I’m a big believer in freedom of information, be it intellectual property, political opinions, or crazy rantings. So, it’s a bit upsetting to read about the effort to which China censors online content. Worse is that Google, Yahoo, MSN, and others are working hand in hand to easily facilitate the removal of content “offensive” to the Chinese government.

The argument pro censor necessarily grows from the following theory:

We, the ruling party, know what is better for the people than they do, because we are specially selected as the best and they are the average mass. We therefore are equipped to decide what kind of knowledge is good for them or not.

To casual inspection, this is sound. However, it assumes a hidden precondition, that rulers have some natural right to arbitrarily limit fundamental freedoms of the populace. This is one that America specifically rejects by Constitution and Bill of Rights, granting certain liberties to its citizens that its founders would consider to be universal and necessary.

So, why does writing opinion about Chinese history offend the government? Why does speaking out against the government offend the government? The question of the day is: “If you care about limiting speech, are you more worried about maintaining the political status quo, or serving the Chinese people?” Perhaps the answer is obvious.

2 Responses to “Blog Censorship in China”

1. Julie says:

   1/4/2006 at 11:41 pm

   Even to casual inspection, the first sentence of the theory you quoted should set off huge warning bells to anyone with any sense of freedom or self-thought. Absolutely no one except yourself should govern what you are allowed to say or think. (it is whether you deserve an audience that should be a more important, relevant, and timely question) You ask why the government is upset about dissenting opinion? Because at its core it is still bent on retaining its totalitarian regime, and free thought has always been the bane of any such regime’s existence. They think they know what’s best for the Chinese people, but exactly who gave them that right? Throughout Chinese history there existed the Mandate of Heaven, which I personally find crudely but basically democratic: that if the people really really didn’t like their current ruler, they could overthrow him and establish a whole new rule. While in the end this still perpetuated oppressive imperalistic monarchies, its most basic tenet was the fact that the “people” must consent and be “happy”.

   Reply
2. Elliott Back says:

   1/5/2006 at 2:50 pm

   Absolutely no one except yourself should govern what you are allowed to say or think.

   But what if they know that what you’re thinking is bad for you? Then, the argument is, it’s better for you if they can prevent it. For example, suicidal people clearly have suicidal thoughts, which we as a country just to be insufficiently good for them. So, we do our best to prevent people from thinking (or doing) about killing themselves.

   Of course, this is argument ad absurdum…

   Reply