China Takeover?

by Danny Steiner  

Please note that this thesis is missing graphs which could not be replicated online.

The Internet has been the most revolutionary technology since the advent of the Gutenberg Press.  Like the printing press Gutenberg invented in 1455, the Internet has brought about a transfer of information faster than it was ever thought possible.  The Gutenberg Press enabled literacy and information to become tangible to the everyday person.  The Internet has also enabled the exponential growth of information to anyone with access to it.  Plus, the Internet, as quoted by Cay Enns, “allows and encourages [her] to look at far more information than [she] would have without the Internet” and that “[she] is much smarter than [she] would have been without it”.  Today, the Internet is very accessible.  With the Internet at one’s hands, one can access any information one’s heart desires.  Never before in the history of mankind was this possible.  Not only was it not possible, but also it was inconceivable for the public to have such information at their fingertips.  The Internet has enabled small voices to get their voices voiced through blogs and chat rooms over the Internet.  The Internet allows individuals to have his or her own soapbox to speak about anything at all. 

As China has migrated into a more developed and global society, the Internet has materialized to the Chinese people, and they have embraced it. China has censored its people nearly as long as Christianity has existed.  How will China deal with the Internet: a new tool allowing the individual voice to be heard?   China will become the most powerful nation in the world because of the emergence of the Internet.

Since 1949, the Chinese government has been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, which has utilized censorship and propaganda to control its people.  The first censorship law to be used in China was implemented in 300 A.D. (Mette 1) From this point, Chinese emperors used some form of censorship until the introduction of the CCP in 1949.  The first leader of the CCP was Mao Zedong.  Mao "believed that through unremitting hortatory propaganda and mass mobilization campaigns aimed at nation building, the 'masses' would eventually achieve sufficient 'proletarian consciousness' to transform Chinas into a socialist- and ultimately communist- state" (Desnoyers 110).  Next, the CCP created a propaganda department, which in Chinese is "xuanguan bu" (Desnoyers 111).  The fact that CCP created a propaganda department alludes to the importance and tradition of propaganda in China.  An example of the CCP's censorship was the Anti-Rightist Campaign of 1957 in which, citizens who were deemed dissidents went through "thought reform" or reformed by other means in order to accomplish the ""correct" political line" (Desnoyer 113). 

In the late 1970's and early 1980's, Deng Xiaoping led the CCP propaganda movement in another direction.  Instead of attempting to turn China into a communist state as Mao did, Xiaoping attempted to focus on economy and materialism.  A common t-shirt in the 1980's read the popular slogan, "To get rich is glorious!" From then on, China has pursued a more "open door" philosophy, along with propaganda to encourage materialism, in order to develop into one of the fastest growing economies ever in human history (Desnoyers 115).

In order for the CCP to control its masses, and more specifically, dictate what its masses believe, the Chinese government controls the main information source: the newspapers.  The Chinese government “uses its power to control news sources and to restrict ordinary people from providing information to Chinese media and especially to foreign media” (Qinglian 2).  Because of its long history of censorship and propaganda, the Chinese Communist Party has continued to believe that censorship of the masses is the best philosophy for governing.  Between 1998 and 2002, 38 Chinese journalists were arrested with only 6 eventually being let free.  This was the highest number of arrested journalists anywhere in the world.  Obviously, the CCP is using a scare tactic to prohibit progressive journalists from printing anti-Chinese government articles.  By publicly punishing the journalists, the government is making a statement to all of the other journalists in the country that the Chinese government will not tolerate undesirable information.  Not only have journalists been arrested, but there are also “mysterious circumstances in which journalist have been killed.  In 2002, Feng Zhaoxia an editor and journalist for the newspaper Gejie Dabao was one of these journalists killed under supposed “mysterious circumstances”.  This newspaper had written controversial articles in the past, many of them by Feng Zhaoxia.  His death officially was called a suicide, but his family and friends believed that it was a conspiracy”(Qinglian 13).  Another journalist, Gao Qinrong, was sentenced to 12 years in prison for “taking bribes”.  Gao wrote an article in 1998 called “Huge Sums Wasted on an Irrigation Project Scam in Yuncheng District”.  Following this article, Gao was kidnapped and taken to several prisons, several of which turned the kidnappers down for no formal grounds for detention.  So the captors finally found a prison that would accept Gao with the false charges of “taking bribes”.  Amazingly, with no evidence, Gao was sentenced to 12 years in prison where he is still today.  In a society where journalists are sentenced for actions they did not commit and have the possibility of being killed, freedom of the press is almost impossible.

Xinhua has been at the “heart of the censorship and disinformation system established by the Chinese Communist Party since it took power in 1949”.  Xinhua is also the world’s largest news agency with 306 radio stations, 369 TV stations, 2119 newspapers and 9038 periodicals.  Xinhua has a complete monopoly on the media in China and “it is according to the official definition, ‘the eyes, ears, and voice of China” (Battistella 2).  Therefore the Chinese government has a monopoly on the media in its country.  The agency’s first priority is to print articles that are provided by the Publicity Department, which was previously named the Propaganda Department of the CCP.  “Each article or report has to fulfill a number of ideological and journalistic criteria before being released for publication” (Battistella 5).  Besides preaching ideals of the CCP, Xinhua also denied the existence of SARS in China during the first months of the epidemic.  Contradicting this decision, the employees of the agency wore masks to protect themselves (Battistella 7).   The censorship of the SARS epidemic caused a slow response to the disease, which ultimately led to many more lives lost than needed to be (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 3). 

Proof that the Chinese government is restricting freedom of speech and censoring their media is the fact that “677 newspapers were closed between September 2003 and March 2004” (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 3).

The following is a series of graphs, which represents the relationship between China, Iraq, and Saudi and Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America.  The former three countries are not democratic societies and do not celebrate freedom of speech, human rights, and individualism.  The latter three differ from the former three in these regards in that they do encourage freedom of speech, human rights, and individualism.  The graphs evaluate different areas of life that enable the six countries to be compared and observed.  Graph “A” evaluates the GDP per capita in US dollars.  Viewing the graph, it is obvious that the three countries that are more democratic in nature are far more successful in terms of individual economic success.

Graph “B” evaluates the Water resources per capita.  Canada is a phenomenon because of its geographic location and landmass, but overall, the latter three pro human rights’ countries have more water per person.

Graph “C” evaluates the Infant mortality rate, which is much higher in the countries that do not promote democratic ideals than the ones that do. 

Graph “D” evaluates the Newspaper circulation sold per thousand inhabitants. The availability of information is not as accessible in the non- democratic countries. 

Graph “E” evaluates the number of Internet users.  Again this proves that the spread of information is not as valued in China, Iraq, or Saudi Arabia as it is in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. 

And finally, graph “F” evaluates the total population in thousands of the six countries under observation. 

China, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia all straggled behind the more democratic nations of Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America.  By observing all of these graphs together, it is simple to come to the conclusion that countries that promote human rights, freedom of speech, and individualism are more successful in every aspect of their respective societies.  Therefore, if China (Iraq or Saudi Arabia) became a more democratic society that encouraged freedom of speech, human rights, and individualism, it would be tremendously more powerful due to its already economic success and resources.

Considering the comparison between societies that do encourage freedom of speech, human rights, and individualism to those that do not, societies that encourage these forenamed qualities are more successful.  “Freedom of speech is a human yearning- insistent, persistent, and universal” (Smolla 3).  Freedom of speech is a natural human desire that each and every human contains and at some level tries to attain.  A central reason why freedom of speech is so essential for human beings is because it brings about a feeling of self- fulfillment.  This feeling and belief is what separates man from animal (Smolla 10) and allows each individual to reach his or her potential (ACLU 23).  Another practical purpose for freedom of speech is the appeasement it provides for rebellious citizens. Without freedom of speech, the only way that anarchists will get heard is though a violent overthrow.  There must be “valves through which citizens may blow off steam” (Brandeis, Smolla 13) to act as a “checking function” against the government (ACLU) or rebellion will occur.  Additionally, “humankind’s search for truth is best advanced by a free trade in ideas” (Smolla 6).  Although this reason is not as concrete or initially relevant to society, no purpose is more significant than the search for truth.  In this search for hope, there is subsequently a faith in progress, which is the driving force for humanity (Smolla 7).  Faith in progress is made possible by “the attainment and advancement of knowledge”  (ACLU 23).  Without it, Homo sapien sapiens would still be Homo erectus’. (Yes, I got erectus in there!)  Overall, freedom of speech is simply a human yearning, “foundation of self-fulfillment” (ACLU 23), a checking point against government, a way to appease rebels, fundamental for the search for truth, progression of mankind, and the advancement of knowledge, the thing which separates us from animals, and necessary to halt an ignorant society, which leads to “oppression and tyranny” (ACLU 23).

The emergence of the Internet into China and the inability of the country to censor the Internet like it has other media, will allow China to progress human rights and individualism.  The Internet was not meant to be controlled when it was initially created and it is still like that today.  It was not “designed as a technology that would lend itself to centralized control” (Boas 438).  China is trying to manipulate the Internet in order to give itself power over its netizens. In meetings prior to the 2003 World Summit on the Information Society in Geneva, China and Saudi Arabia especially voiced their displeasure to the “hands-off approach to the Internet regulations promoted by the United States and other advanced democracies” (Boas 438).  China is trying in a way to promote the growth of the Internet while also trying to censor it.  The founders of the Internet created a system in which “complexity and control should be implemented at the ends of the network (the multiple computer and individual users that are interconnected)” (Boas 439).  Due to the fact that the Internet was built along this “end to end” design, as more individual users start using it, the more complex and impossible it is to control it from a centralized point.  Also, because the Internet has grown much like an urban sprawl forms, its lack of planning has led to “a lack of global governance” (Hom, Tai, and Nichols 3).  “Controlling the entire Internet by controlling each of its component networks would remain a nearly impossible task” (Boas 439). 

Consequently, Chinese netizens will use “access to the Internet… [as] a democratizing tool, [which] empowers users through information exchange” (Hom, Tai, and Nichols 1).  A study by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences came to the conclusion that the Internet will “bring about more openness and opportunities for political discussion in China” (Hom, Tai, and Nichols 2).  Although only 6.7 percent of the Chinese citizens use the Internet, this number is ever growing.  The growth of Internet users in China will only lead to more discussion, more activism, and more progress.  The Internet in general has been a strong tool in allowing small voices, such as dissidents and activists, to be heard.  Already, these Internet users in China have brought light to “China’s human rights issues and abuses” (Hom, Tai, and Nichols 3).  When the Internet comes together with human rights’ activists, the Internet can be used as the underground railroad of information.  Although these citizens might be limited in the real world by the Chinese government, they are as influential and powerful as their abilities allow in the virtual world.  The Internet is an arena where the idea of a pure competitive market is nearly instilled.  On the Internet a user can be pretty much whatever they want to be and act accordingly. 

And many netizens in China are beginning to realize the power that they can have over the Internet.  In March of 2003, Sun Zhigang, a graduate student was stopped by police, detained for not having proper identification, and then died three days later.  Sun’s parents posted the story on the Internet and within two hours after being posted on sina.com (the largest news portal in China), 4,000 comments had been generated.  News media picked up the official story.  Eventually, all of the uproar led to the conviction of the officials responsible for Sun Zhigang’s death (Qiang 1).  This is just one example of how the Internet is beginning to shape the foundation of human rights in China.  In 2003, there were at least half a dozen of these online uprisings, leading to a new form of public opinion in China called “Wanluo Yufun” or Internet Opinion.  Internet Opinion has become the driving force of public opinion in China.  The forums on the Internet has “given… a place to gather, debate, communicate, publish, receive information, and finally, to collectively articulate and amplify [everyday citizen’s] voices on public matters” (Qiang 2).  The Internet is creating an inverse relationship to the one the government wants: a bottom-up force instead of a top-down force. 

Despite authorities’ persistent efforts to control the Internet, the rising tide of online opinion is a fact of life in Chinese society now and will continue to play an influential role in expanding the space for free expression and even in creating social change.  The transformative effect of the Internet has already set China on an irreversible course toward greater openness and public participation in its social and political life.

Xiao Qiang 4

The flow of information over the Internet cannot be stopped (Qiang 4).  The snowball effect has already begun to build up momentum and it is charging downhill to the future.  China’s true voice will be heard whether the Chinese government wants it or not.

Alternatively, one can argue that propaganda and censorship benefit China.  Freedom of speech is not a real or natural concept and by restricting it, it actually gives it purpose.  Freedom of speech is an unreal concept because of the way that people, mainly people in power, abuse the concept by using it to suit their own agenda.  Those with political power use “freedom of speech”, but when you are not in power, that freedom is not inherently there (Fish 102).  Freedom of speech is not a victory for human’s rights but a victory for those in political power.  Free speech is only permitted when it is on the agenda of the reigning political party or those in power (Fish 110).  Also, freedom of speech needs to be restricted because it gives it purpose.  “Without restriction, without an inbuilt sense of what it would be meaningless to say or wrong to say, there could be no assertion and no reason for asserting it” (Fish 103).  Freedom of speech is only able to exist within the confines of what is known to be good or evil.  It is not a value, but just a product of the limitations and constraints upon it (Fish 108).    Speech will never be free of consequences or from state pressure and therefore will always have meaning (Fish 114).  Another factor for the falsity of freedom of speech is because it is necessary to have some sort of censorship.  It is necessary for the government to censor such things as extreme brutality on television and irresponsible lust in the movies.  In conclusion, freedom of speech is unreal and restricting it gives it purpose and is necessary.

Besides the fact that freedom of speech is unrealistic and harmful, China has and continues to have huge economic success.  It is debatable whether China would be more successful if it were more democratic, but one thing is sure: they are growing at an unheard of rate economically.  It might be possible that China will become the most powerful nation in the world without individuality, freedom of speech, and human rights.  China GDP increased at an incredible rate of 9.4% in the first three quarters in 2005 (Morgan 1).  China’s goal was to quadruple its GDP between 2000 and 2020, but it will accomplish this ahead of schedule.  The economy increased by 9.5% in 2003, despite the Chinese government attempts to slow down growth (CNN.com 1). 

China faces a large threat to their economic success and future ability to be the world’s most powerful nation: their environment.

Our raw materials are scarce, we don’t have enough land, and our population is constantly growing.  Currently, there are 1.3 billion people living in China; that is twice as many as 50 years ago.  In 2020, there will be 1.5 billion people in China.  Cities are growing, but desert areas are expanding at the same time; habitable and usable land has been halved over the past 50 years. … [China’s GDP miracle] will end soon because the environment can no long keep pace. … Half of the water in our seven largest rivers is completely useless. … One-third of the urban population is breathing polluted air.

Pan Yue, China’s deputy minister of the environment

Friedman 2

China’s goal for the past 25 years has been to make profits.  And in that, it has been tremendously successful.  But with economic success and a goal such as it has, there are costs. The by-products of focusing your country’s goal upon making profits are “pollution of water, air, and soil” (Magdoff and Magdoff 7).  In money-seeking countries such as China and the United States, exploitation of resources is commonplace.  Because of all of its environmental problems, China has spent an estimated 15 percent of its GNP to fix these problems (Jahiel 2).  The Chinese people are so blinded by their desire for economic success that they are brutally exploiting their natural resources. 

Although the Internet is not easily censored, the Chinese government is doing everything in its power to censor the Internet.  Chinese Internet users depend upon cyber cafes to access the Internet and so the Chinese government has created surveillance software for these cafes.  The crackdowns on Internet users in these cyber cafes have a “disproportionate impact on less economically privileged users” (Hom, Tai, Nichols 2).  Another strategy is self-censorship.  New services such as BlogCN, BlogBus, and CNBlog all require their members to sign pledges promising they wont post anything critical or harmful to the Chinese government.  This continues the ongoing tradition of self-government in China (.  For forever, the Chinese people have been taught to be absolutely loyal to the Chinese government or emperor, so it is difficult to undo centuries of tradition in that respect.  China detained at least 50 people in 2004 for publishing online material not suitable for the Internet.  China censors its 300 million mobile phone users’ text messages (Hom, Tai, Nichols 4).   A daunting study by Harvard University in 2002 revealed that China used 30,000 employees to block Internet sites in China.  Supposedly, anywhere between 19,000 and 50,000 sites were blocked in a six-month period.  Finally, a very scary figure by Reporter Without Borders said “only 30 percent of messages with ‘controversial content’ were allowed into Chinese chatrooms, while 70 percent were filtered out by censors or by the site host” (Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 5).

In rebuttal to the counterargument, several aspects of the argument can be critiqued.  The argument that free speech is not real and restricting it gives it purpose is very debatable.  The benefits of having freedom of speech outweigh the costs heavily.  Next, China has had enormous economic success, but at what cost?  Also, there are wide held beliefs that the economy will begin to slow down in the near future.  The environment is a major problem in China, but there are reports that the Chinese government is trying to make it better.  The only catch in the thesis is the environment.  If China is unable to fix their environmental problems, there is no hope for it to become the most powerful nation in the world.  Conversely, if China does deal with these problems, there is little standing in its way.  Finally, China is attempting to control its Internet to the best of its abilities, which is damn impressive.  However, as the paper has proven, the Internet is a formidable creation to control and it is most unlikely that China will be able to do so.

With the emergence of the Internet, especially Blogs and other such personalized pages, human rights are progressing in China.  If the Chinese government is unsuccessful in censoring the Internet completely, China will progress exponentially as a nation and become the most power nation in the world.  The Internet is soon to become the central medium for all other media: television, movies, video games, newspapers, etc.  Unless a new technology is created to censor the Internet, human rights will be able to flourish like never before (including China).  The potential of China is outstanding and I believe that with the Internet this potential will be realized sooner than Americans may like.