http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7305061/site/newsweek/
According to students and Xiao Qiang, director of the China Internet Project at the University of California, new rules call on administrators to block off-campus users and prevent students from posting anonymously to "enhance the moral and thought education of university students."
>>20-21
I don't know why you people even bother with him.
Domingo Chavez!FpTygh5paU is a troll.
>>21 The Soviet union ran quite well under Stalin. When he was gone is when it started to fall apart. Because the leaders could not keep order among their people, could not get the people to go with the standards. Some figured, hey if we all get the same thing no matter what, why bother really trying.
>>22 You call me a troll when I am trying to seriously discuss somthing, You are the troll. You hardly make any points its just "Your an idiot, you dont know what your talking about" and thats about it.
>>23
I already stated why you're a troll. You just spam boards, that's all, the only difference is that on imageboards you spam your fatty girlfriend and on texboards you spam your inane ramblings. I have pointed out numerous times how you are being ridiculous but as a good troll, you just avoid that, make up new retarded assertions and just continue your ways.
I advice that nobody wastes their time with you. You are worthless.
>>16
Yes, and "Anonymous" is an adjective. An adjective is not a noun.
> The Soviet union ran quite well under Stalin.
That's a scary definition of "quite well". He may have modernized the USSR, at least in part, but he massacred millions with his policies. In fact, a lot of what he did were abject failures, but propaganda and a callous disregard for life hid that fact.
Also, there's too much name-calling going on in this thread.
> Also, there's too much name-calling going on in this thread.
That's what you get for being stupid while posting with a name! OH SNAP!
>>25 I never said he was not a mad man. But he kept the order and held together the union through fear. The Iron fist of the Soviet Government kept the people in line. In the late 1980's those outlying countrys felt that iron grip loosen, and took the chance to break away. And succeeded in not just that, but collapsing the entire Soviet Union.
You say I make no points, and do nothing but spam. All you seem to do is insult other people. Your the fucking troll who is spamming up the discussion boards. I came here looking for actual intellegence, but get rewarded with the discussion boards version of a /b/tard. Named Citizen
>Do you honestly know shit about Communism?
Actually, I do. Obviously, you don't.
>Or the reason it failed so horribly in the Soviet Union?
It failed because Marx thought a single party would lead the way from the revolution to communism instead of simply ursurping power.
It failed because exactly that happened.
What power did the russian soviets actually have?
Do you want to tell me the regime that was responsible for Kronstadt was striving for a worker's state?
The Makhnovshchina was communism. The Soviet Union was mereley another authoritarian regime using a convient excuse to keep the ruling elite in power.
> Your the fucking troll
"You are"
> intellegence
"intelligence"
> Named Citizen
Everyone who doesn't post with a name (like you) has the name "Citizen"¹. If you cannot deal with anonymous messageboards, I think you should get out. You have contributed nothing but stupidity so far and it seems with your attitude, you will easily develop into this board's clown character. If that's what you wanted to achieve, good job.
I think its important for the world to know a few things about Chinese mentality. I'm chinese, been living in the states for a few years now.
First off, china has been ruled the same way, no matter which dynasty or which empire, since as long as there is chinese history. That continues today. The chinese are not interested in what their government is called, or how it resembles certain ideologies. They just want something that works. Now, that decision isnt made by the people, the government controls everything. Put simply, they do "what they think is right". Most of our historical figures are glorified by the government, and i mean way back to the dynastic states. The average person has no place in anything.
China isn't out to follow Communism or any other ideology, its just all talk because people need to put a label on something. You ask a chinese guy what kind of government he has he's not gonna say communism, or free market, or any technical term. He'll just describe it.
In the end the government will do whatever they think is best for themselves, and the country as a WHOLE. A few dissidents here and there, so a few thousand people die in mines, its all statistics to them, and the chinese people understand and accept this, simply because its always been like this, we don't know any different.
The government holds absolute authority in china, it may as well be an absolute monarchy, in fact, there's probably no more than 5 people thats pulling all the strings, the senate and meetings are really just for show
Thanks >>30 for moving back to the topic. I keep a few chinese friends and they have similar opinions as you described. Basically the average Chinese view the government as a given, another affecting their lives just like the weather. They will still talk about the bad weather, but many will view it as stupid idea to try and change the weather.
Also, with the current growth rates, most Chinese probably forgive their government for not being perfect. So many large industry sectors, if not all, are very interlinked with the government. Changing the government to be more like western style ie. more transparent most likely would kill off so much progress. They would also achieve western growth rates, which is a step backwards.
The Chinese development will work out to a fairer state, I am sure, because as the education level rises, people will probably want more transparency in the long run. In the short run, they care about surviving and who can blame them.
More to the original topic though, the proposed rules to administrators about anonymous posting are distressing. I have a question:
Will the Chinese administration really be able to suppress freedom of opinion on the internet, anonymous or not?
Is there a word for the belief that a country's economic system is irrelavent, and that all that actually matters in terms of the greatest good for the greatest number of people is the populus' cultural/intilectual development?
>>30
This is like Japan, to tell the truth. Japan is in totalitarian chaos in all but name-- few people care about what their government does, they just do what they want and if the government kills some people that's just statistics (and better covered-up than it is in China).
Compared to the political apathy in China or Japan, the U.S. really is the center of the free world.
> Will the Chinese administration really be able to suppress freedom of opinion on the internet, anonymous or not?
It depends on whether the Chinese people will start to care enough about politics that they can set up a BBS that doesn't get shut down. For example, if all the college students (the most active group) started using Freenet, or set up a Tor type of thing that let them connect to some BBS hosted in America, then an anti-government movement could get started again.
China has been shutting down big political BBSes for five years now, eventually someone will get tired of it and make a route around the censorship.
>>35 I am not talking about anti-government movements. The term anti-government movement is employed when talking about a developing force within the populace whose intention is revolution. Surely, the Chinese people have more reasons to desire remaining anonymous than revolution?
By the way, western nations also do spy on forums, chatrooms and boards like these to find terrorists. Revolution is part of freedom of speech, but also part of undermining the state, which is a crime not only in China.
So let me rephrase the question: How much freedom of speech is the Chinese government willing to give to its people, how much freedom will these people actually demand and take and how much - keeping in mind the previous paragraph - of a real loss will the Chinese suffer?
Let me then rephrase the question:
...