Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2009

Meeting Of The Matts, Liberal And Libertarian


(http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/18272)

Topics covered:
Chas Freeman post-mortem: was China just a red herring?... Matt W. on which regime Freeman’s in bed with... Pork: the other right meat... Obama’s untransformative undermining of DC school vouchers... Matt Y. defends the Employee Free Choice Act... Should marijuana legalization be decided nationally or locally?...

Monday, February 2, 2009

The new way to protest?

It seems the shoe-throwing fad has found its way to Cambridge. A protester chucked his shoe at Chinese PM Wen Jiabao. Fortunately for PM Jiabo the Brit has worse aim that his Iraqi counterpart. I hope this doesn't become a trend; world leaders will need to build shoe-chucker proof barriers.

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Some Thoughts on the Nature and Importance of Freedom

I went out last night and had a truly grand evening in downtown Iowa City. While my friends and I were at a bar, one of my them tried to walk outside to talk to some people who were smoking there. However, the bouncers quickly rebuffed him because he tried to carry an alcoholic beverage out into that establishment's beer garden after it had been closed down for the evening.

These events sparked a conversation between another friend and me about our experiences in Beijing, China. I spent much of the summer there two years ago and she did the same this year. Despite many Americans' belief that China is a totalitarian state in which all behavior is highly regulated, the truth is that in many ways those living in Beijing enjoy more freedoms than we have here in Iowa City. It's true that the vast majority of China's citizens lack the ability to vote in meaningful elections and that attempts at organizing political dissent are quickly quashed. But in their daily lives Beijing's residents are free to do anything we can do here. That city's citizens can work and live where they please as well as spend the money they earn on a wide variety of consumer goods and services. And when it comes to certain types of recreational activities, those living in Beijing have much freer reign than those of us in Iowa City.

For one thing, Beijing either doesn't have or doesn't enforce laws against carrying open alcoholic beverages in public. During my time there I saw numerous university students walking around campus late at night with open beers in hand, talking, laughing, and having an all-around good time. I indulged as well, often sipping liter bottles of beer on the steps of my dorm and talking with my classmates. We would wave in a friendly fashion to any police or security guards who happened to walk buy and they'd generally smile and wave back.

Furthermore, Beijing has no smoking ban. Want to smoke on campus? No problem. Want to smoke in a bar? Go right ahead! Have an urge to light up in your dorm's lobby? Have at it--the security guards stationed in your building are likely to join in. Attempts to micromanage individuals' private activities are noticeably absent in China.

There's no question that I value my political rights in the United States to a great enough extent that I'd be quite unwilling to trade them for the simple individual freedoms enjoyed by Chinese citizens. However, there's no reason we can't have both. Tragically though, most Americans seem to have lost interest in preventing the government from engaging in whatever arbitrary nanny-state nonsense its bureaucrats choose to pursue at any given time. In the name of democracy and the alleged public good we allow our city government to forcibly detain people and lock them up for doing something as innocuous as sipping a beer or puffing on a cigarette in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Maintaining a reasonably safe environment for the city's residents is indeed the whole reason we have a city council and police for in the first place. But we've given them carte blanche to regulate almost anything they see fit in virtually any manner they see deem appropriate. This is madness. We must push back against this encroachment of our basic liberties and demand that the government justify all its actions thoroughly and reasonably.

Ultimately, people have to take responsibility for themselves. Engaging in risky behavior ought not be grounds for getting drug off the street and locked up in a cage for the night unless that behavior puts other, non-consenting people in danger. Strolling through the Ped Mall with a beer can in one's hand a a cigarette hanging from one's lips just doesn't rise to that level.

Because the government has proven itself so thoroughly incapable of restraining itself, we must organize and push back against it ourselves. Remember, local-level elections are notorious for their low voter turnout. It is well within the power of the freedom-loving denizens of Iowa City to reverse the alarming trend towards group control of people's lives and reestablish liberty as the highest value and ultimate goal of our polity.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Is That a Rocket in Your Pocket?

The plane tickets are bought, the meeting rooms are booked, and as I write this, the big, silver platters are being hoisted on the tables and prepped for a feast. This weekend the UI will host a sprawling, three-day conference on China, the Olympics, and the global media. Complete with laminated name tags and flavored coffees, the conference will pull in a who's-who list of journalistic heavyweights. Journalists from the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, and nearly every other Pulitzer-winning publication will trek to campus and flock to the Adler Journalism Building. And while they exchange small-talk, relate stories about past Olympics, and complete intellectually straining discourses on the role the media plays in hyping and framing the Olympics, a half world away, in Beijing, the Olympic torch is being paired with a ballistic missile.

The 2008 China Military Report, released earlier this week by the Chinese government, reveals a country sprinting towards militarization. The report shows that the Chinese government spent close to $140 billion modernizing its army last year. That figure is represents a staggering 300 percent increase from 2006, and is widely-believed to be grossly underestimated. The debate is over. China is emerging as a global economic and cultural colossus. But, so far, its military has remained relatively tame. Compared to the U.S. and many of its Western Allies, the Chinese military lacked cutting edge weapons systems, it's soldiers were often poorly equipped and underpaid, and a relatively small percentage of China's total GDP was devoted to its military. Now, the tides have turned. When faced with the choice between guns or rice, the officials in Beijing chose the barrel.

And what does this mean to the West?

China's government is a seemingly unsolvable paradox. It embraces Western-style capitalism as a means of enriching its masses and building its coffers yet remains very much a centrally-planned system. It endorses internal and international human-rights reforms yet subjugates large portions of its population to egregious human rights abuses. If it shows a smile, a frown is stirring underneath. Is the current military build-up a sign of belligerence or unprompted aggression? What do they have in mind? Is an all-out assault on Taiwan out of the question?

It seems clear that China is a country both proud of its past and confident about its role in the future. While it hopes to use the 2008 Olympics as a springboard to international glory, if back flips and breast strokes fail, tanks and bombers will succeed. The cold, hard truth is that military might matters. If China wants to fill its perceived place among the world's elite superpowers, it knows it needs an advanced military, fueled by a large pocket-book. While its exact aims are uncertain, its overarching goal is clear. China is mighty now, and will only grow mightier.