Thursday, October 13, 2005

to elaborate my points in why the defense of BJW report bothers me, i want to show you how and how deep different bloggers/commentators get into "the core issues" of taishi incident.

again, i categorize them into two groups, one, more or less on the side of richard-rebecca, the other, one the side of anti-eswn. contents about "core issues" are highlighted by red color.


group 1: richard-rebacca

you can also check out ESWN for more whitewashing of the CCP violence by blaming the media and blogs.

In the end, the fact that the CCP again resorts to violence to work against the masses and maintain corrupt local cadres says that Hu and Wen have some work at the Politburo Standing Committee level to do to save the CCP from itself. Luo Gan must go.


The point here is that facts like that one - and worse - happen every day in China. The difference is that this time a foreign witness was present. So the instructions are: fire the witness, not the Party thughs. Déjà vu.

It's this overturning that won't help democracy movements in China, not a reporter's "exaggerated" story. Fire the thugs, not the witness.


I can't even believe that some people get so angry about an honest mistake in reporting. It was obviously a stressful situation.If the story had been about a foreigner beating a Chinese, these people would still be believing it was true.
But this is how things operate here. Distract people's attention from the truth (i.e. hoodlums cooperating with the govt, beating people, denying the people of taishi their rights), and meanwhile these people are busy getting angry over "the bias in the western media." why not stop blaming foreigners for everything, and think about the fact that Lu really was beaten? Maybe he still has his eye, but he was beaten. The situation in Taishi is still the same. Are people really that ignorant and xenophobic that they get off on saying "oh look at the west and the western media, blah blah blah." As if that's a plus for the world's largest manufacturer of BS, Xinhua.



when by doing so, they change the subject, diverting all the attention away from what lies at the heart of the matter (corruption, thuggery, attempted murder) to the very least important aspect of the story. But it deflects attention from the crime, and that's exactly what some parties want to see happen


I think it seems beyond dispute that a gang of thugs with a mandate from the local government dragged Lu out of his car and beat him in an attempt to intimidate local activists. If people decide it's no big deal because, well, the guy isn't dead - that's pretty sad.


Once I heard that this guy was still alive, I knew right away that "certain forces" would jump on this to say "oh look at the bias in the Western media" blah blah blah.

Please, give the guy a break and don't go around celebrating the fact that Lv is "alive and well." According to an eyewitness, it sounds like he got the royal shit beaten out of him. We haven't seen any pictures of him, but I am assuming it wouldn't be very pretty. On top of that, the situation in Taishi remains the same, and the fact stands that people who are trying to get in are getting beaten. So, really, try not to use the fact that Lv is alive to support your "go China" prejudices.


Sometimes bad stories get printed. Even People's Daily has posted things that weren't true, believe it or not. But I suspect it is a case of the reporter being too close to the danger and letting himself be overcome by emotion. It's too bad, because it will damage the credibility of the media with Chinese people, as you say. And, of course, it totally shifts the focus away from the CCP's sins and places it on the reporter's. How lucky for the CCP! Let's see if they try to play it up. Anyone taking bets?


You do seem, however, to be trying to change the topic from a discussion of Benjamin Joffe-Walt to a discussion of the Western media's "anti-China bias", that China's media is "not shut down or censored" in any way, and that local governments having "free and fair elections" in China are par for the course.

All of it adds up to one message: "The West is always trying to keep China down".

No, I think Chinese officials and thugs do that well enough without our help.


group 2: anti-eswn

I should point out that from what I have seen I'm on the side of the villagers. What it looks like is that you have local officials which have are trying to cover up the fact that they've got their hand in the cookie jar. Having said that.....

Hyperbole does not help thing.

The political reality is that the only way you are going to get anything done is provincial and central officials decide to step in. (And there have been cases in which they have done so. Tung Che-Hwa and the SARS scandal are two.) Overstating the case of the villagers makes it less likely that this is going to happen.

The other issue is that the way the story is being played is that "Tashi shows that all of the rhetoric about the CCP wanting to help the poor is a sham." The trouble is that Tashi is one village, and we have no idea based on press reports what is happening in the tens of thousands of other villages. Of course you can make assumptions based on your beliefs about how the world works (i.e. the CCP is evil therefore of course things are worse elsewhere), but the whole point of journalism is to get the facts.

There is another huge blind spot in the traditional press. The Tashi incident has already gone on for about three months. It's likely to continue to go on for another several months if not years. Newspapers tend to be horrible about covering stories like that.


Also, I'd be careful of the "everyone who disagrees with me is a CCP minon" attitude. I saw that a lot with the Tiananmen democracy activists. The trouble with thinking that way is that pretty soon everyone gets labelled an CCP minon, and you find yourself totally alone and ineffective.

One of the problem that I see with trying to fit this into the "good villagers raising up against the CCP" point of view is that you miss some questions.

Three questions I have are:

1) Lu Banglie along with other activists are members of local people's congresses. Is he is a party member? What sort of political protection does he have? One weakness that he has is that he is from Hubei and so can't pull too many strings in Guangdong. At the same time, the people who beat him up are going to be in much more serious trouble if he comes to any major harm.

2) Did the local committee offer any sort of carrots to get the villagers to withdraw?

The standard operating procedure in this sort situation is for the officials to offer *both* carrots and sticks (i.e. we'll start arrest people but if you cooperate we'll give you all cash from this special fund).

3) What has been the censorship like in other stories? The Taishi story has been heavily censored since about 9/16. This could be because the Central Propaganda Bureau has issued a censorship order relating specifically to Tashi. However, it is also the case that the Propaganda Bureau issues a general "do not report bad news" order in late September because of National Day and the Party conference. Also the Party conference means that the Central Government is pretty much paralyzed for about two to three weeks and one wouldn't expect intervention in any local situation.


One pet peeve that I have is when newspapers do not get titles right. Liu Banglie is, according to ESWN, the NPC deputy from Zhijiang, Hubei. Titles mean a lot since they are a rough indication of the amount of political connections someone can pull. The Guardian identified Liu Banglie was a village head, which has considerable less political pull than an NPC deputy.

An NPC deputy is largely a ceremonial position, but the positions are vetted by the CCP Organization Department, which means that he does certainly have some political pull (at least in Hubei). RFA identified him as a member of the Zhijang "parliament" which is different. If he were a member of the local city people's congress, the amount of political pull he would have would be different. A local people's congress delegate would have more real power locally, but less pull nationally. It's also possible that he is both. (That's why I'm curious of Lu is a party member or not.)

What I find appalling is that no one has asked him the really important background questions. What I would be interested in knowing is his experiences in trying to enforce the Village Election Law? Is Taishi the first time he has tried something like this? How typical is Taishi? How atypical is Taishi? All of that would give a much better idea of what is going on in that corner of the world.

There is a danger of overgeneralization. We seem to have a good idea of what is happening with Taishi (thanks to ESWN). With some questioning of Lu, we might be able to get some insight into what is happening in Hubei and Guangdong. This still doesn't give us a general picture of what is happening all over China.

One other bit of data. I do recall a paper on the implementation of the village election law. Basically the Chinese system of government effectively gives very broad powers to provincial governments to implement (or not implement) national laws. The paper was trying to make a connection between factors such as the law implementation and factors such as economic growth. It concluded that a great deal of how the Village Election Law gets implemented depends on the personality of provincial government and in some cases the personality of the provincial governor. Some provinces are very enthusiatic about village elections. Some are not, and there is no coorelation with much of anything. Among the provinces which are not enthusiatic is Guangdong. (Zhejiang and Fuijan by contrast are very enthusiatic about village elections.) I'll try to dig up the paper.

Also from the Chinese viewpoint whether Lu is minorly injured or dead matters a great deal. Basically if Lu is seriously injured or dead, he becomes a heroic martyr and at that point the central government is forced to come down hard on the Taishi local government (see Sun Zigang which was also very poorly covered)

If Lu is not dead or seriously injured, then he is not a heroic martyr. At this point his guangxi networks in Hubei can't do very much, and Beijing can't do very much either if the Guangdong provincial government does not want to act (which it may or may not do.)


The best way to quell the diverting of attention and 'manipulation' is for us (and the Guardian) to face it squarely ourself, before lending CCP such ammunition.

What Richard asked for here, is exactly the opposite. To employ the CCP tactic of self denial and censoring the seeking for truth is playing into CCP's hand. This is the best way to hurt the Taishi cause.

I seem to have read that Lu himself is a success story of a case parallel to Taishi. So there might well have been a few sucess stories of village re-election already. Perhaps our journalists could cover the story of these cases (e.g. that of Lu himself)


I just found that there had been at least 52 cases before 2003 of village mayor impeachments. Probably a lot more by now.

Taishi seems to be among the 'failed' cases which probably involves local corruption or incompetence

http://sun-bin.blogspot.com/2005/10/taishi-and-village-impeachment.html


And of course, being labeled a "mischievous commenters", I must live up to it by asking questions contrary to the prevailing generalization of China.
Is Beijing really involved?

Has anyone see the Chinese news and website reporting of Lu's farmer's rights activity in previous years?

Specifically the scuffle and fights he gets into in his own village? I think this has something to do with Joseph's "martyr" comment. This seems to be his trademark, a "bitter flesh" strategy of sorts. It's a "charge against windmill", I read on one blog.

It reminds of Mississippi Burning in our own history. Would anyone say the local's treatment of civil rights wokers were at the direction of the Whitehouse? Many of those racists certainly were Republican and/or Democrat.

Only the most unreasonable person would reach such conclusion, so why should it be any different when it comes to China?


Say, didn't Lu turned up at home with little injury? Is anyone aware of getting beat up is par for the course in Lu's struggle for for farmer's rights in China? And no, ordinary villagers in China wear cloth slippers, not steel-toed boots.

I think the truth about Lu's "eye out of its socket" BS is out in the open.

Instead of believing western media that is slanted with anit-China bias, how about do some search on Chinese search engine such as Baidu, Sohu, Yahoo CN, and see what the real story is?

Lu's story is well covere in Chinese media and cyberspace; as with any issue in US, you will find wide range of opinions, including those critical of Chinese government, not shut down or censored.

Suprised?

Would you be suprised there have been many successful impeachment proceedings in China, where laws prescribed are followed by local government, with free and fair election void of violence?

Or you rather believe Taishi is the norm not the exception?

http://www.cncitizen.org/article.php?articleid=148

(catalog of village impeachment proceedings 1999-2003)


Do some research on Chinese search engine (Baidu, Sohu, Yahoo CN) and see for yourself the wide range of opinions, including those critical of the government. Here are some sample headlines you will find:

"Law is the best avenue for ceasing dispute"

"Taishi villiager's rights are protected according to law"

"396 villiagers retract support for impeachment"

"Govnerment must set good example being law abiding"

"Small democracy, big obsticle"

"Recall election shouldn't be this hard"

"Cost of villiager's self-rule needs to be lower, lower!"

"Taishi could be the fort of democratization" (my god, not shut down???)

"Please save Taishi villiagers!" (letter to Wen from Professor Ai Shao Ming, it's everywhere, again not shut down.)


The link that Bobby gave is worth looking at. It was something I have been looking for since I learned that Lu himself came to his position after an impeachment in his village.

The link said there were over 50 successful impeachment case across Chinese villages since Mar/1999. Roughly about half of the impeachments succeeded. (It was run by exiles and student leaders who fled China in 1989)

This gives us hope about the Taishi case.


ESWN has translated a detailed interview of Lu Banglie by Radio Free Asia. I think we can now tell for sure that BJW's description, although generally consistent, were not very professional written at the specific descriptions.

I think we should focus on the implications of 52 to (maybe)100 cases in recent years, and how we can help Taishi (and other villages) in the most constructive ways.


sun bin: Taishi and Village Impeachment


eswn: Lu Banglie at Baoyuesi Village

eswn: Media Coverage of the Taishi Village Affair 

eswn: The Taishi Village Elections - Part 1 (Chronology) 

eswn: Taishi Village, My Neighbor


tell me which group enlighten you concerning the taishi incident? which group digs deeper into "core issues" of taishi incident?

my point is: the difference between group 1 and group 2 is not coincident.

the mentality of group 1 doesn't help them to truely understand what is happening, whether it's a mafia beating in taishi village or POW abuse in ab grab.

i am not here to support or against an ideology, what i am here to against is a mentality or certain ways of observing the world, such mentality leads to distortion, ignorance or a vicious circle from prejudice to more prejudice.

posted @ 7:16 PM