Happy that India chose freedom and development combined model (like that of USA) even though India's development is significantly lesser than China today
Great to see USA Senator Bernie Sanders in this video, https://www.facebook.com/noticelpr/videos/1906822686002469/, around 8 min 30 secs, make this visit to Puerto Rico and interact in such a human way with people who are living with the aftermath of the recent hurricane there, which includes living with no electric power!
In my life in India in Mumbai, Dombivli - an outlying area of Mumbai, and Puttaparthi, I have faced a lot of regular power cuts, including power holiday during daytime on some day of the week (but not in Mumbai).
That Puerto Rico is facing this crisis, for so long a period (weeks, I think), is astonishing given that it is technically a part of the USA.
As Bernie Sanders said, money has been allotted for Puerto Rico to handle this hurricane aftermath situation. So let's hope and pray that things will improve quickly and that electric power will be restored to Puerto Rico.
What I love about democracy is that such videos sharing real-life situation in Puerto Rico highlighting a senator who is vehemently opposed to many policies of USA President Trump and his Republican party administration, is freely available. I think it is quite similar in India, where Rahul Gandhi, the vice-president of the main opposition party in India today, the Indian National Congress, is able to freely visit the home state of Prime Minister Narendra Modi from BJP party - Gujarat - and freely criticize the BJP government in Gujarat as well as the union/federal BJP led government in Delhi. Mainstream media in India carries articles with Rahul Gandhi's viewpoints which are heavily critical of Indian PM Narendra Modi and his government. BTW the state of Gujarat is going to have assembly (state government) elections in the near future.
It is this freedom for the opposition to a government to criticize the government, and which views are freely shared in mainstream and social media, that is a vital checks-and-balances feature of democracy to limit or prevent abuse of power by the government leaders.
Today in 2017, I think this democratic freedom to criticize the government and express those views in mainstream and social media is very healthy in both USA and India. I am very happy about that and find it to be wonderful.
In contrast, I have to say that China today does not have such freedom. If some poor areas in China face huge problems, I doubt that stories about these matters will be allowed to be freely shared in Chinese social and mainstream media. So one does not know what really is the truth about China. Maybe it is all largely good. But who knows, maybe there are some serious issues that the Chinese people face from its government but which they are not allowed to tell publicly.
Here are three fascinating govt. promotion videos about China published by official Chinese agency(ies). Note that these videos present the pro Chinese govt. view and do not seem to have any criticism of the govt. In other words, it seems to be a biased towards Chinese govt. view of the matter.
The videos feature views of many non-Chinese people about China, including former Australian PM Kevin Rudd (a former Labor politician).
* China: Time of Xi (Episode 1) – People’s Republic, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrV5GpogjDg, around 43 minutes, published by CGTN in Oct. 2017.
* China: Time of Xi Episode 2 -- Running China Now, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtfTXH5rq0, 43 min. 04 secs, published by CCTV English in Oct. 2017.
* China: Time of Xi Episode 3 -- All Aboard, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1lcPuQHMnc, 43 min 34 secs, published by CCTV English in Oct. 2017.
The above show the good side of China today in the 21st century. But one example of suppression of news/history in China is that it seems that even today in 2017, the topic of the Tiananmen Square massacre in China in 1989 cannot be freely discussed in China! For those readers who do not know much about it, here are extracts from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989:
The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, commonly known in mainland China as the June Fourth Incident (六四事件), were student-led demonstrations in Beijing, the capital of the People's Republic of China, in 1989. More broadly, it refers to the popular national movement inspired by the Beijing protests during that period, sometimes referred to as the '89 Democracy Movement (八九民运). The protests were forcibly suppressed after the government declared martial law. In what became known in the West as the Tiananmen Square Massacre, troops with assault rifles and tanks killed at least several hundred demonstrators trying to block the military's advance towards Tiananmen Square. The number of civilian deaths has been estimated at anywhere from hundreds to thousands.
Set against a backdrop of rapid economic development and social changes in post-Mao China, the protests reflected anxieties about the country's future in the popular consciousness and among the political elite. The reforms of the 1980s had led to a nascent market economy which benefitted some people but seriously disaffected others; the one-party political system also faced a challenge of legitimacy. Common grievances at the time included inflation, limited preparedness of graduates for the new economy, and restrictions on political participation. The students called for democracy, greater accountability, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech, though they were loosely organized and their goals varied. At the height of the protests, about a million people assembled in the Square.
...
Upon realization of the Chinese government's use of force by other nations, the government was internationally condemned and criticized. Western countries imposed economic sanctions and arms embargoes. The Chinese government initially condemned the protests as a counter-revolutionary riot, and criticized other nations. In the aftermath of the crackdown, the government conducted widespread arrests of protesters and their supporters, suppressed other protests around China, expelled foreign journalists and strictly controlled coverage of the events in the domestic press. The police and internal security forces were strengthened. Officials deemed sympathetic to the protests were demoted or purged. More broadly, the suppression temporarily halted the policies of liberalization in the 1980s. Considered a watershed event, the protests also set the limits on political expression in China well into the 21st century. Its memory is widely associated with questioning the legitimacy of Communist Party rule, and remains one of the most sensitive and most widely censored political topics in mainland China.
--- end wiki extracts ----
Ravi: I think the above wiki page will NOT BE AVAILABLE to most Chinese users of the Internet!!!
BTW India has many shameful incidents in the history of the past decades. The last incident that shamed the entire country in a very big way and resulted in a new law was the horrific Delhi Gang rape of Nirbhaya in December 2012: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape. Now that news was not suppressed. India and the world read about it, was horrified, and that horror resulted in a new law being enacted in India to prevent/reduce such horrors from happening again with Nirbhaya's parents especially her mother playing a significant activist role in the matter.
Would China have handled any shameful to the whole country matters in the same way? I think corruption and abuse of power leading to even murder of foreign nationals does happen in China as the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood in 2011 in Chongqing shows, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-17673505. Bo Xilai was the CPC (Communist Party of China) boss in Chongqing. Initially the death of Heywood was portrayed by official accounts as death by alcohol poisoning. The police chief of Chongqing, Wang Lijun, seems to have sought asylum in a US consulate in a nearby city! He allegedly told the US diplomats that Heywood was poisoned/murdered and that Bo Xilai and his wife were involved in corruption. Wang Lijun seems to have come out of the US Consulate of his own accord, and was whisked away by Chinese police & govt officials. For more, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Lijun_incident.
Eventually both Bo Xilai and his wife were arrested and convicted - Bo on charges of bribery, corruption and abuse of power, and his wife for the murder of Neil Heywood. Wang Lijun was also convicted of charges of corruption, abuse of power and defection. So all these three persons are in jail serving long sentences.
But one wonders how fair the trial was. What was Bo Xilai's view of the matter? Was that view expressed in court and then shared freely with Chinese and international media? Bo was supposed to be tough on crime gangs. Did he get trapped by crime gangs? Was the trial fair to Wang Lijun? What is this stuff of being convicted for defection? Was Wang Lijun trapped into this situation because he spoke up against corruption and murder?
I think it is lack of freedom and democracy in China that has created such a sense of mystery and possible conspiracy in the case of the murder of the British businessman, Neil Heywood, and the arrest and conviction of Bo Xilai, his wife and Wang Lijun.
India too has lots of corruption and trials for corruption, including that of former Union/federal govt. ministers and former chief ministers of states! But I think those trials get reported on by free media in India in a much more comprehensive way, than in China, which enables Indian citizens to have some decent idea of the key revelations and conclusions made in or by the court of law hearing the case and giving the eventual judgement.
Overall my view is that freedom and development, both are important for a healthy people and a healthy society. I am heavily in favour of USA and India type of combination of freedom and development, than the Chinese model of extraordinary material development but with great limits on freedom. India got its freedom from the British in 1947. The Republic of China was formed in 1949 with the Communist Party of China under Mao Zedong being in power. I am so happy that in the past seven decades or so, India has gone down the path of this combination of freedom and development, even though today it lags significantly behind communist China in development. India today, in 2017, is way ahead of China on freedom.
[I thank wikipedia and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract from their website on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]
In my life in India in Mumbai, Dombivli - an outlying area of Mumbai, and Puttaparthi, I have faced a lot of regular power cuts, including power holiday during daytime on some day of the week (but not in Mumbai).
That Puerto Rico is facing this crisis, for so long a period (weeks, I think), is astonishing given that it is technically a part of the USA.
As Bernie Sanders said, money has been allotted for Puerto Rico to handle this hurricane aftermath situation. So let's hope and pray that things will improve quickly and that electric power will be restored to Puerto Rico.
What I love about democracy is that such videos sharing real-life situation in Puerto Rico highlighting a senator who is vehemently opposed to many policies of USA President Trump and his Republican party administration, is freely available. I think it is quite similar in India, where Rahul Gandhi, the vice-president of the main opposition party in India today, the Indian National Congress, is able to freely visit the home state of Prime Minister Narendra Modi from BJP party - Gujarat - and freely criticize the BJP government in Gujarat as well as the union/federal BJP led government in Delhi. Mainstream media in India carries articles with Rahul Gandhi's viewpoints which are heavily critical of Indian PM Narendra Modi and his government. BTW the state of Gujarat is going to have assembly (state government) elections in the near future.
It is this freedom for the opposition to a government to criticize the government, and which views are freely shared in mainstream and social media, that is a vital checks-and-balances feature of democracy to limit or prevent abuse of power by the government leaders.
Today in 2017, I think this democratic freedom to criticize the government and express those views in mainstream and social media is very healthy in both USA and India. I am very happy about that and find it to be wonderful.
In contrast, I have to say that China today does not have such freedom. If some poor areas in China face huge problems, I doubt that stories about these matters will be allowed to be freely shared in Chinese social and mainstream media. So one does not know what really is the truth about China. Maybe it is all largely good. But who knows, maybe there are some serious issues that the Chinese people face from its government but which they are not allowed to tell publicly.
Here are three fascinating govt. promotion videos about China published by official Chinese agency(ies). Note that these videos present the pro Chinese govt. view and do not seem to have any criticism of the govt. In other words, it seems to be a biased towards Chinese govt. view of the matter.
The videos feature views of many non-Chinese people about China, including former Australian PM Kevin Rudd (a former Labor politician).
* China: Time of Xi (Episode 1) – People’s Republic, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrV5GpogjDg, around 43 minutes, published by CGTN in Oct. 2017.
* China: Time of Xi Episode 2 -- Running China Now, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtfTXH5rq0, 43 min. 04 secs, published by CCTV English in Oct. 2017.
* China: Time of Xi Episode 3 -- All Aboard, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1lcPuQHMnc, 43 min 34 secs, published by CCTV English in Oct. 2017.
The above show the good side of China today in the 21st century. But one example of suppression of news/history in China is that it seems that even today in 2017, the topic of the Tiananmen Square massacre in China in 1989 cannot be freely discussed in China! For those readers who do not know much about it, here are extracts from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989:
The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, commonly known in mainland China as the June Fourth Incident (六四事件), were student-led demonstrations in Beijing, the capital of the People's Republic of China, in 1989. More broadly, it refers to the popular national movement inspired by the Beijing protests during that period, sometimes referred to as the '89 Democracy Movement (八九民运). The protests were forcibly suppressed after the government declared martial law. In what became known in the West as the Tiananmen Square Massacre, troops with assault rifles and tanks killed at least several hundred demonstrators trying to block the military's advance towards Tiananmen Square. The number of civilian deaths has been estimated at anywhere from hundreds to thousands.
Set against a backdrop of rapid economic development and social changes in post-Mao China, the protests reflected anxieties about the country's future in the popular consciousness and among the political elite. The reforms of the 1980s had led to a nascent market economy which benefitted some people but seriously disaffected others; the one-party political system also faced a challenge of legitimacy. Common grievances at the time included inflation, limited preparedness of graduates for the new economy, and restrictions on political participation. The students called for democracy, greater accountability, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech, though they were loosely organized and their goals varied. At the height of the protests, about a million people assembled in the Square.
...
Upon realization of the Chinese government's use of force by other nations, the government was internationally condemned and criticized. Western countries imposed economic sanctions and arms embargoes. The Chinese government initially condemned the protests as a counter-revolutionary riot, and criticized other nations. In the aftermath of the crackdown, the government conducted widespread arrests of protesters and their supporters, suppressed other protests around China, expelled foreign journalists and strictly controlled coverage of the events in the domestic press. The police and internal security forces were strengthened. Officials deemed sympathetic to the protests were demoted or purged. More broadly, the suppression temporarily halted the policies of liberalization in the 1980s. Considered a watershed event, the protests also set the limits on political expression in China well into the 21st century. Its memory is widely associated with questioning the legitimacy of Communist Party rule, and remains one of the most sensitive and most widely censored political topics in mainland China.
--- end wiki extracts ----
Ravi: I think the above wiki page will NOT BE AVAILABLE to most Chinese users of the Internet!!!
BTW India has many shameful incidents in the history of the past decades. The last incident that shamed the entire country in a very big way and resulted in a new law was the horrific Delhi Gang rape of Nirbhaya in December 2012: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape. Now that news was not suppressed. India and the world read about it, was horrified, and that horror resulted in a new law being enacted in India to prevent/reduce such horrors from happening again with Nirbhaya's parents especially her mother playing a significant activist role in the matter.
Would China have handled any shameful to the whole country matters in the same way? I think corruption and abuse of power leading to even murder of foreign nationals does happen in China as the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood in 2011 in Chongqing shows, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-17673505. Bo Xilai was the CPC (Communist Party of China) boss in Chongqing. Initially the death of Heywood was portrayed by official accounts as death by alcohol poisoning. The police chief of Chongqing, Wang Lijun, seems to have sought asylum in a US consulate in a nearby city! He allegedly told the US diplomats that Heywood was poisoned/murdered and that Bo Xilai and his wife were involved in corruption. Wang Lijun seems to have come out of the US Consulate of his own accord, and was whisked away by Chinese police & govt officials. For more, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Lijun_incident.
Eventually both Bo Xilai and his wife were arrested and convicted - Bo on charges of bribery, corruption and abuse of power, and his wife for the murder of Neil Heywood. Wang Lijun was also convicted of charges of corruption, abuse of power and defection. So all these three persons are in jail serving long sentences.
But one wonders how fair the trial was. What was Bo Xilai's view of the matter? Was that view expressed in court and then shared freely with Chinese and international media? Bo was supposed to be tough on crime gangs. Did he get trapped by crime gangs? Was the trial fair to Wang Lijun? What is this stuff of being convicted for defection? Was Wang Lijun trapped into this situation because he spoke up against corruption and murder?
I think it is lack of freedom and democracy in China that has created such a sense of mystery and possible conspiracy in the case of the murder of the British businessman, Neil Heywood, and the arrest and conviction of Bo Xilai, his wife and Wang Lijun.
India too has lots of corruption and trials for corruption, including that of former Union/federal govt. ministers and former chief ministers of states! But I think those trials get reported on by free media in India in a much more comprehensive way, than in China, which enables Indian citizens to have some decent idea of the key revelations and conclusions made in or by the court of law hearing the case and giving the eventual judgement.
Overall my view is that freedom and development, both are important for a healthy people and a healthy society. I am heavily in favour of USA and India type of combination of freedom and development, than the Chinese model of extraordinary material development but with great limits on freedom. India got its freedom from the British in 1947. The Republic of China was formed in 1949 with the Communist Party of China under Mao Zedong being in power. I am so happy that in the past seven decades or so, India has gone down the path of this combination of freedom and development, even though today it lags significantly behind communist China in development. India today, in 2017, is way ahead of China on freedom.
[I thank wikipedia and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract from their website on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]
Comments
Post a Comment