Posted on 11/20/2004 4:11:23 PM PST by wagglebee
BEIJING -- A factory worker who helped to organize a strike during China's 1989 pro-democracy protests has been released after nearly 15 years in prison, a U.S.-based prison rights group said Saturday.
Chen Gang reportedly was convicted of "hooliganism" and sentenced to life in prison following the violent crackdown that ended the 1989 protests centered on Tiananmen Square in central Beijing, the Dui Hua Foundation said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Freedom is hooliganism to the Chinese fascists.
The Chinese crackdown occurred on the eve of the changes in Eastern Europe. It sent (and may have been intended to send) a clear signal to the East Europeans that too much unrest in the course of 'perestroika' could lead to military intervention, and to the Chinese that the forthcoming changes in Eastern Europe could not be agitated for in China. It may be that the Chinese also saw a need to take advance precautions to stabilise their regime politically and to give it a clearer socialist direction after their introduction of elements of 'capitalism' - a Chinese tactic of taking one step forward with one foot, then one step forward with the other.
In the not too distant future - and perhaps coinciding with Deng's departure from the scene - the Chinese strategists may re-enact the Polish formula for the transition to the new structure. The student pro-democracy movement might again be legalised like Solidarity, becoming a leading political force in China. Deng might be criticised for his role in the suppression of the student demonstration.
'Liberal' Communist leaders would return to, or new 'liberals' might appear in, the Chinese Communist leadership - working in harmony with the leaders of the pro-'democracy' movement.
On the other hand, the message delivered in Tienanmen Square may prove more than adequate to enable the regime to continue its feat of achieving the 'synthesis' stage of the Hegelian dialectical triad - the supremacy of the Communist Party plus elements of Western capitalism and democracy.
(39)Editor's Note:
Furthermore, there is a crucial dialectical difference between Russia and China, connected with the strategists' ruse of fabricating a 'Break with the Past'. In his book Soviet Propaganda as a Foreign Policy Tool [Freedom House, New York, 1991], M. Leighton observed [page 14] that
... the Communist Party of the Soviet Union [CPSU] must posit the existence of an external enemy in order to justify its monopoly of power. If the United States didn't exist as the arch foe, the Kremlin would have to invent it.This was the standard perception, the accuracy of which was taken for granted for generations - until the 'abolition of the enemy' was formalised in Paris on 19th November 1990 with the signing of the 'Declaration of Twenty-Two States' and the 'Charter of Paris'. Point One of the Declaration asserts that 'the signatories solemnly declare that, in the new era of European relations which is beginning, they are no longer adversaries, will build new relationships and extend to each other the hand of friendship'.
But NATO and the West had failed to notice, let alone understand, the meticulous Leninist use of language concerning the 'abolition' of the enemy by the Communist apparatus. For instance, Academician Georgiy Arbatov, one of Gorbachev's closest advisers, had referred in the June 1988 issue of 'Kommunist' to the forthcoming 'erosion of the image of the enemy' [see Note 16, page 32].
If he had meant that the enemy itself was to be erased, he would have said as much; but he did not. Thus the West mistook the image for the reality- just as this leading strategist had anticipated. If the Communist Party needed, as Leighton says, 'to posit the existence of an external enemy to justify its monopoly of power', it followed that the 'abolition of the image of the enemy' would need logically to be accompanied by the 'disappearance' of the Communist Party itself.
Hence the 'August coup' and its aftermath, which represented a 'Break with the Past', opening the way for 'convergence' as intended by the strategists. By contrast, since the West had not, since Nixon's detente with China, regarded China as 'the enemy', the reverse of this logic required no 'vanishing act' by the Chinese Communist Party.
They didn't say he was drooling with a scar on his forhead.
"Freedom is hooliganism to the Chinese fascists."
Religion too.
<< "Freedom is hooliganism to the Chinese fascists."
Religion too. >>
What's the difference?
"Freedom is hooliganism to the Chinese fascists."
Why use fascists to describe a Communist dictatorship?
Did you read the article? Also, have you heard the argument that national socialism and communism have a lot in common? As far as I am concerned, the major difference is that national socialism is more concerned with mysticism and racism. Communism tends to espouse a global unity under a classless system of ideal socialism. I see China tending toward an ethnocentric, fascistic unity that is exclusively for the Chinese themselves. Nationalized capitalism and Lennin's rope are compatible with these observations.
Communism and Nazism does have a lot in common. China is more Fascist then Communist. China is more like state capitalism. As for China, China has many ethnic group, 56 of them, like Korean, Uighur, Kazakh, Uzbeks, Hakka, Manchus, and Mongolians. The majority are Han and they will dominate over the 55 other ethnic groups.
What you're saying about state capitalism fits well with Ledeen's provocative comments. The ethnic breakdowns and who dominates whom is also interesting. I think we agree: China is on the move, and its intentions are anything but democratic. They usually don't even bother with pretending to be democratic. Just look at what they've done to HK.
Han people have a long history of imperialism. Korea and China has had a love/hate relationship. Parts of Manchuria was actually Korea, but China took it under Manchu rules. I think demand reparation from China for stealing our land. Actually, Korea did not care that time because they were more worried about having more people. Many Koreans today live in Manchuria. Koreans are said to have originated from Manchuria and Siberia.
You know, not to be flippant, but when your name is "Chen Gang" (as in "that's the sound of the men working on the..."), your destiny is basically predetermined.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.