Weekly Review: Here are four interesting blog posts from the past week that will help you look at the censorship from an economic perspective, revisit the “racism in China” issue, have heated political discussions about China…with actual Chinese people, and consider how “westernization” may not be “modernization”.
The Green Dam Debacle As Decentralizing Censorship
In all the hoopla surrounding the Green Dam Youth Escort internet filtering software that is reportedly set to be installed on all new PCs sold in China after July 1st, most journalists focused on the usual suspects of increasing government censorship, oppression, and infringement upon privacy. Those who went beyond politics and into economics at most only considered that this was some sort of nepotistic pork-barrel project.
Fons Tuinstra of the China Herald blog, however, brings up an interesting consideration that very few others thought of: Is forcing internet filtering and censorship software onto individual users’ computers really just one way to decentralize or distribute the resources needed to maintain China’s existing internet censorship policy?
To put that thought in this case into perspective we have to go back to an incident that happened with Tencent’s QQ services, then and now China’s more powerful social network company. Because of the compulsory censorship filters Tencent had to maintain massive filter operations at their servers, so huge the company’s capacity could not deal with the high growth it faced. A few times its systems when down, because their corporate internet filters got overheated.
They then came with a solution that looked initially absolute brilliant. It forced its users during an update of the software to download also a personal internet filter on their own computer and save the company a lot of investments in increasing their own capacity.
Instead of maintaining and continuously expanding a centralized computer system for manipulating what is accessible on the internet for its users, would it be more cost-effective to spread the load onto each individual user’s computer? Were this a consideration behind the Green Dam Youth Escort project, it would have been remarkable for its economic pragmatism. Unfortunately, the idea is still mind-numblingly idiotic.
Why This Should Matter To You:
- It is always beneficial for you to look at things in a different, unexpected way. You know, thinking out of the box and all that.
Chinese Hui Muslim Minority 1, Chengguan 0
“Chengguan” is the Chinese name for what can roughly be described as low-level enforcers of municipal codes. They’re like…para-police, sort of. They’re job is to generally keep the streets clean of unlicensed peddlers and street vendors and other odds and ends. Their infamous tactics include intimidation, extortion, and general hooliganism.
Joe of chinaSMACK reported an interesting story this week where a chengguan effort to clear out some street peddlers was ultimately stymied when the peddlers and surrounding civilian crowd got fed up and fought back. At the sight of overwhelming resistence, the other chengguan and back-up police retreated, but the captain of the chengguan squad was captured and publicly, er…”struggled” against. The crowd basically kicked his ass and cursed him until he begged for mercy. Naturally, this victory was reported onto China’s discussion forums, where the usual “hard-working people vs. bullying chengguan” dynamic became “bullying chengguan vs. lawless Hui/Muslim minority” for some. Prejudice against ethnicities and religious belief then became an issue, which many foreigners instantly seized upon, both in the comments at chinaSMACK and over at ChinaGeeks where Custer remarks:
Indeed, the Chinese comments are fascinating. Generally speaking, the Chinese internet has nothing but enmity for chengguan. Other recent popular topics about chengguan on the Chinese internet netizens have compared chengguan to (among other things) the Japanese army and Satan. Here, though, they’re generally much more sympathetic, perhaps because it seems clear the man was beaten quite ruthlessly. And, as Joe reported, they’ve got plenty of bad things to say about the Hui people.
Why This Should Matter To You:
- China is not as homogeneous as you think.
- China is not as heterogeneous as you think.
- You’re not a fan of the “chengguan” either. Join the club.
Political Discussion In China, Where Foreigners Never Tread
Adam Schokora is back again this week with yet another interesting Friday 5 post, this time on where Chinese netizens discuss politics on the internet. Contrary to the assumptions made popular by Western media and foreigners, a ton of political discussions happen on China’s (even monitored and regulated) internet. Adam offers us a harrowing list of various websites where such activity happens, though they’re certainly much smaller than the major portals and mainstream forums you might see translated by websites like chinaSMACK (which generally steers towards more social topics with broad appeal). Here’s a sample:
general politics ::
Beijing’s Utopia BBS discussion forum may be the most well-known forum for debate about domestic and international issues. It tends to slant leftward, and has a special section for Mao Zedong. Leading special topics on Utopia currently include an ongoing critique of neoliberalism and articles on Lu Chuan’s Nanjing Massacre movie City of Life and Death. Marxist Review is a Beijing-based current events forum with an ostensibly Marxist slant. Recent topics include multi-party government, bureaucratic socialism, and democracy in the hands of revolutionary masses vs. the right. School of Athens is a academically-flavored community that slants in a liberal direction, particularly after absorbing many of the members of the liberal Fatianxia law commentary site following its harmonization in December, 2008 (and in fact, many pages on School of Athens imply that it actually is the successor to Fatianxia). Discussion involves the rule of law and civic society. A recent post that reposted an essay on freedom of speech by author Lin Da’s drew a comment thread in which netizens felt that Zhongnanhai (China’s White House) could learn something from it.
The interesting observation to add here is how much input foreigners tend to have on Chinese politics, but how rarely they actually seem intent on engaging the Chinese on those politics. Language is only one reason.
Why This Should Matter To You:
- You’re genuinely interested in discussing politics with actual Chinese people, instead of preaching to the choir to reaffirm your ideology. If so, here’s a list of places you can start, but you might need to learn Chinese first.
- You’re an internet spy for foreign imperialist powers and you need a list of targets to infiltrate and incite social instability towards the ultimate goal of keeping China down. You already know Chinese because your employer trained you well.
Blast From the Past: Westernization is Barbarization, Not Modernization
CDT digs up what promises to be an inflammatory essay written by a certain Henry C.K. Liu (I sense quite a few ears perking up) on Asia Times Online from nearly six years ago! The essay itself is long enough to be ripe for the 20 excerpts treatment, but I’ll go ahead and recommend it here for now and mull over dissecting its interesting argumentative parts later.
It is a little hard to encapsulate the thrust of the entire essay but Liu is generally talking a lot of shit about the West and Western attitudes, arguing that the West has illegitimately co-opted the concept of “modernity.” There are ton of great excerpts I want to use, all of which are going to pop a vein in many foreigners’ temples.
Confucian ethics notwithstanding, morality and honor failed to save China from Western imperialism, because morality and honor require observation from both opponents. It was not a clash of civilizations, but a clash between civilization and barbarism. Militarism is a race toward barbarism camouflaged by technology as modernity. [...]
Western military prowess, with its arsenal of smart bombs and weapons of mass destruction ready for deployment to impose its will on others, is not a march toward modernity, but a retreat toward barbarism. A civilization built on militarization of the peace remains a barbaric civilization. What Western militarism has done is to abduct modernity as synonymous with Western civilization, depriving human civilization of an evolving process of cultural diversity. The effect of this abduction of modernity had been profound and comprehensive.
Oh schnap! Henry just called Westerners immoral and dishonorable! Whatcha gonna do ’bout it?!
Why This Should Matter To You:
- It is an interesting piece of rhetoric that coincidentally tests many people’s ability to patiently and successfully dissect, understand, and rebut the arguments made before their knee-jerk emotional responses kick in.
- In all seriousness, if you’re not academically inclined, you will probably actually want to avoid this piece. Not only is it long, but it’s filled with history and academic terms. I’ve unfairly oversimplified the piece above by focusing on some of its more inflammatory language.
That’s it for this week. Have a link to a blog post that shouldn’t be missed? Be sure to share it with everyone in the comments, and don’t forget to tell us why you recommend it!
-
CNR’s Weekly Review highlights some of the most interesting and can’t miss blog posts from the English China blogosphere. This week: June 14-20, 2009.
-
A 12 point summary of the entire Green Dam Youth Escort web-filtering and censorship software controversy and the CCTV attacking Google for porn links scandal.
-
20 excerpts from Heny C K Liu’s essay discussing “The West’s” abduction of “modernity” and “destructive ethnocentricity”, arguing for a merger with Asian values.
The Good, Bad, & Ugly Of Trains, Youth, Politics, Dissidents & CCTV 
Green Dam & CCTV’s Attacks On Google – 12 Point Review 
20 Excerpts: “The Race Toward Barbarism” 
“Western military prowess, with its arsenal of smart bombs and weapons of mass destruction ready for deployment to impose its will on others, is not a march toward modernity, but a retreat toward barbarism. A civilization built on militarization of the peace remains a barbaric civilization. What Western militarism has done is to abduct modernity as synonymous with Western civilization, depriving human civilization of an evolving process of cultural diversity. The effect of this abduction of modernity had been profound and comprehensive.”
So very true
“The essay itself is long enough to be ripe for the 20 excerpts treatment…”
Which remains your most commented-on thread. If I have time I’ll give this one a helping hand for you as well.
“Contrary to the assumptions made popular by Western media and foreigners…”
There you go again…
stuart, oh stuart, I always like to sprinkle a few of those (like crack) into anything I write just to poke you. Stop knee-jerk reacting to that phrase. If you disagree with how it is used, please explain so. Otherwise, stop being so petty and insecure. Geez.
“If you disagree with how it is used, please explain …”
That would first require that you elaborate on those unspecified ‘assumptions made popular by Western media and foreigners’.
More sprinkling, please.
stuart, are you serious?
Does that help? This is basic English sentence composition, stuart. Don’t be disingenuous.
“stuart, are you serious?”
I have this vision of John McEnroe screaming at the umpire after losing a point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekQ_Ja02gTY
I wasn’t being disingenuous; I just don’t accept the premise of your statement.
There may be a proliferation of political dialogue in the relative anonymity of the cyber world, but ‘western assumptions’ – if they exist at all – would refer instead to the dearth of open discourse and the lack of freedom to criticise or present dissenting opinion.
It is just an opinion for discussion anyways, no need to be dismissive about it anyways.
Regarding Henry C. K. Liu’s article… read it a long time ago and wasn’t impressed back then either. Like any other simpleton, who tries to apply their “amazing new and improved history filter” to history, to reinterpret it, with some great revolutionary new take on things, and produce some mind-blowing realization for us all that makes us hit are heads and go “wow, he’s smart”, Liu is just being simple. He obviously grew up with some bizarre romantic notion of history where he likely worshipped the West and all its glories only to grow up and find out that Western civilization, like most others, was built on war and barbarism. But, instead of seeing that basically all people, everywhere, have the same history, he decided to look to the East, where all things are “balanced” with fengshui and numerology and the mysterious tao, and have only been knocked off kilter by the corrupt and barbaric Western civilization. It does not exactly take a genius, or an article as long as his, to figure out that the barbaric parts of Western civilization are barbaric. It does take a simpleton though to suggest that Confucianism and “East Asian” values are a panacea, that Tu’s 6 points aren’t already an integral part of Western civilization, and to forget that between his, and turn-of-the-century academia’s, fight over Eastern and Western civilization, there is the real world where nothing really is East or West. America doesn’t need an injection of new values from his idealized East; it needs to remember its own values, and the values it professes, and then actually follow them.
How can this be seen as censorship when the end users were never required to install or run Green Dam.
“Preinstall” in Chinese actually means “bundle”. Take this 6/12 ZDNet article citing WSJ for example:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=19688
As to what Green Dam will filter, it is configuable by the user.
How this is twisted into censorhip by NYT and a handfull of bloggers is beyond me – anti-sinoism perhaps?
Charles, the “bundle” vs “preinstalled” contention seems thin. “Bundle” is often used to refer to software already pre-installed out-of-the-box, just as often (if not more) as it is used to refer to optional included software NOT installed but included on CD-ROM separately.
It is also shown that Green Dam includes user-configurable lists as well as non-configurable centralized lists. The lists that the user cannot control but are forced to adhere to by way of having the software foisted upon them is the “censorship.”
Am I getting anything wrong? These basic facts seems to be widely agreed upon except by you, which I find odd. Are we missing something?
Kai, the MIIT has made clearification on this issue as early as 6/10. Media choosing not to focus on it does not mean it doesn’t exist. Take this report for example, MIIT official has made it very clear what’s bundled is the setup, and user has the option to not install, or run Green Dam:
http://www.taizhou.gov.cn/art/2009/6/10/art_76_36883.html
据新华社电 昨日，工信部有关负责人说，由政府出资提供过滤软件供社会免费使用是国际通行做法，目的就是为防止未成年人受互联网不良信息的影响。
…
(okay, blah, blah about keeping young people safe…)
…
这位负责人还表示，“绿坝”产品的有效识别率超过90%。考虑到不同层次用户的实际情况，“绿坝”软件运行环境对计算机配置要求低于目前市场主流产品，并可由用户自行选择安装与否，同时对用户上网行为不进行任何监控，也不搜集任何用户信息。
The “end user can freely choose to install or not” quote from MIIB offical shows they are asking for
There are plenty of reports like this stating Green Dam installation is optional (even per original 5/19 MIIT announcement there’s at a minimum option to install or bundle on CD accompanying new systems) if you are willing to take a look on Baidu.
Confusing, maybe, but not censorship – as no end users are required to run it.
Also it is widely agreed it can be uninstalled, as well as litany of hacks/cracks available now:
Confusing, maybe, but not censorship – as no end users are NOT required to run it.
Hey Charles, yes, you’re right that users can uninstall it and hack it. I think that much has been widely disseminated by netizens themselves. I agree with you on that point though I still find myself agreeing with the calls of censorship given a confluence of propaganda surrounding the initiative, use of taxpayers money to fund such an initiative, the exploitation of ignorance, that it is an opt out and not opt in initiative, and last but not least, the very fact that even voluntary usage of software does not guarantee 100% control of how the software works. Yes, perhaps 100% control in terms of being able to turn it off or uninstall it, but realistically, simply turning it does not even begin to suggest you have 100% control over what is being filtered out. Why? Because of those unknown lists you have no control over.
I think the program needs to be entirely configurable and opt-in before cries of censorship can reasonably subside. What do you think?
Kai, propaganda goes both ways. To me this issue is essentially blown out proportion by NYT and a handfull of bloggers, as propaganda goes both ways:
- Do you know US government also used tax payers money to create a free web monitoring software with very similiar features (McGruff SafeGuard http://gomcgruff.com), and it too does not offer 100% control per your logic.
- Banned list being obscured is standard in most cybersecurity software
- Again there’s no madeate to install or run this software; it is opt in as end users are under no obligation to use this free software
- Have you actually tried Green Dam? I installed it on my box for giggles and with it I was able to access Tiananmen Mothers, Student for Free Tibet, Falun Gong, and Pamela Anderson.
Charles, I fully agree that there is propaganda everywhere, both in China and the United States. My point about propaganda is spinning Green Dam as software aimed at protecting children. Why should such software be shipped on all computers when it is obvious that not all computer buyers have children? It is filtering software. The propaganda is in presenting it as something other than what it is, or being disingenuous about what it is for. Green Dam is not just about blocking vulgar content, it is about blocking content the government deems objectionable. This is censorship.
I don’t know which NYT articles or bloggers you are referring to so I cannot comment on your impression of them as blowing this issue out of proportion.
Re: McGruff
Alright, McGruff! Long time no see. Other than government subsidization, I don’t see how these two programs are very similar. McGruff is remote monitoring software that allows snoopy parents to see what their kids are doing and THEN take subsequent action in how they want to control it. Green Dam does not allow parents to monitor, it allows the government to monitor. Green Dam does allow parents to define what they want filtered, but this is in addition to what the government has already decided what will proactively, automatically, and pre-emptively be censored. McGruff is allows parents to opt-in, install, select what to be monitored, and then choose how to handle the next step. Green Dam is opt-out, pre-installed, filtering/blocking/censorship software. There’s a pretty big qualitative difference between the two programs and their entire approach (not to mention application).
Re: Banned lists obscured
I’m not sure what you mean here. Please clarify.
Re: Mandate to install.
I think there’s on-going confusion on this issue. I think the government made it mandatory in June, whereas you’re citing an earlier document. Even in June, the confusion has continued. Please check out this link and the links it sources from and tell me what you think. I don’t think the official position on Green Dam being mandatory and installed has changed but I’m open to new information. Proving me wrong would be good news in fact.
Re: Trying Green Dam
Are you serious? I wouldn’t touch that piece of junk with a ten foot pole, not even for shits and giggles. I think it has been established that the software is incredibly poorly developed, which only adds salt to the gaping taxpayer wound.
stuart, at the dinner last night after Barcamp Shanghai, there was a hilarious discussion at our table about Howard Stern. Those who liked Howard Stern spend on average half an hour a day listening to him. Those who hated him, spent 1.5 hours listening to him. I delight in the fact that you have such an unhealthy interest in commenting on my topics, scouring as you do each time for anything you can twist to disagree on. Thank you for spending more time writing content for CNR than your own blog.
“Thank you for spending more time writing content for CNR than your own blog.”
A pleasure as always; I go where I’m needed most at any given point in time. And of course I ’scour’ this site – it’s one of the more interesting places to keep my finger on the China pulse, but far from the only one.
Dinner last night sounds fascinating – who’s Howard Stern?
Hey there Kai,
Stumbled upon your write-up randomly. Have to say: very eloquently and accurately written. Applauding your skills :)
Let’s connect. @jennybai.
-J