Global Voices » Chinese

China: The Political Drama of Wang Lijun's “Stress Leave”

Oiwan Lam — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:14:06 +0000

Over the past few days, Chinese netizens have been following the story of former Chongqing police chief Wang Lijun's secretive meeting at the U.S. Consulate closely. Many believe that Wang tried to seek asylum in the U.S. in order to protect himself from becoming the scapegoat of Chongqing Chinese Communist Party Secretary Bo Xilai's power struggle in Beijing.

Wang Lijun has been portrayed as a role model of the Chinese police since 2000 after his successful crackdown on a triad network in Liaoning province in 1999. In June 2008, the anti-triad hero was appointed as the head of police bureau in Chongqing city. Working side-by-side with Bo Xilai, he arrested a large number of former government officials in Chongqing on charges of corruption, including former head of the Justice Bureau Wen Qiang and former deputy chief of the Police Bureau Pang Changjian. In May 2011, Wang was elected as deputy mayor of Chongqing.

A dramatic turn took place on February 2, 2012, when the Information Office of Chongqing municipality posted a message via Weibo stating that [zh]:

据悉，近日市委决定，王立军同志不再兼任市公安局局长、党委书记，以副市长身份分管联系经济领域工作。

We are told that the City Committee recently has decided that Wang Lijun will no longer serve as head of the Police Bureau or Secretary of the Chongqing Party Committee. He will remain in charge of economic affairs as deputy mayor.

While Wang still attended a public function in February 6 2012, two days later on February 8, the information office announced [zh] in Sina Weibo again:

据悉，王立军副市长因长期超负荷工作，精神高度紧张，身体严重不适，经同意，现正在接受休假式的治疗。

We are told that deputy mayor Wang Lijun suffers from hypertension due to work pressure. He is very ill and it was agreed that he is to receive “vacation style treatment”.

On the same day, the U.S. State Department confirmed that Wang had had a meeting at the consulate in Chengdu, from which he departed “of his own volition”.

Political analysts with mainstream media [zh] believe that the incident reflects the internal struggle within the Chinese Communist Party and that President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao have joined hands to sideline Bo Xilai before they step down in the upcoming 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China. The word in Chongqing, it seems, is that Wang's power play was successful and he is now in the custody of Party Central. Meanwhile on Twitter, netizens have their own speculation about what took place.

Bo Xilai left in the lurch: Corruption fighter Wang hops away, leaving Chongqing mayor and deputy Party Secretary Huang Qifan ("red songs") behind; Image by Rebel Pepper.

Tufuwugan, for one, believes [zh] that Wang Lijun has been made Bo Xilai's scapegoat:

估计有人要搞薄都督，想阻止他进常委分赃，先卸了都督的左右膀，都督当然为了自保要牺牲王立军，在文革时连自己老爹都能把他肋骨踹断几根的人，牺牲王立军算什么，王立军估计看到处境不行，也知道都督会把他出卖，所以为了自保，做出跑到美使馆的事，精彩大戏正在上演。

I think someone wants to stop Bo from entering the Politburo standing committee and they do this by taking away his arms. Bo will sacrifice Wang Lijun to protect himself. During the cultural revolution, he even broke a few ribs of his dad's, so betraying Wang Lijun is nothing. Wang Lijun probably sensed that Bo would betray him, which is why he ran into the U.S. Consulate. This is such an exciting opera.

Alan Huang feels that Wang has been too naive in his political career:

蒙古族人王立军从小练得一身好武术，如果领导内蒙古独立，估计能成民族英雄，丫非走蒙奸的道路，最终身败名裂。在这个拼爹的年代，出生于铁路工人家庭的王立军，竟然幻想和太子党党魁薄熙来鱼死网破。连店是谁开的还没搞清楚就敢来砸场子，相当naïve啊。

Mongolian Wang Lijun learned martial arts since he was very young. He could have led the independence movement of Inner Mongolia and become a national hero. But, he betrayed his people and lives in shame. In a society where people's status is defined by that of their fathers, there is no way that a railway worker's son can fight against the head of the princelings, Bo Xilai. He has no idea who is in control, so naive.

Qiumazha on the other hand feels [zh] that Wang has made a good move:

我忽然觉得，王立军不傻。闯美领馆避难只是寻求轰动效应，以防被蒸发。另外，他声称他已经将内幕证据等放在了安全的地方，杀他就会自动解密。谁知道这个安全的地方就不是美领馆呢？这个老侦查出身的人，应该比好莱坞谍战片编辑更有想象力。嘲笑王立军闯关之举恐怕是不智的。

Suddenly I feel that Wang Lijun is not stupid at all. He ran into the U.S. consulate in order to draw public attention, so that he wouldn't be vaporized. In addition, he claims that he has all the evidence [on Bo] hidden in a safe place. In the case that he's killed, the secrets will be revealed. That safe place might be the U.S. consulate. He has enough investigation experience that he should be more imaginative than any Hollywood director. Those laughing at Wang Lijun are too ignorant.

Since Wang Lijun has been very harsh in cracking down on political activists, dissidents in Twitter are happy to see him seeking help from the “enemy forces”.

Gongmingyaoyao mocks [zh] Wang:

王立军教育我们，不管怎么当五毛，关键时刻还是美国人才是亲爹啊

Wang Lijun teaches us that all 50 cents know that the Americans are their daddy in critical moments like this….

Wuyuesanren echoes [zh] Gongmingyaoyao's comment on Sina Weibo:

早就说咱们官员最信任的政府是美国政府，中美关系那不是一般的好，好多人还不信。王立军跑美领馆这事儿再次确证了这种说法吧？我们这帮你们嘴里的美分带路党最多是看好美国的制度，认为值得我们学习，他们才是真把身家性命押在美国那边。五毛们，你们醒醒吧。

I always said that our officials trust the U.S. government more than any other. People just don't believe that Sino-U.S. relations are that good. Now, Wang's move has proven it again, right? For us, those who are labelled as the US dollar gang [as opposed to the 50 cent party], we appreciate the U.S system and want to learn from it. But they [the officials] keep their family and wealth in the U.S. Please wake up, 50 cents!

Shang Guangluan reports [zh] on what he heard from the street:

晕啊，刚刚在小店吃面，听见几个民工都在谈王立军的事，这事儿成了全民娱乐了。但他们集体得出的结论是：王立军肯定被以叛国罪枪毙。这个……

My god… just now I had noodles in a small shop, a number of rural workers were talking about Wang Lijun. The incident has become people's entertainment. Their conclusion is: Wang Lijun will be shot to death for treason…

Political dissident Ye du points out [zh] that:

【网络热点观察】全民网络热炒王立军。王捕头事件深刻反映了在一个互害型社会里，即使是体制中人，也没有一个人是安全的。今天加害于人的，明天也随时因为站队、利益等问题而被害。这就是为什么我们说一个民主社会的来临才是全体公民福泽的原因，这样才可避免互相恐惧、互相伤害。

[Observation online] All people are talking about Wang Lijun online. The incident shows that in a society where everyone hurts everyone else, even though you are from the Establishment, there is no safety. Today you hurt someone, tomorrow you will be hurt either because of the clan you belong to or over someone's interests. That's why we say democracy is the way out of such mutually inflicted fear and harm.

Writer Ye Kuangzheng believes [zh] that Wang Lijun's move signifies a turn in China history:

王立军进入美国使领馆，已被证实。这是1949年以来，高层官员第一次做出这种令人震惊的举动。林彪那次属出走未遂。由此可想象，王所置身的政治环境，没有巨大恐惧，极难迈出这一步。王立军的这一步，王立军的未来，会对中国未来的政治生态和官员心理有重大影响。王立军引发的政坛地震，也只是刚刚开始

It has been proven that Wang Lijun did enter the U.S consulate. This is the first time since 1949 that such a high-ranking government official has made such a shocking move. Lin Biao's escape, that failed. The fear that Wang is was confronting must have been enormous, or else he wouldn't have made such a move. Wang Lijun's actions and his future will have significant influence on China's future political ecology and the psychological state of government officials. This political earthquake has only just begun.

Hong Kong, China: Cross-border Self-drive Tour Instigates Fear and Anger

Ronald Yick — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 05:43:55 +0000

Tension between Hong Kong and mainland China has mushroomed in recent months. While small conflicts, such as a train scuffle, have ignited fury, the recent introduction of a cross-border self-drive tour scheme, signed by the Hong Kong and Guangdong governments without public consultation, has instigated a new round of social panic and anger among Hong Kong people. Some netizens even compare the situation of Hong Kong to Tibet and Xinjiang, where ethnic conflicts have developed into separatism and repression.

The image below, which has been shared more than 130 times via Facebook, is a re-creation of a photo taken recently in Tibet. The slogan on the military vehicle was originally “Han Chinese and Tibetan are one family” (漢藏一家親. It has been widely circulate via micro-blogs to mock the central government's policy in Tibet that the “family” is united by military force. The Hong Kong version of the photo was produced a famous blogger, Kay Lam & Fokguy remix team. The background of the photo is the busiest commercial district in Hong Kong, Causeway Bay and the slogan on the military vehicle has changed into “China and Hong Kong are one family” (中港一家親).

The photo's subtitle states [zh]:
‎

2015 年 SOGO 門口．自駕遊 X 中港一家親幻想圖（來自 2012 年駐西藏的解放軍車）

Taken in font of SOGO in 2015. An imaginary photo of ‘cross-border self-drive tour’ and ‘China and Hong Kong being one family’.

The image is a mockery of the newly announced “Self-Drive Tour” scheme, which allows private cars from mainland China to enter Hong Kong without having a local license. User, Bay area, posts [zh] an article at inmediahk explaining the background of the scheme:

近日驚見到沒有港人看的左報新聞，原來林瑞麟及鄭汝樺已在毫無諮詢的情況下私自與大陸簽訂了「私家車自由行」的條款，未來三月內地私家車就可直入市區，橫衝直撞每個角落，意象可怖。我們可以預視到，深圳廣州現時的交通文化，將會嚴重衝擊全港的交通系統：我們香港第一個小悅悅亦將會很快誕生。

Recently Hong Kong people are surprised by the pro-Beijing's newspaper's news that Stephen Lam [Chief Secretary of Hong Kong government] and Eva Cheng [Head of the Transportation and Housing Bureau] had signed an agreement with mainland Chinese government on “Private vehicle visit scheme”. Within three months, private vehicles from mainland China can ride into the city, reaching every corner at full speed. Imaginating such scenes is horrifying. We can predict that the driving culture from Shenzhen and Guangzhou would crush our transportation system: Xiao Yue Yue [a baby girl killed by hit and run driver in Guangzhou] will soon appear in Hong Kong.

Dictionary of Politically Incorrect Hong Kong Cantonese has translated some discussions among Facebook users:

Chan: Individual visit scheme isn’t enough and there will even be self-drive tour… Don’t fool me! Mainlander drivers don’t follow rules. When I was in China, I dared not to cross roads. Their driving skill and unfamiliarity with the roads of Hong Kong, I really afraid that the no. of traffic accidents are going to surge.

Cest la Vie: Population density, usage of road, parking, driving attitude, environmental problem, law enforcement problem, life risking problem…There are so many problems. Why do self-drive tour have to be implemented? Crazy?

Everybody should protect the remaining freedom of Hong Kong. Left handed drive and right handed drive will harm many innocent citizens. Besides, reckless Mainland Chinese drivers really make people shivering. Hong Kong citizen have to object that. Put everybody’s safety to the first priority. Please!

Apart from road safety, air pollution and traffic jams, people are angry about the under-table arrangement of cross-border policy. As by Land Justice League, a civic group advocating social justice and democracy, pointed out :

中港跨境政策一直是本地政治團體和社會運動鞭長莫及的「黑洞」，整套操作完全排斥市民﹝其實是兩地人民﹞，甚至是立法會的參與。由議題設定、研究、制訂政策，市民全不知情，無從過問，每次都是見到曾蔭權或唐英年或林瑞麟與國內官員排排企簽約，市民才透過愈來愈麻木的主流記者得悉，「阿爺又俾著數啦/中央又挺港啦」。

Cross-border policy is like a “black hole” and local political parties and civil societies do not have any say in the process. The negotiation has excluded all citizens, both Hong Kong and mainland Chinese citizens. Even the Legislative Council cannot participate in the discussion. There is no way for us to know about their agenda and considerations. Only when mainstream media reports about Donald Tsang of Stephen Lam signing the agreement with mainland officials, do we know that “grandpa [meaning central government] is offering policy favors to Hong Kong again”.

我們每次都是看人家在簽我們的條約，我們從來沒有一次屬於香港人的、可以引以自豪的「簽約儀式」。香港這個不斷「被簽約」的命運共同體要自主，第一步是要離開、違背、拒絕、撕毀綑綁着我們的條約、協議和遊戲規則…

They are signing all these agreements for us, but the agreements do not belong to Hong Kong people. There is nothing to be proud of. Hong Kong needs to be independent from all these “unequal treaties”, the first step is to walk away, reject and tear apart from all these agreements, treaties and political games that trap us in unequal relations…

China: Veto of UN Security Council Draft Resolution on Syria Draws Praise and Grief

John Kennedy — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:24:32 +0000

This post is part of our special coverage Syria Protests 2011/12.

Russia and China seem to have voted with their own interests in mind yesterday in their controversial opposition to a draft resolution at the UN Security Council which calls on Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to stop the killings in his country, a revision of an earlier draft calling on Assad to relinquish power.

China justified its decision to veto the draft resolution, saying it wants to promote peace in Syria, and Russia claims to hope for a diplomatic approach to resolving the conflict in the country. As FireDogLake writer David Dayen points out: “The fact that Russia still supplies arms to the Syrian security forces clearly weighed heavily on the vote today.”

US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, confronting Li Baodong, China. Image posted to Weibo.

Unrest in the country has led to an estimated 7,000 deaths since March last year, with more than 200 lives lost in a massacre earlier this week.

Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of the People's Daily tabloid Global Times, made today what is perhaps one of the most vocal statements in support of China's decision to veto the draft resolution, ending up under heavy fire in the comments section. Taking offense at Susan Rice's reported “disgust” at China's vote, Hu confuses her [zh] with Condoleezza Rice but also writes:

美国代表不点名批评中俄“出卖了叙利亚人民的意愿”。骂去好了。美国多次在安理会涉以色列提案表决时搞“一票否决”，这次中俄是“两票否决”。叶利钦当年说的好：只要中俄联手，美国无论捣鼓什么，“都是手淫”。赞呵。

The American representative has criticized China and Russia for their “betrayal” of the Syrian people. Whatever. America has vetoed a number of Security Council propositions dealing with Israel with a lone vote. China and Russia's “veto” now was done with two votes. Yeltsin said it best: As long as China and Russia stick together, the most America can do is play with itself. Awesome.

Almost as a sort of response, writer Ran Yunfei wrote [zh] shortly after that:

一个政府做一次错事可以原谅，不可原谅的是把做错事当成事业。我不是个民族主义者，但百年来的历史证明，中国与俄国的联手从来都没有对过。

A government can be forgiven for making one mistake, but it becomes unforgivable when making mistakes becomes a legacy. I'm not a nationalist, but a hundred years of history has proven that China and Russia have never done anything right by sticking together.

One “verified” commentator on Sina Weibo wrote [zh] early Sunday morning Beijing time that Russia and China ought now to be removed the Security Council and China replaced by Taiwan; that post was quickly deleted.

Sorry world, sorry Syria, we Chinese have an evil government. —Michael Anti, on Twitter.

The horrific video below [WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT], however, purportedly of the massacre Thursday in Homs, has not yet been deleted and has gathered hundreds of comments across the different spaces on which it's been embedded. At Sina Video, where it's currently being hosted, the most recent comment reads:

尼玛的我们国家在干什么鸟呀

Damnit, what the hell is our country doing?

This post is part of our special coverage Syria Protests 2011/12.

China: A Death Sentence to Hide Government Corruption?

Oiwan Lam — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 03:35:04 +0000

Wu Ying, named China's sixth richest woman in 2006, lost an appeal against her death sentence at the Zhejiang Higher People's Court on January 18, 2012. Many citizens have pleaded online for Wu's life believing the death sentence was meant to silence her from exposing corruption by government officials who may have loaned her embezzled public funds.

Suspicions grew stronger when Dong Yang City government submitted a joint letter to the courts recommending she be executed.

The 30-year old was first arrested in March 2007, charged with “illegal fundraising” of RMB 770 million (approximately USD 122 million). In December 18, 2009, the charge was changed to “financial fraud”, and she was sentenced to death by the Jinhua Intermediate People's Court. In Wu's first trial, there was no lawyer to represent her, and all trials including the appeal took place behind closed doors.

Human rights lawyer, Teng Biao, has written a very long article [zh] explaining some of the details known about Wu Ying's court case.

Wu Ying stood trial for financial fraud and was sentenced to death. Screen captured photo from NTDTV

A loan shark list

Wu started a beauty parlor business in Dong Yang city at the age of 22 in 2003. Her business then expanded to entertainment business and property investments. As is common for private entrepreneurs in China, she had difficulty obtaining loans from banks and had to raise funds by other means. In December 2006, her business had cash flow problems and she failed to pay back a debt to loan sharks. She was kidnapped, robbed and received death threats soon after she was released. Local police officers did not investigate her case. Instead, several months later, she was arrested.

During Wu's detention, she exposed a list of government officials who had illegally lent money to her. Three of them received long jail sentences. Later, local newspapers revealed [zh] that Wu had shared a list of 137 names of which 103 had lent her more than RMB 500,000. The speculation is that many local government officials may have been implicated. Officials who receive bribes, or obtain funds by other illegal means, are suspected of lending money to private businesses at high interest rates.

Inevitable illegal fundraising

Teng Biao points out [zh] that under the current financial system it is inevitable for the private business sector not to commit “illegal fundraising”; in other words, most of the successful private businesses in China have probably committed Wu Ying's “crime”:

民营企业却难以得到银行的支持，只能靠处于灰色地带的民间借贷。数据表明，银行的短期贷款中，民营企业只占不到20%。据全国工商联一项调查，有90%以上的民营中小企业表示，无法从银行获得贷款。全国民营企业和家族企业在过去三年中有近62.3%通过民间借贷的形式进行融资。

Without support from the banks, private businesses have to borrow money from the market. According to statistics, only 20% of short term bank loans go to private businesses. A bank survey shows that more than 90% SMEs [Small and Medium-sized Enterprises] said they had failed to obtain loans from banks. More than 62.3% of family businesses obtain their capital from the market.

An unjust system

Blogger Li Ming points out [zh], that if Wu must die, many more would follow:

吴英该杀，那么温州诸多“跑路老板”也该杀，借高利贷一掷千万金的“太太豪赌团”，以及所有把集资用于铺张挥霍的老板，都该抓来杀掉。有的富豪集资营运失败，享受救助待遇，而同属一类的吴英或遭遇杀头待遇，此大不公，此即法之大恶大暴。

If Wu must be killed, the runaway bosses in Wenzhou must be killed too. Those gamblers who borrow money from loan sharks, those bosses who show off their wealth with corporate money must be killed too. Now we have a group of business losers enjoying the government's bailout, while Wu Ying in a similar condition has been sentenced to death. This is so unjust. The law is evil.

Yao Shujie, an overseas scholar, observed more injustice in mainland Chinese society [zh]:

吴英只是对11人造成损失，而上市公司的老总们，却是给上亿无辜的股民造成巨大的损失。本质上，吴英和这些上市公司的老总，对人们造成的伤害，并没有任何差别。所不同的，吴英被判死刑，上市公司老总们，却照样拿数千万的年薪，照样升官。

还有，像许宗衡和刘志军这样的贪官，涉案金额高达百亿人民币，给国家和人民带来的灾难和对社会所产生的不良影响，比吴英的破坏力高出千百倍，却没有被判死。

12年前，赖昌星高达700亿元的惊天大案，因为逃到加拿大躲了11年，去年引渡回国时，却拿到了一块外国人给的免死金牌。

同样是一个国家，有道是，判死吴英，笑死无数贪官和赖昌星。

Wu Ying has only inflicted damage on 11 people. In the case of the listed companies, their failure would bring harm to millions of people. There is no different between Wu Ying and the CEOs of the listed companies but Wu has been sentenced to death, while all these CEOs are taking millions of paychecks and bonuses, and have a bright future waiting for them.

Corrupt officials such as Xu Zhonghang and Liu Zhijun, their cases involved tens of billions of RMB and the harm they caused is a thousand times more serious than Wu's. They were not sentenced to death.

Twelve years ago, Lai Changxing committed a RMB 70 billion corruption scandal. Since he managed to escape to Canada for 11 years, he received amnesty from the death sentence upon his return.

In one and the same country, people have such different fates. No wonder some think Wu's death sentence is a [source of] great entertainment to corrupt officials and Lai Changxing.

Is the death sentence really about Wu Ying's economic activities? Independent writer, Ye Kuangzheng, from Beijing does not think so [zh]:

地方官员联名要判吴英死刑，不仅为了灭囗，也是杀鸡儆猴，看谁进去了，还敢乱咬官员！吴英案仍有数亿资金未追回，匆忙杀了吴英，钱如何追回？难说背后没有潜藏的利益链。与吴英案有关的官员，为何至今未判？即便吴英罪大恶极，也应等资金和案情水落石出了，再做定夺不迟。

The government officials' joint letter demanding Wu Ying's death is not just to silence her but to threaten others. Who else dares to expose the corruption of government officials during their detention? There are millions of dollars missing from Wu's bank accounts - who has taken the money? Once Wu is dead, who else can give us a clue? Are there interlocking interests behind all this? How come some of the government officials involved in the case are still uncharged? Even if Wu did deserve such a harsh penalty, we should still wait until the full truth is revealed before seeing her die.

China: Several Tibetan Language Blog Sites Shut Down

Dechen Pemba — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:56:03 +0000

This post is part of our special coverage Languages and the Internet.

Against the backdrop of a stream of self-immolations in Tibet in protest against Chinese rule, unrest in eastern Tibet with protestors shot by police and a severely increased military presence, several of the most popular independently-run Tibetan language blog sites hosted in China have gone offline as of today.

The blog section of the website AmdoTibet has been closed (the rest of the site is functioning) and the following notice can be seen:

The notice in Chinese reads: “Due to some of the blog users not publishing in accordance with the goal of this site, the blog has temporarily been shut down, we hope that blog users will have understanding!”

Another very popular blog site Sangdhor.com is also offline, without any explanation. In October 2011, Sangdhor boldly published a poem titled “Mourning” that was about the self-immolations in Tibet. The poem was quickly taken offline. An English translation of the poem was published on High Peaks Pure Earth.

Below are two screenshots of Sangdhor.com, the top screenshot shows Sangdhor in its functioning state and the bottom screenshot was taken earlier today:

Finally the blog site Rangdrol.net is also offline and contains an interesting notice in Tibetan. In October 2011, Rangdrol published a poem titled “The Truth of Flames on the Thorny Path” which carried many references to fire and flames; the poem was taken offline (read the English translation on High Peaks Pure Earth).

Below is a screenshot of Rangdrol taken earlier, the English text “Site off-line” suggests that the administrators have removed the site, and the Tibetan text underneath reads: ”For the sake of life, we are mourning and crying”.

This post is part of our special coverage Languages and the Internet.

China: Not Worried About Twitter's Decision to Self-Censor

John Kennedy — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:50:09 +0000

Twitter's announcement Thursday that the site will begin censoring content according to the relevant laws, regulations and policies of each country in which it has users, was followed not only by American netizens, but discussed as far away as China.

Although Twitter remains blocked in China, the site's Chinese-language users, an assorted bunch, moved quickly to source people to translate [zh] the company's statement and figure out what it might mean—a Twitter.cn, for example, or, as Ai Weiwei wonders, if the time has come to move on in search of a new platform with more respect for its users [zh].

Wen Yunchao, a well-known Internet activist from Guangzhou now working in a sort of domestic exile in Hong Kong as a producer for a new TV station, posted his thoughts on Twitter's new censorship measures to his Twitter account (@wenyunchao) several hours ago:

Image from Weibo

从推特发布的公告来看，现在是比以前进步了，以前是接到一国政府要求删除推特信息时，全球均不可见，现在是只是该国用户不可见。（1）

1. From the looks of Twitter's announcement, this is an improvement. Previously, a tweet could be deleted at the request of a country's government, leaving no one in the world able to see it. Now, only the users in that specific country won't be able to see it the information in question.

推特新的审查政策不会对现有中文用户产生影响。现在翻墙使用推特的用户，推特很难从技术上认定这些用户来自中国，因此亦无足够的依据屏蔽这些信息在中国的显示（无从显示）。（2）

2. Twitter's new censorship policy won't affect current Chinese-language users. It won't be easy for Twitter to determine through technical means which of its users come from China, as they have to scale the GFW to access the site, meaning the company won't have enough information to know who in China to block information from.

推特想进入中国，至少存在两在不可克服的障碍。一是黑箱的审查机制与透明规则之间的冲突无法解决。除非像谷歌那样以内资公司的方式存在，否则推特屏蔽特定信息将面临用户的诉讼。（3）

3. If Twitter decides to set up operations in China, there are at least two obstacles it won't be able to overcome. The first is that there's no way of resolving the conflict between black box censorship mechanisms and transparent regulations. Unless Twitter were to do like Google and set up a joint venture in China, it's going to have to deal with lawsuits from all the users who get singled out.

二是推特既然有新浪的政府公关能力，亦无法做到像新浪一样巨量的审查投入。对于中国当局来说，不会允许一个比新浪更宽松的类推特平台在中国提供服务。（4）

4. The second is that even if Twitter had as much PR sway over the government as Sina, it still wouldn't be able to commit as vast an amount of resources as Sina has to censoring content. Nor would Chinese authorities permit a platform like Twitter, far more open than Sina, to provide services within China.

Taiwan: 2012 Election Sets Example for Mainland Chinese Democratization

I-fan Lin — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:32:22 +0000

Taiwan's presidential and legislative election was held on January 14, 2012. Incumbent Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang (KMT) was reelected as President with 51.6% of the vote. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) challenger Tsai Ing-wen resigned her post as chairperson of the DPP following her election defeat.

Chinese communities around the world were closely watching the results, as Taiwan is the first among the Chinese societies to transition from authoritarian to democratic governance. Many people from mainland China and Hong Kong travelled to Taiwan to observe the political process; they wonder if Taiwan can set an example for the future democratization in mainland China.

Beijing based journalist Mark MacKinnon was surprised by Taiwanese enthusiasm for politics:

As a Beijing correspondent, it's so weird to see and hear people talking and shouting - in Chinese - about politics.

Based on the website of the Central Election Commission, 74.38% of eligible voters casted their votes in 2012. Ma Ying-jeou won reelection with 51.60% of the total votes cast, and Tsai Ing-wen gathered 45.63%.

Taiwan sovereignty

Different from the previous election, the usual Blue (KMT) and Green (DDP) antagonism seems absent, yet Taiwanese sovereignty remains the most critical issue. Karlatheo expressed [zh] expressed her concern after the election:

1月14日，平靜地去投票。與朋友相聚。其實大家並不特別在意哪一黨得勝，但是很在意台灣的主體性是否會失落。…知道中國的因素主宰著這次的選舉，經濟的問題是所有的人都得面對的。…馬總統，請記得您是我們僕人

On Jan[uary] 14, I went to vote peacefully. Then I gathered with friends. We do not care which party won the election, but we do care about whether Taiwan’s sovereign will be kept…We knew the issue of China dominated this election, and everyone needs to face the economic problems… President Ma, please remember you are our servant.

Nathan Batto was also worried about the future of the Taiwan-China relationship after the election:

With a sizeable 70-43 majority in the legislature, Ma Ying-jeou is not going to immediately become a lame duck president. Instead, he probably has enough power to do most of what he wants. He will almost certainly have the power to implement the next stage of ECFA, and it is not out of the question that he could push through the peace agreement that he mentioned during the campaign.

Researcher fellow at the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation, Dean Cheng, pointed out:

A strong Taiwan, confident in its relationship with the U.S., is key to peace and security in the region. In the weeks before Taiwan’s election, the U.S. Administration suddenly dispatched several senior officials to Taiwan. As it has been almost 12 years since a visit from a sitting U.S. cabinet member, the re-election of President Ma would seem to present an opportunity to demonstrate that this lack of attention has come to an end.

Example for mainland China

Those who could not fly to Taiwan to observe the election watched the news closely. Lele is from China [zh], but she has observed Taiwanese elections for more than a decade:

尽管不是长在台湾生在台湾，也不是亲哪个党派的政治狂热分子，但台湾四年一次的总统大选开票直播，我一定会观看。这已是第四次看到台湾总统大选了。…台湾民主大选制度逐渐走向成熟，不知大陆何时也能向台湾一样走上这一条路？大陆老百姓也有选举国家领导人的权利？

I was not born and have never lived in Taiwan. I am not political fanatic for any party, but I always watch the live broadcast of the election in Taiwan every four years. This is my fourth time watching it… The election system in Taiwan has become mature. When will China step onto the same road as Taiwan? When will Chinese have the right to vote for our leaders.

@darkillzhou [zh] (on Weibo) from China made jokes about the mainland Chinese election when talking to his Taiwanese friend:

刚一台湾朋友结束聊天时对我说，“明天早上我們要去投票了﹐晚上就知道總統是誰了”，我顿时不知如何答复。虽然我们之间的交流没有任何障碍，但在他面前真觉得无地自容。我只好说，“你们太落后了，我们如果明天早上投票的话，今天晚上就知道谁会当选了。。。”

My Taiwanese friend just told me they will go to vote for their president tomorrow morning, and they will know who wins the presidential election by the evening. Suddenly I did not know how to respond. Although our communication was smooth, I felt very ashamed. At the end, I said, ‘You Taiwanese are not efficient. If we mainland Chinese go to vote tomorrow morning, we would know who win the election tonight…’

In Hong Kong, columnist 練乙錚 (Lian Yi-Zheng) talked about [zh] how this election may change the future of China:

台灣的故事，如果只看到七八十年代，那是和大陸到目前為止差不多的，但到了八十年代，故事出現政治拐點，五千年文明古國民主化了。其後發展，大家清楚，要點是：台灣經驗是一個近乎完整的立國經驗。政治上，從極權到民主、從專制到自由；經濟上，從落後到富足，從漁農到包含大量高科技。
台灣在國際上沒有話語權，在全球華人當中的政治比重也很低，但一個內容豐富的「台灣論述」正在積聚力量，吸引着全世界大小角落裏正在徬徨焦慮地尋找精神家園的華人；這次到台灣觀選的陸人港客，便是這個論述的吸收者、傳播者。

What has happened in Taiwan is similar to that in China, if we only look at Taiwan’s history before 1980. In the 1980s, there was a turning point in their politics. Building upon the 5,000-year-old culture, the country became democratic. All of us know the following story: the so-called ‘Taiwan experience’ is similar to an experience of founding a state. Politically, they became democratic after totalitarianism, and now they enjoy freedom after autocracy. Economically, they became wealthy from [being] an undeveloped country, and they have developed hi-tech industry in addition to fishery and agriculture.
Taiwan can hardly speak out on the international stage. On the political stage of Chinese society all over the world, Taiwanese only play a small role. However, the ‘Taiwan proposal’ with a rich content is gaining its energy. This proposal attracts Chinese people all over the world who are anxious to find their spiritual homeland. This time, those people from Hong Kong and mainland China who went to Taiwan to observe this election will absorb this experience and spread it.

In China, 水木丁 pointed out [zh] it is an opportunity for people in China to reflect why they do not think democracy is a choice for China:

我看蔡英文的演讲时，一直在想这个问题，不知道那些持如此论调的人，看到这一场总统选举，会有什么样的说辞，所以美国人英国人可以讲民主，我们不配讲民主？所以连一衣带水的台湾人都可以讲民主，我们不配讲民主吗？全世界都素质高，只有我们素质低，不配讲民主吗？
我看到台湾大选的井然有序，内心感慨，因为我知道这些和我们一样的黄皮肤黑眼睛的同胞们正在学习，他们也曾选错人，也曾走过弯路，发生过闹剧，陷入过绝望，但是他们还是继续选择了这条路，不问自己配不配。我看到他们站在大雨中，胜利的人们和失败的人们，因为有信念，知道自己想要一个怎样的世界，所以也就有希望。我突然想到这个配不配的问题，这世界上貌似没有那个国家的人民，是要先证明自己配民主和自由，才被施舍民主和自由的，想到此岸的人们竟然要怀疑自己到底配不配，这真是羞辱。民主的确是要慢慢来，但绝对不是从证明自己配不配开始。

When I watched Tsai Ing-Wen’s talk, I kept thinking about this question: I do not know what those people will say about this election. Americans and British people can talk about democracy, but we are not qualified for talking about democracy, are we? Now Taiwanese can talk about democracy on the other side of the strait, but we still cannot talk about democracy. Is it true that the people outside of China have higher quality and we do not? Is this why we are not qualified for talking about democracy?
I have some reflections when I saw the election in Taiwan held smoothly. I know these people with yellow skin and black eyes, who look like us, are learning. They had chosen the wrong person. They had taken the detour. There had been a farce. No matter what has happened, they continue walking on the way they choose. They do not ask if they are qualified. I saw them standing in the rain, the supporters of the winning party and the supporters of the losing party. They have their beliefs. They know what kind of world they want. Therefore they have hope. Suddenly I thought about the question of qualification. No citizen in any country in the world is given out democracy and freedom after they prove that they are qualified for democracy and freedom. Thinking about the doubts about our qualification that many of us have, I feel humiliated. Democracy should be realized step by step, but the process should never start with proving us qualified for it.

Encouraged by the observers in Hong Kong, mainland China, and other parts of the world old cat believes [zh] the Taiwanese should be strong and help the democracy movement in China:

在這一次大選中，許多同胞憂慮中國透過讓利、市場力量，軟性影響台灣的選舉，而選前大批企業老闆公開支持九二共識，被視為中國影響的證明。這些憂慮當然很合理，但我們只能單向憂慮嗎？我們不能反向送出我們的魅力嗎？
這是台灣的機會…如果台灣對中國的民主化有貢獻，未來我們才有機會贏得十三億人的同理認同…台灣雖小，卻占有舉足輕重的位置，我們不應該再用逃離中國的心態思考未來。
無論幸或不幸，我們就是站在這個奇異的歷史高點上了，華人的民主典範，也許不是我們設定的目標，但卻是我們實實在在擁有的力量。
不應該辜負這樣的力量。

In this election, many Taiwanese worried about the influence of China on our election through their economic power. Before the election, many heads of big Taiwanese companies supported the so called 1992 consensus in the public. Their actions are considered as the influence of China. These worries are very reasonable. However, are we only able to worry about China? Aren’t we able to attract their eye?
This is an opportunity for Taiwan… If Taiwan contributes to the democratization in China, we may earn the heart of the 13 hundred million people in China… Taiwan is small, but we stand on an important position. We should stop evading China when we plan our future.
No matter if it is lucky or not, we are at the magic point in the history. Being a model of democracy in the Chinese society may not be our goal, but this is the power in our hand.
We should not waste this power.

Questions for China’s democracy opponents

Oiwan Lam — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:10:03 +0000

David Bandurski from China Media Project introduced a discussion among mainland Chinese public opinion leaders on the Taiwan presidential election and translated a Weibo post which raised a series of questions for China's democracy opponents.

China: ‘Anti-American Warrior' Gets Head Stuck in DC Airport Escalator

John Kennedy — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:00:20 +0000

“America is the enemy of all the people in the world.”

So wrote Sima Nan, one of China's most vocal opponents of Western liberal values, before he boarded a plane to Washington, DC, on January 20, 2012. At some point after arriving at Dulles International Airport, Sima leaned over the handrail of an escalator and wound up getting his head pinched between the handrail and an approaching section of wall.

Sima was put in a neck brace and taken to a hospital where he remains today, partially mobile and busy updating his microblog [zh].

The news that the media figure, who has made a career out of bashing the United States, quietly traveled there on the eve of Chinese New Year broke first online and, among other things, led to rumors that Sima had gone stateside to reunite with his wife and daughter. Sima has claimed that no warning sign was posted on the escalator and has said that he will sue the airport.

Sima, who was on his way to a conference, has been mocked to no end over the past week, as dragonwell summarizeshere at the Tea Leaf Nation blog, along with some of what he has written since confirming the news of his injury on January 24.

Image from Rebel Pepper

On the Phoenix TV blog portal, Canada-based blogger Yu Xiaoping has written on the hypocrisy [zh] of Sima's position, regardless of the nature of the conference he had been invited to attend:

刚刚听说反美斗士司马南在美国机场被人认出来还以为是有人在造谣呢，结果网上登出来伤者的照片。而他也在自己的微博当中证实，的确他在美国的机场被滚梯卡住了脑袋。乘坐滚梯不要将脑袋伸到外面，这是正常人都能知道的道理。每天都有成千上万的人往返于这个华盛顿机场，能把个强烈反美的人脑袋卡住，这显得特别不可思议。

Just heard that the anti-American warrior Sima Nan was spotted at an American airport and I thought it must have been a rumor, but then photos of the person injured appeared online. He's confirmed this on his own Weibo, that he did in fact get his head stuck on an escalator in an American airport. You don't stick your head out when you're riding an escalator, this is something all normal people know. Tens of thousands of people pass through this Washington, DC, airport each day, which makes it all the more hard to believe that someone as fiercely opposed to the US as this could get his head stuck there.

对伤者我深表同情，我觉得不宜在这种时候讽刺人家。对网上流传的他是与家人团聚，在未经证实的情况下也不好传播。不可否认的是，很多当年反美的斗士在中国赚足了稿费，然后一家人移民到了美国。

倒是有一点，大家不知是否注意到了。经此人个人微博的表述是去美国开会，而不是与家人团聚。虽然无法证实真假，我觉得这比他的家人在美国更发人深省，一个强烈反美的人，能够得到美国的签证，以工作的理由进入美国，而不是由于家庭团聚人道的理由拿到签证。这在天朝，你能想象吗？

I deeply sympathize with the injured person, and I don't think this is the time to be ridiculing him. As for the rumors online that he'd gone to see his family, it's best not to spread that sort of thing until the situation has been clarified. What is undeniable, however, is that many people who once spent years fighting America from China, have immigrated to the US with their families after having saved up enough through writing earnings.

There's one point, though, I don't know if people have noticed, that he's written on his personal Weibo account that he went to the US for a conference, and not to reunite with his family. Although it's impossible to confirm either way, what's far more telling I think is to know that someone so fiercely opposed to the United States can still receive a visa to go there, for work purposes in particular, rather than obtaining a visa for the humane reason of going to join his family. Can you imagine China doing the same thing?

龙年新气象。认同美国价值的人往美国跑，因为在国内受到了迫害。反对美国价值的人也往美国跑，不是因为在国内受到迫害，而是至少受到美国方面的邀请，这是所有以开会的理由取得签证的人都可以证明的常识。

一个国家是不是强大，到底怎样才能变得强大？就要看他是否能够包容反对自己的人。我们回顾中国历史，真正盛世的时期都是从大臣到老百姓能够胡说八道的环境。为什么？因为皇帝不怕有人谋反，因为你没那个本事，没那个能力，想胡说八道就说吧，变不了天。一朝皇帝只要是根基不稳，则会严格控制老百姓的言论，特别是控制大臣们的言论，采取酷刑政策，怕是有人谋反，每天惶惶不可终日。

Fresh into the Year of the Dragon. Those who accept American values have run off to America, because staying in China they just endure persecution. Those against American values are also running off to America, not for fear of facing persecution at home, but at the very least due to an invitation from the US, which as everyone knows is necessary to obtain a visa to go take part in a conference.

What is it that allows a country to grow to become great? You need only look at whether it can tolerate those who oppose it. If we look back at Chinese history, the truly prosperous periods were all times in which everyone from top officials down to common folk could all say whatever they wanted. Why is that? The emperors weren't afraid of anyone rebelling because no one was capable of pulling something like that off, and knowing that it wouldn't change anything, people could speak whatever nonsense they chose. Only the emperor of an unstable dynasty, meanwhile, will strictly control what people can say, exercising the most control over what top officials say, even employing torture out of fear of a rebellion, spending each day in a panic.

这位司马南到底去参加颂美的会议准备只身去舌战群儒，还是去参加反美的会议，去锦上添花，都代表美国社会的包容。前者是这个会议包容他这个人，后者是美国政府包容这个会议。只有包容才能使一个国家强大，美国不用担心什么，只有虚弱的政府才会担心，不敢让反对者进来。很多异见人士因为不堪在国内的迫害逃到国外，结果中国的护照不能更新，取得国外护照以后拿不到中国的签证，导致再也无法见到国内的亲友，其实这就是一种流放，天朝连文弱的书生都怕，你就可想而知了。

很好奇想知道这位反美的斗士到底去参加什么性质的会议，成果能否和大家分享一下，所以希望伤者早日康复，给大家一个真相。这一现象难道不令人深思吗？

This Sima Nan, was he on his way to a verbal showdown at a pro-US conference, or was he going to take part in an anti-American conference, like the frosting on a cake, a representation of the tolerance within America's society. In the case of the former, it would have been the conference tolerating this individual, and in the latter, the US government tolerating such a conference. Only tolerance can make a nation great, and America has nothing to worry about. Only a weak government would worry about something like this and not let its opponents in. Many dissidents, unable to bear the persecution at home, have fled overseas and found themselves unable to renew their Chinese passports. Similarly, once they receive foreign passports, they can't obtain visas to China, leaving them unable to see their friends and family in the country. What this actually is is a form of exile, and for China to fear even frail intellectuals, you can figure out the rest yourself.

I'm curious to know just what sort of conference this anti-American warrior was on his way to attend, so I hope the injured person recovers soon to share the truth with everyone. Either way, it's gotta make you wonder.

Why do I wish to see Hong Kong's independence

Andy Yee — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:05:26 +0000

Amid a series of social and cultural clashes between Hong Kong and Mainland Chinese, Hong Kong netizen Marie Meow has written an open letter (English translation here) on Facebook exploring the reasons, possibilities and limitations for a Hong Kong independent from China. The letter has gone viral on the Hong Kong Internet, attracting lots of positive feedback.

Hong Kong Rethinks its Relationship with Mainland China

Andy Yee — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:27:07 +0000

2012 will see the 15th anniversary of the return of Hong Kong to mainland China. But Hong Kongers have little mood for celebration. A survey conducted by the University of Hong Kong in December 2011, found that the number of respondents who view themselves as Hong Kongers is more than double the number who view themselves as Chinese.

Over the years, it has been a received wisdom that blessing from the mainland underpins the development of Hong Kong. This is most apparent when China’s support helped Hong Kong endure the 2003 SARS epidemic crisis and the 2009 global financial meltdown. However, after recent social and cultural clashes with the mainland, the Hong Kong public is now questioning that wisdom.

Comical presentation of Professor Kong Qingdong, by Hong Kong cartoonist Cuson Lo

In January 2012, hundreds of Hong Kongers protested outside luxury store Dolce & Gabbana, which allowed mainland Chinese tourists but not local residents to take photos in front of the store. In a separate incident, disputes broke out between Hong Kong passengers and mainland tourists who ate on a train. It turned into a public fury when Peking University professor Kong Qingdong added fuel by saying that Hong Kong people are “running dogs”.

In fact, in recent months, news headlines in Hong Kong are all about how mainlanders ‘invade’ the city. Local hospitals are stretched to the limits as pregnant women from the mainland crossed the border to give birth with the hope of securing a Hong Kong passport for their offspring. Mainland buyers exhausted the Hong Kong baby milk powder market amid food scandals in China. And as millions of Chinese tourists visit the city every year, it seems that all local residents could feel is their disregard of civic values and rule of law.

Last year, Hong Kong netizens made a popular music video named Locust World, which described mainland Chinese as “locusts” who like to “jump queues, spit in public”, “shout in restaurants, hotels and shops” and would use up the city’s resources. A version with English subtitle could be found here:

A view which is very common among mainlanders is that “without China’s economic support, Hong Kong would have been dead long ago.” But many Hong Kongers now think that the “mainland invasion” has done more harm than good to Hong Kong. Certain sectors, like retail, finance and real estate, have benefited greatly from mainlanders, but the inflation and housing bubbles created make the rest suffer. Furthermore, Hong Kong’s public system is yet to be prepared for a large influx of mainlanders. There is also a fear of the erosion of traditional Hong Kong values like the rule of law.

These views are now prevalent among Hong Kong bloggers and social critics. It is a complex challenge facing Hong Kong, one interlaced with local vs. mainland and poor vs. rich conflicts.

At Asia Sentinel, Alice Poon, a former real estate professional and author of Land and the Ruling Class in Hong Kong, explores the value gap between mainland and Hong Kong, and the fact that only a narrow range of sectors could benefit from closer relationship with the mainland:

The unbridgeable gap seems to be between (Hong Kongers’) acceptance and (most mainlanders’) rejection of or aversion to universal values like rule of law, democracy, equality and liberty. It is not through the latter’s fault that they find these values alien; it’s just because they have been living under a political system that has infiltrated them with the idea that those are not Chinese values and therefore no good for them. The system has taught people that all they need worry about is the economy and how to make money and practically nothing else. Morals aren’t important. Corruption can be tolerated. There is of course no lack of intellectuals in China who have refused to be brainwashed and who truly embrace universal values, but most of them unfortunately are rewarded with either political exile or incarceration.

It goes without saying that the only Hong Kong people who welcome mainland tourists, immigrants and shoppers are developers and their cronies (real estate agents, contractors etc.), especially those who are large shopping mall landlords. Even for retailers, whether or not they can benefit from the influx depends on whether the products they sell are mainlanders’ favorites. As for the rest of Hong Kongers, all they can feel towards the swamping inflow is resentment.

Meanwhile, however, the influx of Chinese capitals and tourists could have some damaging long-term effects on Hong Kong’s economy. Stanley5’s Blog explains:

正正是因為「自由行」、中資企業來港上市，以及給境外人士投資地產，搞到香港白白失去產業轉型的機會。現在香港只有金融、地產與旅遊服務業，大量人才與資金被吸過去，地價租金又被推高，以至製造業消亡，其他產業也一蹶不振，就連我最愛的港產片也快要消失了。我經常說：論出口品牌，韓國有SAMSUNG，台灣有 HTC，新加坡也有CREATIVE，香港有什麼？山寨機？莎莎？屈臣氏？米蘭站？

It is because of Hong Kong’s dependence on mainland tourists, the listing of Chinese enterprises in Hong Kong, and Chinese investments in real estate that it loses the opportunity to transform itself. Today, Hong Kong can only boost its finance, real estate and tourism services industries, which suck in a large amount of resources and talents. The real estate bubble leads to the death of the manufacturing industry. Other industries and products, like my favourite Hong Kong films, are also dying. I always say: in terms of export brands, South Korea has Samsung, Taiwan has HTC, even Singapore has Creative. What does Hong Kong have? Copycat phones? Sa Sa? Watson’s? Milan Station? [Note: The latter three are Hong Kong retailers.]

但令我討厭的是，現在不少來自大陸的所謂「遊客」，其實並非來旅遊，也非欣賞香港，而是為了「辦貨」、帶水貨，賺兩地貨幣的匯率差價，還有不少人是挪用公款、洗黑錢 (例如 D&G 要保護的人)。但最難頂的是他們部分人的惡劣舉止與財大氣粗。你叫我要包容，我告訴你，他們很多人根本就沒有「自由行」的資格！

But what annoys me is that many of the so-called “tourists” from mainland come here not to tour, but to buy products only to resell them for a profit in the mainland. And a large number of them do this with black money (like those under Dolce & Gabbana’s protection). And what is most disgusting is their rude behavior. If you tell me to be tolerant, I would say that many of them do not qualify to be “tourists”!

Profile image of @leungmantao

If the abundance of natural resources is an economic curse for some countries, the closeness to Chinese spending power is another form of curse for Hong Kong. Hong Kong has one of the highest levels of income inequality in the world. This is where you can find the world’s third-most expensive shopping strip, while over 100,000 people have to live in 6ft by 2ft “cage homes”. As Hong Kong has gotten more and more wealthy, many local residents are left behind. Prominent social critic Leung Man To draws our attention to the decline of Venice as an ominous warning for Hong Kong:

想當年威尼斯衰落之後，只能憑觀光賺錢；但遊客一多，物價便升，地租更是貴得離譜，於是漸漸逼退老居民，終於鬧到今日這步田地，好端端一座輝煌千年稱霸地中海的貿易大城只剩下可憐的六萬個倖存者。至少在飲食上，如今我能看到香港「威尼斯化」的迹象，「價廉物美」變得愈來愈難，又貴又不好吃的地方反而日益增多；要是肯一擲千金，選擇倒是不少。眼見茶餐廳「餐蛋麵」那兩片餐肉愈切愈薄，北上定居的人群愈去愈多，你叫香港人怎能不生氣？怎能不感到危機四伏？

After its decline, Venice could only depend on tourism for income; but as visitors become numerous, prices of commodities and real estates skyrocketed. This drove away the local residents. Today, only 60,000 residents remain in this glorious city which once dominated the Mediterranean for a thousand years. I can see Hong Kong following the path of Venice, at least from its restaurants. It is increasingly difficult to find “value for money” eating out places, but it’s not hard to find places which are expensive but so-so. Of course, you still have many choices if you are willing to pay. As the piece of meat in the “meat-egg noodles” you get in restaurant becomes thinner, and more and more people around you migrate to the mainland, how can we not feel angry? How can we not feel perilous?

That being said, while Hong Kong could blame the mainland for all the social issues, it might have more to do with the policy failures of the Hong Kong government. In the opinion of blogger Grey Reporter:

香港作為一富裕城市，但貧富差距之驚人，基層生活的匱乏，以至中產的生活質素也好不到那裡。公義、多元性、市容、環保、文化創意…等都跟真正富裕城市相去甚遠，這一切和內地人也沒有關係。

As a prosperous city, Hong Kong has shockingly high inequality. The grassroots population lacks basic security, and the middle class is not much better. Justice, diversity, city planning, environmental protection, culture and innovation…… in all these regards, Hong Kong lacks behind other cities which can justly call themselves rich. All these have nothing to do with the mainlanders.

政府無長遠計劃鼓勵主流港跟少數族裔以至新移民共融，也沒有魄力去長遠解決香港的醫療人手不足，房屋及各項福利如教育學額不足等問題，仍是採取頭痛醫頭，腳痛醫腳，以及自生自滅的方式。於是，造成資源不足所出現的民粹意識，不深究政府的規劃缺失，把矛頭指向「外來者」爭資源。

The government has no long-term planning to encourage minority groups or immigrants from mainland to integrate into the Hong Kong society. It also lacks a comprehensive and long-term approach to tackle the lack of resources in health care, housing and education. It views them in bits and pieces. In the end, when cracks appear in the public system, populist opinion directs their anger at the “outsiders” who steal away their fair share. But what we should criticize is the government’s failure to plan for the long-term.

In the end, he hopes that ordinary Hong Kong people could realize the fact that they, like most mainlanders, live in an unjust political system under which the rich and the powerful collude. They share the same destiny, that is, to end this injustice:

其實香港人和內地人有著共同命運，就是對抗中共強權及與之勾結的富豪權貴，結束專制和不公義的執政狀況。相比之下，一些內地人的「不文明」舉動算不了甚麼。畢竟如果認為香港是一個包容的社會，便應該抱以寬容及「循循善誘」的態度。要知道，三、四十年前的香港也「文明」不了多少(現在也不見得香港人人文明守禮)，大家還不是如此走過來。

Actually, Hong Kongers and mainlanders share the same destiny – to end the authoritarian rule of the Chinese Communist Party and the collusion between the rich and the powerful. Relatively speaking, the “uncivilized” behaviors of some mainlanders do not matter much. After all, if Hong Kong calls itself an inclusive society, it should be more tolerant and patient. Thirty or forty years ago, Hong Kong was not much better (and not all Hong Kongers now are civilized). We have gone through the same path.

China: Tibet Burns, But Where Are the Chinese Public Intellectuals?

Oiwan Lam — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 06:55:38 +0000

Since 2009, there have been at least 17 Tibetan self-immolation incidents in China. The latest case was reported [zh] on January 15, 2012. The public discussion about the protests of Tibetans has been manipulated and monopolized by state controlled media outlets who blame the Dalai Lama and western media for inciting to violence and terror [zh].

The reaction among Chinese public intellectuals and netizens is practically indifferent when compared to other self-immolation incidents, such as the Yihuang demolition case. Some netizens wonder, where have all the public intellectuals gone?

Profile image of @degewa

Tibetan poet Woser (@degewa) is always among the first people on Twitter to bridge Tibetan news to Chinese communities. On January 15, after she read news of the self-immolation of a Tibetan monk near Ge'erdeng Temple in Aba, Sichuan, she wrote [zh]:

今晚，我们都在哭泣。。。先是我，与一位喇嘛说起同胞自焚，不禁落泪，他也哽咽。。。这么晚了，你欲言又止，终于哭出了声。。。

@degewa: Tonight, we are crying… first it was me telling a Lama that one of his fellows had self-immolated. My tears kept running down. He could not speak…. It is so late now, you want to talk, but words don't come out. Finally you cry.

Is it because of sadness that people don't talk about it? Twitter user, @lotusseedsD, who lives outside China wondered, where have all the Chinese netizens gone? And why don't Han Chinese help bridging out [zh] the information? Han Chinese are the biggest ethnic group in China.

中国汉人为自焚的藏人做了什么？@wh_z @old_wine 相较国外的呼吁和翻墙出来的少数声音，除了会骂人傻逼互相掐架互相瞧不起，中国网民对藏人自焚的冷漠让人背脊发凉，让人不屑，让人引为齿。

@lotusseedsD: What have Han Chinese done for the Tibetans? @wh_z @old_wine. When compared with overseas concerns and a minority of voices, Chinese netizens only enjoy fighting and cursing online. Their indifference is so chilling and shameless.

藏人频繁自焚，请问中国民间舆论做了什么？ @wh_z @old_wine 我的意思是，中国网民有没有像乌坎动车追尾校车事故512地震等各种事件发帖，被删了又发，各个论坛删之不及制造舆论压力？中国汉人为自焚的藏人做了什么？？？？

@lotusseedsD: So many Tibetans have self-immolated. What have the public opinion leaders done to help? @wh_z @old_wine. How come Chinese netizens do not bridge out information, compete with the web censors and create public opinion pressure like the case of the Wukan uprising, the school bus accidents, and the 512 earthquake? What have Han Chinese done for Tibetans?

She challenged Chinese netizens to look beyond their nationalistic feelings [zh] and reach out to help a group of human beings [zh] who are in pain.

换个方式：把 “藏汉”二个字从民族情结里去掉。17个生命用一种惊天动地的，在你居住的土地上以自焚方式求救呐喊想让人们听到他们的声音。您和您土地上的人，能为这17个宝贵的生命做些什么？继续要听不见呢还是用您微小力量把他们的求助声传播出去？

@lotusseedsD: Try to look beyond “Tibetan/Chinese” nationalistic feelings. 17 souls have self-immolated on the land that you live in so as to make their voices heard. What can you and people in your land do for these 17 precious lives? Continue to play dumb or help to spread their voices?

关注自焚不是渲染鼓励。同是生活在一片土地上的人，都被欺压。你汉人或无法对藏人伸出援手，然而于人类最本能的感情上，是不是应该做到最起码的关心，让他们知道你们听到他们的求助呐喊痛苦？

@lotusseedsD: Showing concern about self-immolation is not incitement. People living with you on the same piece of land are under oppression. You Han people may not be able to help the Tibetans, but at least you can show some concern as human beings. Let them know that you have heard their painful cries.

Also on January 15, @cecilcoe pointed out [zh] that the online public sphere is highly manipulated by the web censors:

我可以作证：自焚者照片在新浪上一贴就删，快得无法形容。后来我改成贴台湾自焚者照片，在文字中提到西藏自焚，就比较慢。在哪短短时间里有12个评论。当然，总人数没乌坎多，但说汉人不关心，也不尽然。

@cecilcoe: I can testify: Sina deletes all the Tibetan self-immolation photos in a blink. Later I posted Taiwanese self-immolation photos and mentioned the Tibet incidents, and the deletion speed slowed down a bit and I received 12 comments. Of course, the concern is much less than about Wukan, but not all Han people are indifferent.

Human rights activist @tengbiao concurred [zh] that public intellectuals are playing dumb regarding the repression in Tibet:

藏人自焚这件事上，除了极少数几个例外，中国公共知识分子们集体哑火、装聋作哑。房间里的大象，沉默的共谋。他们和行凶者一样无耻。

@tengbiao: Apart from extremely few exceptions, Chinese public intellectuals are collectively playing dumb about the Tibetan self-immolation incidents. As an elephant in the room, their silence is a form of conspiracy. They are as shameless as the murderers.

Prominent blogger @yanghengjun agreed [zh] with Tengbiao:

他们点燃自己，照亮黑暗。怎奈我们在黑暗中太久，甚至变成了黑暗的一部分。

@yanghengjun: They [the Tibetans] burned themselves to give light to the darkness. However, we have lived in the darkness for too long and turned into part of the darkness.

The above discussion does receive some proactive responses, dissident @zhaoyang8964 also spoke out on Twitter [zh]:

藏人自焚是源于对中共暴政的愤怒和绝望，也是以死明志的反抗！我身为汉人而为这个无耻的政权感到羞愧。所谓“西藏自古以来就是中国的领土”纯粹扯淡！尊者一向表明愿留在中国版图内但希望获得真正的自治，而无赖政府根本不尊重尊者，也从来不把藏人的诉求当回事。

@zhaoyang8964: Tibetans self-immolated to express their anger and despair against the Chinese Communist government's tyranny. They protested with their lives. As a Han Chinese, I feel ashamed for such a shameless government. It is totally bullshit to say that “Tibet has always been (since the ancient times) a part of China.” His Holiness has been expressing his willingness to be a part of the China territories, all he is asking for is genuine self-autonomy. But the brutal government does not respect His Holiness nor the Tibetans' demands.

Upon reading @degwa's tweets, Crazy Crab drew a cartoon to mock the Chinese government:

The Politburo Standing Committee on Fire. Cartoon shared by Crazy Crab on CartoonMovement.com

However, political statements could not help challenge the official discourse about the immolation incidents. So far Wang Lixiong is the only Chinese intellectual who has offered [zh] an elaborate and counter-official view of the Tibetan immolation incident. Below is a partial translation of his article written on January 12 on Tibetan immolation:

施暴于自我，除了是出于绝望的抗议或对尊严孤注一掷的捍卫，若有对实效的企望，就如甘地所说：“通过我们所受的深重苦难，可以影响政府”；或马丁·路德·金所说：“我们将以自己忍受苦难的能力，来较量你们制造苦难的能力…耗尽你们的仇恨…唤醒你们的良知”。

这种企望的实现，前提是需要存在良知。专制政权的机器只有刚性结构、冷酷逻辑，以及官僚利益。当年几千孩子在天安门广场濒临死亡地绝食，有谁看到过它的良知？

以往非暴力抗争的局限就在此——结局不是取决抗争一方，而是政权。抗争方只能起压力作用，权力不让步就不会有进展，因此目前的西藏落入困境是必然。

走出困境，方向在哪里？我觉得是目前首要回答的。没有方向就只能盲目。哪怕是自焚的壮烈献身，也让人感觉更多是绝望。而各方面对自焚，除了情绪动荡，也是就事论事的茫然。

说自焚者有勇气没有智慧，是不公平。智慧不是苟且偷生的技巧，是能够带领西藏走出困境的高瞻远瞩。那不是普通民众应该和能够承担的。而把已退出政治的达赖喇嘛当作一切智慧的来源，则是不负责。达赖喇嘛确定了非暴力原则和中间路线，如何实现应该是政治家们的智慧。

目前还看不到这种智慧。中国方面只有一手钞票一手屠刀；西藏方面——假如流亡政府是代表的话，也看不出除了发表声明，还知道该做什么。

请告诉勇敢的藏人，他们可以做什么。知道了应该和能够做什么，他们就会活下去，而不是用惨烈自焚仅换来媒体的短暂一瞥。

To exercise violence upon oneself, apart from being a desperate protest and defense of one's dignity - their expectation, if any, is similar to Gandhi's teaching: “Change the government through our sufferings” or Martin Luther King's saying: “We will wear you down by our capacity to suffer, and one day… we will appeal to your heart and conscience that we will win you in the process.”

The premise of such an expectation is the existence of a conscience. The machinery of the authoritarian government has only an iron structure, cold logic and bureaucratic interests. Many years ago, thousands of young people were on hunger strike in Tiananmen Square. Who saw any conscience then?

The limitation of non-violent struggle is that its end depends on the state power, not the protesters. The protest will only create pressure, it doesn't go anywhere if the power does not compromise. That's why Tibet is trapped in the current situation.

How to step out from this dead end? This is the most important question we have to address. Without direction it will result in nihilism. The self-immolation will bring more desperation. Apart from triggering emotions, it offers no solution.

It is unfair to say that the self-immolating are not wise. To live without dignity is not wise. The true wisdom is to bring Tibet out of the dead end with a vision. Ordinary people cannot lead the way out. However, it is also irresponsible to rely on the Dalai Lama who is slowly stepping out from the political scene. Dalai Lama has put forward the non-violent principle and a middle way, but it depends on the politicians' wisdom to actualize it.

We can't see such wisdom at the moment. What the Chinese government has is a pile of paper money and a butcher knife; As for Tibet, if the exile government is the representative one, so far it doesn't know what to do apart from issuing statements.

Please tell the courageous Tibetans what they can do. If they know what they should/can do, they will live rather than use their own lives in exchange for a blink of media attention.

China and Hong Kong: Train Scuffle Ignites Cross-Border Fury

Oiwan Lam — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:08:22 +0000

A YouTube video showing a dispute on a train in Hong Kong in which a mainland China tourist was criticized by passengers for eating food with her child inside the cabin, has triggered a fierce cross-border debate between mainland Chinese and Hong Kong people. As if tempers were not already flaring high, a Beijing University Professor, Kong Qingdong, added fuel to fire with his remark on a mainland online television channel that Hong Kong People are “running dogs” [lapdogs].

Below is a local news report on the subway train dispute on January 15, 2012. YouTube user Languagelover7 has added subtitles in English at the top of the screen:

The unedited version can be found here [zh]. It has attracted more than five million views within four days. Below is an explanation of the situation from the Hong Kong side:

當天與女友在紅磡站上車，上車後近我的兩排位都坐滿人，一邊一個大人三個小孩，一邊即是三個大人以及他們的行李。當時都不以為然；後來看到那個媽咪張一包童星點心麵倒進她旁的小孩手中，而另外兩個女孩則有一個拿著糖包。及後雙手捧著一堆點心麵的小孩不小心將一些灑到身上及地上。看到這個程況，我便以我有限的普通話，指著不准飲食的牌向他們說：不好意思，這裡不能吃東西。之後…..換來一輪啾呼叫。那媽咪說只是小孩子吃，以及正在收起，問我為何要多事…..我向他說剛才我都有見你放進自己口中，你也有吃…..其實講左幾句我都知冇結果，誰知這時他們對面的友伴邊笑邊出聲：佢地說得真是很差！我很火用廣東話同佢地講：我係講得差！呢度係香港人的地方，你同我講返廣東話。這時他們有一句沒一句繼續講，這時有位見義勇為的男仕出聲：收聲啦！好嘈呀！繼續食呀好唔好？自己做錯野仲嘈，要唔要叫職員呀？當那班人還在嘈時，男仕在旺角東站按著車門，等職員過來。而我亦第一時間下車向職員揮手叫他們過來。之後你地都響YTUBE度見到晒

On that day I was with my girlfriend at Hung Hom Station. All the seats in the cabin were taken. On one side was an adult and three children, on the other side were three adults with their luggage. Later, I saw the mother pouring some noodle snack into the hands of one kid, while the other two girls were holding some candies. The kid with the noodle snack spilt some on his clothes and on the floor. I used my limited Mandarin [standard Chinese of mainland China], pointed at the “No eating allowed” sign in the cabin, and told them: ‘Excuse me, you can't eat here'. What happened next was a round of defense. The mom said that only the kids were eating, that she was about to take it away, and that it was none of my business… I told her that I saw her eating as well… I knew I could not change their attitude and was about to shut up, but then her friends sitting opposite to her, sneered at me: “Their Mandarin is so lousy.” I got so angry and talked back in Cantonese: ‘My Mandarin is lousy! This is Hong Kong, you should speak in Cantonese!' They kept on defending themselves in loud voices. A man in the cabin stood up by my side: “Shut up! It's so noisy here! Just keep on eating OK? How could you yell like this when you have done wrong? Should I call the railway staff?” As they continued to speak loudly, the man pushed the button to call staff when the train reached the next station. And I waved the railway staff over to take care of the situation. What happened next, you can see on the YouTube video.

There are two major reactions to the video in Hong Kong. Some criticize the lack of etiquette by mainland Chinese; and others feel there is no need to make such a big scene. The most popular comment on the YouTube thread is made by suilaam321:

@MrDrxchannel 請問你有看part1了嗎你有聽到片主被嘲笑嗎? 中國大陸沒這麼糟糕?也許是小部份人吧暑假最多中國大陸人來香港的時候我分別去了香港迪士尼和海洋公園但情況是無論去到那一個主題公園都會有大陸人插隊當然我沒有說全部大陸人都這樣也許你會說香港人也一樣但香港人一般被指責後都會乖乖排隊我遇到的卻是我只說叫他們不要插隊同行插隊的那個女人便開始發爛說前面有人幫排隊之類試想想如果每個人都這樣會有秩序嗎? 最後我只好找職員那個人卻理直氣壯說邊隻眼見到佢有插隊? 最後卻鬧多事以粗口相對請問這還又是否需要容忍?

@MrDrxchannel Did you see part One? Don't you see how the man was being mocked? Mainland Chinese are not that bad? Perhaps a minority of them are so. During the summer holiday when tourism from mainland China to Hong Kong peaks, I went to Disneyland and Ocean Park. No matter where I went, I could see Mainland Chinese jumping ahead in queues. Of course not all mainlanders are like that. Maybe you'd say Hong Kong people are the same. However, in the case of Hongkongers, usually when you point out their wrong doing, they would get back in line. When I asked a mainland Chinese not to jump the line, the woman when crazy and kept saying that others were jumping the queue too. If everyone does this, will there ever be order in society? I called staff. But the woman said there was no proof that she jumped the line, and cursed at me that it was none of my business. Do we have to put up with this?

As for the response from mainland Chinese, there are more moderate but critical ones, such as this one made by Wen Yunchao on Facebook [zh]:

港人很讨厌在地铁上吃东西的大陆人，因为地铁规定说不能在地铁上吃东西且吃东西的是大陆人；但港人不会讨厌在公车上大声讲电话一讲一路的港人，一则是因为没有规定禁止，二是因为讲电话的是港人。这些都与素质和文明无关。

Hong Kong people hate mainlanders eating in the train because according to subway regulations, it is forbidden. Moreover, it is mainlanders violating the regulation. But Hong Kong people do not hate people speaking loudly in public transportation, because there is no regulation against it, and it's Hong Kong people talking. This has nothing to do with etiquette nor civilization.

The most controversial comment from mainland China popped up on January 19 on online television, in which Beijing University Professor Kong Qingdong said that most Hong Kong people were corrupted by their colonizers and are “running dogs”.

Languagelover7 has also added English subtitles to this video [now offline] and uploaded to YouTube.

The undercurrent of the tension between Hong Kong and mainland Chinese has everything to do with the increasing influence of Beijing government in Hong Kong - as indicated by the official visit of future premier Li Keqiang in August 2011. The political tension has surfaced in several recent cultural and social conflicts such as the public scandals over infant formula milk powder shortage; mainland pregnant women taking up local hospital resources; the “invasion” of mainland Chinese tourists; and the official status of Cantonese language in Hong Kong.

Below is an agitated response on Kong's TV interview made by Tinykylei in her forum [zh] (sic) on January 20 that touches on the broader issues:

Wow …. this is with English subtitle and the translation is pretty accurate … can't believe a mainland Chinese “Scholar” said such a thing - why everyone has to speak Mandarin ? It's right for people can speak in their mother tongue but when you said mainlanders yelling in Hong Kong, and the HK citizen speak in Cantonese they are “dog” and not civilize … can you please check what you have just said again? the HK person also speaking in their mother tongue … I had enough of you CCP and brain-washed mainlanders - go on, keep on sending Mainland Chinese to mix the people and let the rich Mainlanders buy house and stay here, poor mainlanders come to give birth and take the social welfare, and take over the city, you better kill all the HKers who born in HK before 1997 as well

Unhappy Hong Kong Envious of Taiwan's Democracy

Andy Yee — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:38:15 +0000

Having witnessed Taiwan's 2012 presidential election, Derrick Tao, a Hong Kong photographer, made a video (with English subtitles) to contrast democratic development of the two societies. As a prosperous but undemocratic city state, “Hong Kong could either join Taiwan as pioneers of freedom and democracy in the Chinese societies”, or “accept the status quo and let go of her ideals and beliefs.”

Global Online Community Protests U.S. Anti-Piracy Bills

Jillian C. York — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:39:16 +0000

Today, January 18, is an important day for the Internet. Corporate websites, from Google to Twitpic, along with civil society groups and individuals, have all joined together in a common cause: to protest two American bills that could have grave effects for global online free expression.

As Global Voices' Executive Director Ivan Sigal has written, “there are powerful corporate and government forces who would prefer to see the openness and accessibility of the web restricted.” The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect-IP Act (PIPA) would both force websites to pro-actively censor potentially copyrighted information, and could, as Sigal wrote, “inflict broad damage on the work of digital activists living under repressive regimes, as well as restrict basic speech freedoms around the world.”

Because these bills have the potential to affect Internet users worldwide, members of the global community have joined Americans in protest. From German digital rights group Netzpolitik to Open Media Canada to individual bloggers and social media users, the sentiment is the same: Stop these bills.

Blacking out

French site https://linuxfr.org goes dark against #SOPA

Many sites have chosen to express their opposition by blacking out their sites, either entirely or with an interstitial page. Danica Radovanovic (@DanicaR), writing for Australian blog network DejanSEO, discusses Wikipedia's decision to join the blackout, a decision that affects the site's diverse global community:

Over the course of the past 72 hours, over 1800 Wikipedians have joined together to discuss proposed actions that the community might wish to take against SOPA and PIPA. This is by far the largest level of participation in a community discussion ever seen on Wikipedia, which illustrates the level of concern that Wikipedians feel about this proposed legislation. The overwhelming majority of participants support community action to encourage greater public action in response to these two bills. Of the proposals considered by Wikipedians, those that would result in a “blackout” of the English Wikipedia, in concert with similar blackouts on other websites opposed to SOPA and PIPA, received the strongest support.

French organization La Quadrature du Net has joined its American counterparts in blacking out its website, displaying the following image:

The Pirate Party of Catalunya blacks out in solidarity

Pirate parties are among the most stringent opponents of the anti-piracy bills. In Spain, Catalunya, Switzerland, Argentina, Canada, and Sweden (among, almost certainly, many others), local pirate parties have joined in blacking out their websites.

Also blacking out for January 18 are Germany's Chaos Computer Club and Green Party, and international organization Reporters Without Borders. The latter explained its decision, writing:

We have decided to close our English-language website for 24 hours to symbolize the oppressive gag that would spread over the Internet as we know it if SOPA and PIPA are adopted. These bills would affect an incalculable number of Internet users who are innocent of any kind of intellectual property violation by forcing websites to block access to other sites suspected of vaguely-defined copyright breaches.

For more images of sites blacking out in protest, check out Netzpolitik's SOPA blackout gallery.

Translating the importance of activism

In some countries, bloggers have taken it upon themselves to educate their communities about the importance of opposing SOPA and PIPA. Lebanese blogger Mireille Raad has written an explanation for why Lebanese citizens should care about these bills. She writes:

Being a lebanese, doesn’t stop you from being an internet user – the SOPA will affect the internet in a bad way and it involves websites outside the US, and that’s yours…

…You should care and be pissed of, because, like it or not, the internet doesn’t exist in the clouds, it is made of companies that exist in countries and have to answer to local laws despite the fact that internet is “global”. This fact is making people worldwide care about the SOPA legislation – and even though you may feel powerless, you still should care and take online action – because all citizens in cyberspace are created equal and so their actions resonate equally

An earlier post Taiwanese freedom of information activist CK Hung dubs the anti-piracy bills “The Great Firewall of Chinamerica.” In a graphic [zh], the blogger demonstrates his point:

Edit: An English version of the graphic is also available:

He also writes:

掌權者很樂意用「保護智財」或「阻絕色情」、「和諧社會」當做永遠不可能吃到口的誘餌來說服公民支持其強化管制網路的法律和政策 (例如選擇便利管制的工具)，然後藉由這些法律和政策來強化它對公民的資訊監控。掌權者很樂意公民只看見海市蜃樓，卻忽略通往海市蜃樓的道路上，威脅著社會自由民主的 collateral damages。不論最終的掌權者到底是微軟、蘋果、共產黨、民主黨、還是共和黨，受害的永遠都是絕大多數的公民。

Those in power are happy with the “protection of intellectual property” or “denial of sex,” “harmonious society” as a bait that can never feed the mouth to convince citizens to support their policy and legal acts that will strengthen the control over the web (eg, choosing tools to facilitate the control) . And then by these laws and policies they can strengthen its monitoring of citizens' information. Those in power are happy that citizens see only a mirage, but ignore the road to the mirage are the collateral damages threatening the free and democratic society. No matter who the ultimate rulers in the end are–Microsoft, Apple, the Communist Party, the Democratic Party or Republican Party– the vast majority of victims are always the citizens.

而臺灣，正是這兩大監控勢力交會處的絕佳實驗場所。

And Taiwan is the testing ground right at the intersection of these two great monitoring forces.

Global Voices' own Venezuelan contributor Marianne Diaz explains why she doesn't like the bills [es]:

De cualquier modo, Estados Unidos no es el mundo, y las leyes de propiedad intelectual tienen limitaciones territoriales y varían de país a país. Por ejemplo, en Venezuela, la obra entra en dominio público sesenta años después de la muerte del autor. Sin embargo, mediante la aplicación de SOPA y PIPA, Estados Unidos pretende que a mí, a ti y a cualquier siberiano se le pueda forzar a cumplir unas limitaciones que no le son aplicables de acuerdo a la ley.

…Anyway, America is not the world, and intellectual property laws are territorial limitations and vary from country to country. For example, in Venezuela, the work enters the public domain sixty years after the author's death. However, by applying SOPA and PIPA, the United States wants me, you and any Siberian to be forced to comply with constraints that do not apply according to [local] law.

On Twitter, similar conversations are happening. From the UK, @GokhanKaratay writes:

I really do hope #SOPA and #PIPA bills aren't passed through the senate. Legislation against piracy is needed, but that really isn't the way

Pointing out the participation of Argentine video platform Cuevana, @Gaby_xoa points out:

#Cuevana uniéndose al apagón #ANTISOPA que cuarta la libre expresión!!! twitpic.com/88nzkg

#Cuevana is joining the #ANTISOPA blackout [against the bill that] restricts free expression!

What you can do to stop SOPA and PIPA

Although the international community is limited in how they can affect an American bill, the solidarity expressed in opposition to both bills is certainly helpful to U.S.-based activists. Aside from the aforementioned examples, bloggers have found numerous creative ways to do so, such as adding an anti-SOPA or anti-PIPA Twibbon or blacking out their WordPress blog. Fight for the Future is encouraging the international community to sign a petition to the State Department. But just writing about the implications of the two bills can help.

American citizens, on the other hand, have plenty of options. Here are just a few ways to get involved:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has a petition as well as a guide to meeting with representatives.
Fight for the Future's Stop American Censorship project is hosting a letter-writing campaign.
Free Press has a campaign to petition television networks to report on the bills.