately think to myself that it's a complete non-issue, just an accepted fact of life, for all of my Chinese relatives living in China. Also, things such as the one child act don't help - you've literally got an entire generation of spoiled only childs, and let me tell you, many of them are remarkably spoiled in the cities. You've got this feeling of collectivism which still very much exists, the "we" taking precedence over the "I", not in the oversimplified hive-mind way that most Westerners perceive it as, but rather something more inbetween. It always amazes me that people in China can feel such a sense of duty to their country (such as a student feeling it's his/her duty to the country to do well in school, something that pretty much never happens in the USA), but yet also feel such apathy for other people around them (to a degree that also doesn't happen in the USA ... not saying we're saints here who never pass by homeless people on the streets without even looking at them by any means, but the degree is still different).
And the list goes on and on, I still don't know where to begin or where to end. I know I'm not comparing China to Yugoslavia or Hungary here, but the perception gap even to this day between China and the USA is so great (and more importantly, so much greater than what most people think it is) that I can't imagine it being much less for China and other situations. Point being, a revolution might be peaceful, or it might be violent, or it might be somewhere inbetween, but none of these outcomes would have anything to do with the situations that led to Hungary's outcome being the way it was, or Yugoslavia's being the way it was.
But, we've also got the huge difference that China, and Chinese people, are simply different. I don't even know where to begin in describing how different Chinese people in China fundamentally are from Americans in America. It's like when I see comments made by people such as "I wonder how the Chinese people can stand <insert thing here>", I immediately think to myself that it's a complete non-issue, just an accepted fact of life, for all of my Chinese relatives living in China. Also, things such as the one child act don't help - you've literally got an entire generation of spoiled only childs, and let me tell you, many of them are remarkably spoiled in the cities. You've got this feeling of collectivism which still very much exists, the "we" taking precedence over the "I", not in the oversimplified hive-mind way that most Westerners perceive it as, but rather something more inbetween. It always amazes me that people in China can feel such a sense of duty to their country (such as a student feeling it's his/her duty to the country to do well in school, something that pretty much never happens in the USA), but yet also feel such apathy for other people around them (to a degree that also doesn't happen in the USA ... not saying we're saints here who never pass by homeless people on the streets without even looking at them by any means, but the degree is still different).
And the list goes on and on, I still don't know where to begin or where to end. I know I'm not comparing China to Yugoslavia or Hungary here, but the perception gap even to this day between China and the USA is so great (and more importantly, so much greater than what most people think it is) that I can't imagine it being much less for China and other situations. Point being, a revolution might be peaceful, or it might be violent, or it might be somewhere inbetween, but none of these outcomes would have anything to do with the situations that led to Hungary's outcome being the way it was, or Yugoslavia's being the way it was.
Social scientists in China, trained as so many of them were in a Marxist framework, are actually very frightened by the example of Yugoslavia. Regional economic disparities in China are even greater than those in Yugoslavia before Yugoslavia disintegrated. Maybe Chinese people are very different in general from Western people (but the Chinese people I know best aren't all entirely different from people elsewhere in the world), but if Marxist theory about how the masses respond to economic circumstances is at all correct, the central government of China has something to worry about.
As another participant point out in another recent HN thread, China has a long historical experience with regional splits and loss of authority by the central government. To speak of China as having a 3,000 year history (as one entity) is hardly more accurate than to speak of Rome (the empire) as having a 2,500 year history. There is some cultural continuity from the very beginning in both cases, but twentieth century Chinese history was full of years of regional warlords and a very prolonged major civil war (which arguably hasn't ended yet).
As another participant point out in another recent HN thread, China has a long historical experience with regional splits and loss of authority by the central government. To speak of China as having a 3,000 year history (as one entity) is hardly more accurate than to speak of Rome (the empire) as having a 2,500 year history. There is some cultural continuity from the very beginning in both cases, but twentieth century Chinese history was full of years of regional warlords and a very prolonged major civil war (which arguably hasn't ended yet).
In Malaysia, this is even worse. The government actually has the right to arrest someone "without the need for trial in certain defined circumstances".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_%28Malays...
For example, the recent "Teoh Beng Hock" case happened in Malaysia. This guy was found death "at the premises of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission headquarters" after he had been taken there for questioning the same day.
Malaysian police classified his death as "sudden death". Committing suicide? He supposed to marry his fiancee who has a 3 month-old prenancy on this coming September. Can you imagine a guy like this would commit suicide?
I am Malaysian myself(currently in US). I usually do not care anything happening in Malaysia. But, I really think that this incident is just too suspicious for me to believe in the government anymore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_Security_Act_%28Malays...
For example, the recent "Teoh Beng Hock" case happened in Malaysia. This guy was found death "at the premises of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission headquarters" after he had been taken there for questioning the same day.
Malaysian police classified his death as "sudden death". Committing suicide? He supposed to marry his fiancee who has a 3 month-old prenancy on this coming September. Can you imagine a guy like this would commit suicide?
I am Malaysian myself(currently in US). I usually do not care anything happening in Malaysia. But, I really think that this incident is just too suspicious for me to believe in the government anymore.
Could be worse, mate. Could be Thailand!
So when I asked him if, since he did business in China, he supported lifting the US embargo against Cuba, he emphatically said "no, that's completely different." I asked how, but he couldn't come up with a single thing and became pretty annoyed with me.
Whenever I hear stories of these kinds of abuses in China I can't help but to think of the utter hipocrisy of the USA's policy towards Cuba.