Civil Liberties

China Exports Its Panopticon 

Science fiction writers have wondered for years what an all-encompassing surveillance state might look like. China decided to build it.

|

Science fiction writers have wondered for years what an all-encompassing surveillance state might look like. China decided to build it.

Over the last year, The New York Times has revealed the lengths to which Beijing has gone to identify and control Uighurs, a Muslim minority that has lived for centuries on the country's western frontier. While Chinese state secrecy means we don't know the full extent of the regime's malevolent policies, what has been uncovered should chill every civil libertarian to the bone.

Within Kashgar, a majority Uighur city, residents must line up to be scrutinized before they can move from place to place. They are legally required to travel with ID cards and to swipe them at each checkpoint. They are also required to expose their faces to cameras that feed their pictures to facial recognition software. At the behest of the national government and regional police forces, Chinese software makers are training their algorithms to distinguish Uighurs from Han, China's ruling ethnic majority. Police officers stationed throughout Kashgar need neither probable cause nor a warrant to detain Uighurs and check their phones for the surveillance software that they're legally required to install.

And if a Uighur resident raises a red flag during one of these encounters? He or she will likely be sent to a "re-education" camp where, Human Rights Watch reported last year, Chinese Muslims are "held indefinitely without charge or trial, and can be subject to abuse." The camps may contain tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Muslims. The lack of government transparency makes it impossible to know even this basic information.

To the extent that China has justified its systematic targeting of a religious and ethnic minority, the government says it wants only to combat Islamic terrorism as part of its "stability maintenance" program. Yet the country's surveillance apparatus has no obvious form of due process, no regard for civil liberties or privacy, and no avenues for appeal.

Perhaps we should not be surprised that China, the most oppressive global superpower since the Soviet Union, is a leader in this race to the bottom. More alarming is that the disease is spreading. Foreign Policy reported in August 2018 that Ecuador is using a "national emergency response and video surveillance system built entirely by Chinese companies and financed by Chinese state loans." The Times reported in April that the country may soon add China's facial recognition software as well.

As this technology improves and gets cheaper, it will likely become affordable to every two-bit dictator on Earth. What happens then is a chilling mystery.

NEXT: Brickbat: Big Money

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Orange Man Bad!

    1. Eh, I think they are more yellow than orange, but either way that’s racist.

      The problem isn’t skin tone, it’s authoritarian governments!

      I don’t know why the axiom “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is so hard for people to grasp.

    2. Chinese exports good! Comparative advantage through totalitarian control good! –Reason

    3. You didn’t actually read the article, did you? Not everything is about you.

      1. They are usually about Orange Man bad.

    4. Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!

      We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
      http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/donald-trump-scandals/474726/

      “The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”
      He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me reality schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
      All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!

      Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!

  2. China, the most oppressive global superpower since the Soviet Union

    I would be a bit more dubious about using the term “global superpower” in the same sentence as China, particularly in an article regarding the disturbingly paranoid lengths they are willing to go to to suppress a sliver minority in an extreme western province of their own nation..

    As this technology improves and gets cheaper, it will likely become affordable to every two-bit dictator on Earth

    Free and open global markets, baby! We gotta take the bad with the good. The time for developing effective countermeasures is.. about a decade ago..

    1. Free and open global markets, baby!

      Tariff-free imports of Chinese goods produced with Chinese slave labor under a fully government controlled currency, while at the same time mandating high labor costs in the US and having the Fed print money and stimulate the economy is about as far from “free and open global markets” as you can be, short of global central planning.

      We gotta take the bad with the good.

      The good being… what? Massive government and consumer debt? The enslavement of the Chinese by their government?

      The time for developing effective countermeasures is.. about a decade ago..

      That’s statist thinking. In fact, the only “countermeasure” we need is to stop allowing the Chinese government to profit from enslaving the Chinese people by imposing the same costs and overhead on them (through tariffs) as we do on American companies.

      1. Tariff-free imports of Chinese goods produced with Chinese slave labor under a fully government controlled currency, while at the same time mandating high labor costs in the US and having the Fed print money and stimulate the economy is about as far from “free and open global markets” as you can be, short of global central planning.

        We’ve been A-Ok with that for years, reacting to that has led to a lot of collective pearl-clutching by the Orange Mad Bad! groups, who need a fainting couch when the word tariff is uttered in the same breath as China ..

        The good being… what? Massive government and consumer debt? The enslavement of the Chinese by their government?

        Typed out without a lick of irony from your Chinese made computer or phone, from your Chinese made chair.. etc..

        That’s statist thinking. In fact, the only “countermeasure” we need is to stop allowing the Chinese government to profit from enslaving the Chinese people by imposing the same costs and overhead on them (through tariffs) as we do on American companies.

        Countermeasures for facial recognition cams are statist thinking? A few years in a re-education camp ought to sort you out on that.. I appreciatie your posturing, but this article is about China Exports its Panopticon , and you’ve gone off the rails here.

        1. Typed out without a lick of irony from your Chinese made computer or phone, from your Chinese made chair.. etc..

          Gosh, do you think it’s also ironic that I pay my income taxes even though I object to them? That I take advantage of the MID even though I strongly oppose it? That I drive on the Interstate highway system even though I oppose its public financing? Yeah, policies pursued both by the US and China have ensured that the only place I can buy computers now is from China; that’s not ironic, that’s sad.

          I appreciatie your posturing, but this article is about China Exports its Panopticon , and you’ve gone off the rails here.

          I’m afraid it’s you who “went off the rails” when you made the ludicrous claim that we have “Free and open global markets, baby! We gotta take the bad with the good.”

          1. Gosh, do you think it’s also ironic that I pay my income taxes even though I object to them? That I take advantage of the MID even though I strongly oppose it? That I drive on the Interstate highway system even though I oppose its public financing? Yeah, policies pursued both by the US and China have ensured that the only place I can buy computers now is from China; that’s not ironic, that’s sad.

            You are absolutely right.. Hypocritical would of been a better word. Pay your taxes or don’t.. I give no shits. And enjoy your buying power and standard of living that Chinese labor, among many others has brought you, and lament it’s point of origin from the comforts of your own home..

            I’m afraid it’s you who “went off the rails” when you made the ludicrous claim that we have “Free and open global markets, baby! We gotta take the bad with the good

            And I still have no clue what the fuck you think this has to do with an authoritarian regime’s paranoid surveillance of a marginalized ethnicity in a remote province… or the fact that tin-pot dictators have the same access to these tools of oppression that consumers of many nations do, thanks in large part to the
            Free and open global markets
            in which to purchase them.

    2. China is most definitely moving to flex their muscle globally.

      They just aren’t playing in the same arena as the US, EU and Russia. They are moving in on Africa and South America, targeting the natural resources they are going to need going forward. At the same time, they are expanding their “territorial waters” to control the south pacific – again with resources being a primary concern.

      Don’t take their absence from the Persian Gulf and Israel/Syria/Palestine/Lebanon as an absence from the world stage.

    3. Nip it in the bud!

    4. The Uighurs are just a test case. If everything works out, it will go nationwide there.

  3. Uh, China is communist. You know, first cousin to socialist. So no worries in the US, right. We would never allow socialists to take over the government.

    1. If anybody is moving the needle towards a Chinese-style surveillance state in the US, it seems to be a bi-partisan effort (or even more Republican-led recently.)
      US Patriot Act vote roll call

        1. The link wasn’t the only thing that fell off. When Obama pushed PATRIOT II through without so much as a whisper of opposition, the mask fell off. We have two statist parties. There is no opposition – only a game where they decide how to whack up the take.

          1. U.S. politicians are notoriously short-sighted.

            1. Democracies fail because inevitably the people vote the current demagogue and future tyrant emergency powers to deal with something, who never gives it up.

              Note they use the same sophistry our government uses.

          2. Exactly. But as long as we have some other country that’s evil, why worry.

      1. The PATRIOT Act was intended as a temporary measure to deal with terrorism after 9/11 until people could figure out something better. Many of its provisions have sunset.

        Who actually “moved the needle” on a Chinese-style surveillance state was the Obama administration. Obama explicitly ran on using both his political power and his executive power to restore civil liberties and privacy; that’s what voters wanted. He ended up expanding the surveillance state, signing privacy-invading legislation, attacking civil liberties further, massively abusing executive power, and to add insult to injury, push a legislative agenda that massively expanded the welfare state.

        1. Yeah, but he had good reason.

          Look at how close the Russians came to taking over the Trump campaign. If the Obama administration hadn’t had – what was it, 17 agencies that they claimed were sure that the Russians were infiltrating the Trump campaign? – well, just think what might have happened!

        2. I certainly wouldn’t let Obama off the hook. He’s culpable in all of this. My recollection is that the Republicans in the Senate and House were in on the expansion of surveillance under Obama.

          I don’t see any evidence that says Trump is any better on this subject. He signed the FISA 702 reauthorization as soon as he was told that it wasn’t what was used against his campaign. I’m not aware of any other specifics that indicate he is for any relevant reductions.

          If there’s any one issue that seems to unite the Dems and Reps, it seems to be expansion of the surveillance state.

          1. You’re thinking of this in terms of partisan politics: R’s vs D’s. The real question in a representative government is: do elected officials represent what their constituents want and do they govern on the principles they ran on. I suspect most R’s do what they were elected to do when it comes to defense and anti-terrorism, whether you like it or not. Obama and many D’s have not been doing what they were elected to do.

            1. I agree. On every exit poll interview on TV I’ve ever seen the people who claim to have voted Republican always like to emphasize that they voted for their candidate because he promised an expanded and more intrusive surveillance state, except MOAR HARDER than the Democrat asshole.
              /B y the way, Marge, that was satire….

              1. That was actually just a feeble attempt at sarcasm on your part, not satire.

                And you’re using the wrong metric; the question isn’t whether you voted for your representative specifically because he promised X, the question is whether he promised X and you still chose to vote for him.

                Republicans generally run on America first, strong domestic law enforcement, and strong national defense, and Republican voters tend to vote for those candidates. Voters get what they vote for, among the handful of alternatives they usually face.

    2. Communism is socialism and vice versa. You can argue semantics all you want but when you come down to it, one is the ownership of the means of production by the state and there are no human rights while the other one is the ownership of the means of production by the state and there are no human rights.

  4. And racists are happy to let it happen as long as they get their steady supply of cutt rate shit.

    1. The individual is most important, but some individuals are more most important.

    2. Not sure why anyone would think tariffs (taxes on imports) are an effective means of punishing a regime for human rights violations. We normally use sanctions in such a case.

      1. Not sure why you’re fixated on tariffs. You seem to have a reflexive respinse to an argu.ent I never made.

        My post was about individual choices.

        Damn dude, get the TDS treated.

        1. I just assume that everything is about tariffs or immigration these days.

          1. Not when dealing with Tulpa! When dealing with Tulpa, everything is about Tulpa “winning” arguments by using more grade-school insults than everyone else! He-she doesn’t even clarify exactly what her-its stance is, let alone advance any real arguments!

      2. Not sure why anyone would think tariffs (taxes on imports) are an effective means of punishing a regime for human rights violations. We normally use sanctions in such a case.

        We do, and it’s a stupid idea. What do sanctions have to do with the core of the problem?

        The core of the problem is that the Chinese government has a comparative advantage in terms of labor costs through totalitarian control of its workforce, over American manufacturers who are forced by the US government to comply with costly labor related mandates and regulation.

        The best solution to this problem would be for the US government to start letting the free market operate in the US; then we wouldn’t need to do anything since fully free markets can compete well with Chinese slavery. Given that the US government is going to continue to impose high labor costs on American companies, however, it makes sense to impose similarly high costs on Chinese goods through tariffs.

        1. What do sanctions have to do with the core of the problem?

          I’m not necessarily for sanctions with China. But, “the problem” that I’m considering is the subject of the article; human rights violations within China. Sanctions would be far more crippling to the perpetrators of human rights violations, namely the Chinese government.

          “The problem” that you seem to be considering is unfair labor practices. That isn’t the subject of the article.

          1. But, “the problem” that I’m considering is the subject of the article; human rights violations within China. Sanctions would be far more crippling to the perpetrators of human rights violations, namely the Chinese government. “The problem” that you seem to be considering is unfair labor practices. That isn’t the subject of the article.

            The plight of Chinese peasants or whatever you may call “unfair labor practices” isn’t my concern.

            The problem I’m referring to is the violation of property rights and freedom of association of Americans. And that violation is bad enough with the kinds of costly regulations the US government imposes on US employers; it’s compounded if the US fails to impose equivalent costs on foreign manufacturers.

      3. We’re not levying tariffs because China is mean to its citizens. We’re levying tariffs because we’re in an economic war and weakening their access to the largest consumer market in the world is the easiest way to reduce the money, thus power, wielded by companies associated with the PLA.

  5. And if we fight a cold war against this evil we should take care guard ourselves against our own moral destruction. These matters require the utmost care. I think a good place to start is developing counter measure technology and also placing these regimes under the microscope.

  6. The Communists of China depend on citizen acceptance of these measures.

    As the incentive to do their job suppressing fellow Chinese decreases, more and more Chinese agents of the state will work to avoid effectively doing that job. Then only party hardliners will be doing those jobs and less and less of them. That’s what this tech is for. To supplement an ever decreasing desire of Chinese to volunteer for these jobs suppressing their own.

    The same thing happened in the USSR. The KGB got weaker as the populace refused to be the spies of the state they once were. Add in longer and longer waits for necessities but corruption by Communist Party officials expanded.

    1. Citations, please?

  7. “Yet the country’s surveillance apparatus has no obvious form of due process, no regard for civil liberties or privacy, and no avenues for appeal.”

    And some claim that our Constitution is so outdated…

  8. Riggs, understanding the article was on surveillance, and all, but I’d say the liberal migration policy for southern Xinjiang province would’ve fit your article as it’s part of the “stability maintenance” thing.

  9. And yet there are still those who ridicule burkas and niqabs

    1. “I may look like a testosterone-sweating dude, but I identify as a devout Muslim woman every time I need to go out shopping.”

  10. the government says it wants only to combat Islamic terrorism as part of its “stability maintenance” program

    It’s hard for the U.S. government to complain about that!

  11. When you have places like England with ubiquitous camera surveillance. It’s only a matter of time before their panopticon activates. The US is not far behind.

    With tools like Trump and Warren running things, the only thing stopping it here is the utter ineptitude of government IT.

    1. Ok, that is a good point. I have interacted with government IT and they are pretty terrible at every level I have touched.

      I’m gonna assume that the big boys over at the NSA are not such Luddites, but the day to day operations tech is way behind the curve.

      1. I don’t think that’s such a reasonable assumption. When I was finishing up my EE degree, we had an NSA salesman come to a class and make a really rather pathetic and desperate attempt to recruit computer/electrical engineers, relying on a whole bunch of “be a hero and stop terrorism” type BS.

        Meanwhile, actually competitive companies recruit at job fairs, enticing candidates with competitive salaries and benefits.

        I’m pretty sure I know where all the hyper-competent types ended up.

        Government jobs are welfare for the inept and unmotivated.

  12. built entirely by Chinese companies and financed by Chinese state loans.

    This is China’s version of colonialism. They finance infrastructure programs in undeveloped nations knowing the nation will default, then they take possession of the infrastructure and land it is built upon. They are doing it all over Africa and it appears now in South America.

    1. Until the government decides to take that infrastructure and land back by force. China can’t do much about that without an actual invasion. I suspect the governments there are corrupt enough that it will never happen, though.

    2. Maybe Americans should be building infrastructure all over Africa, but that’s probably too much to ask. Americans are up to their eyes in debt and don’t even have the American infrastructure to show for it.

      1. How much debt do you have?

        1. Better than most. It’s only nose level.

  13. China is building this surveillance state with the help of Google and other silicon valley companies. So, don’t be evil, unless being so involves making money oppressing Chinese people.

    1. Yup. We never traded with the USSR, Cuba, or any other Communist nation like we do with Communist China.

      I am for Free trade but only when all trading partners are playing by the same basic rules (like not stealing each other’s tech). America is literally helping China become a stronger and stronger military adversary and suppress its people.

      If the strategy is to get China’s citizens to revolt based on the increased tyranny and bankrupt China in an arms race, then who is to blame if that doesn’t work.

      America buying stuff from other less authoritarian nations would make it harder for China to become a military superpower.

      1. “America is literally helping China become a stronger and stronger military adversary and suppress its people.”

        It reminds me of the fable of the frog literally helping the scorpion crossing the river and getting stung for its troubles. I think it was Lenin who said that the capitalists will be glad to sell the Bolsheviks the rope with which to hang them.

  14. I guess they never want to go through the mongol invasion again

    1. Those Mongols are part of their nation now.

      China is invaded.

      1. yea it was tongue and cheek really…..but the uighars aren’t assimilated like the mongols who have mixed and mingled for 800 or so years…they can probably write pretty good mandarin

    2. Get the City Wok guy to build a wall.

  15. We should nuke the Chinks while we still have the chance.

  16. The existential crisis facing H. sapiens is not climate change, or overpopulation, it is whether humanity / human dignity / individual freedom / liberty will be snuffed out.

    1. “liberty will be snuffed out.”

      By whom, the Chinese government? I wouldn’t worry. You may be interested in science fiction. Books and such. I’m reading The Three Body Problem by Liu Cixin, an author of Chinese books. It’s probably the best science fiction I’ve read in several years, so please have a look and don’t let its Chineseness put you off.

      1. Not necessarily by the Chinese government specifically, but a slow accretion to all governments of more and more authority, and a technologically enabled diminishment of private spaces, speech and eventually thought itself.

        1. I assume a technologically enabled diminishment can be technologically reversed. When the public stops participating compliantly, the tech will not function as it is supposed to. Isn’t this the highest form of warfare according to Sun Tzu, war against the enemies’ alliances and communications.

          1. Perhaps, but doesn’t Sun Tzu also say that the best way to win a war is to sap the opponents willingness to fight? Most folks are just too damn comfortable, and putting up with the “minor” annoyances of the security state is not enough to get them to finally start saying “No!”.

  17. Idiot leftists have no idea how good they have it in this country and what they are trying to destroy.

    1. Agreed. Though, I would say the exact same thing about many on the right, especially the newly-minted collectivist branch of the right, and also civil-war-seekers like Last of the Shitlords here.

  18. And yet they’re still using sickles to harvest. Don’t for a second believe that that’s an old photo because I’ve seen this all over Ukraine too. It’s much easier to keep people under control when they are doing backbreaking labor all day long just for survival. That’s why second world countries keep one foot firmly planted in the 21st century and the other firmly planted in the 19th. Fortunately, Ukraine has much more freedom these days and the differences in just the year I’ve lived here are quite astonishing. China, not so much.

    1. ” It’s much easier to keep people under control when they are doing backbreaking labor all day long just for survival. ”

      It’s also much easier to control people when they are planting grains. They are harvested more or less simultaneously, on schedule, and can be stored. It’s an ideal crop for jack booted government thugs to confiscate. It’s much more difficult to control a population who subsist on rhizomatic tubers like potatoes which can be hidden and allow much more flexibility. During the Korean war for example, farmers used to save their crops from the North Korean soldiers by rendering their potatoes into starch, spreading it on the ground and covering it with leaves, leaving the jack booted thugs clueless as to where to steal their next meal.

    2. It should surprise nobody, yet it still does. The USSR in its heyday was described as a 3rd world country with a 1st world military. Expect no different from China. Or any other communist power.

      1. Yup. I cited a link above where: “In the middle 1980’s about seventy percent of the industrial output of the Soviet Union was going to the military. Oleg Gordievsky, a KGB official who defected to Britain, asserted that at least one third of the total output was going to the military. British intelligence could not believe such a high figure but later Western intelligence sources estimated that it was at least fifty percent. One can only imagine what severe shortages of industrial goods there were for the rest of the economy.”

        1. The Peoples’ Liberation Army is a lot closer to the Chaebol or Zaibatsu of neighbouring nations like Hyundai or Mitsubishi than they are to the Red Army of the USSR. They even run brothels and casinos. You’re not going to learn much about China today by studying the USSR in the 1980’s.

        2. In one of Heinlein’s memoirs (Grumbles from the Grave?), he talks about visiting the USSR and seeing the rail lines going into Moscow. He chatted after the fact with some logistics person, or intel geek, etc., and commented that based on the limited supply lines, it didn’t look as if the city could be anywhere near as populous as was claimed by the Soviets. The intel geek concurred in the assessment.

          Sounds like yet more confirmation of your point: just about everything was being conscripted to keep their military going.

          (I’ll have to remember the part about potatoes and other root crops when the fertilizer comes in contact with the air conditioning system in the US. Root crops all seem to love the thin soil in my garden!)

      2. What surprised me was how the poorest areas in China had access to cable satellite TV, leap frogging over the intermediate steps like broadcast TV that were still the only option in vast areas of America.

        ” Expect no different from China. ”

        My spider sense is telling me you really don’t know a thing about China.

        1. Ask the Uighurs.

          1. “Ask the Uighurs.”

            Go there and ask them yourself if you are curious.

        2. What surprised me was how the poorest areas in China had access to cable satellite TV,

          Cable satellite TV?

          Did they all have cable satellite TV?

          Wow.

          Pity that there’s no such thing.

          And that electrification is intermittent.

          1. “Pity that there’s no such thing.”

            Go to China and check it out for yourself. You are in for a surprise. They have managed to meld the TV, the cable, and the satellite in one package when much of America relied on broadcast TV.

  19. “As this technology improves and gets cheaper, it will likely become affordable to every two-bit dictator on Earth.”

    When it gets even cheaper and better it will be affordable to every person on earth, dictator or dictatee. What then? Disruption. I hope countermeasures and methods to combat surveillance will be developed. I imagine government spies assume the public is compliant and apathetic towards the technology, leaving an opening for those willing to subvert it.

    1. It’s already cheap and available to individuals.
      https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-surveillance-detection-scout/

  20. Tech companies are doing this for the Chinese government, but they’re going to do it on their own behalf in the rest of the world, effectively erasing any sort of dissent

  21. “Science fiction writers have wondered for years what an all-encompassing surveillance state might look like. China decided to build it.”

    …and I’m sure every control freak in the US government is green with envy and just drooling at the thought of implementing the PRC’s surveillance ideas here in America.

    1. It is already here.

      1. I assume every character we all post here on Reason is well archived by the feds.

  22. There should be a reality check here for all those who equated a free market in economics with freedom in general.

    Our thesis has always been one begets the other, or at least once you allow the market to determine prices, production and wealth distribution, you tend to increase the amount of overall freedom in society, it being a consequence of mobility and economic autonomy.

    What we see in China’s case is the Third Way being writ large, and the only difference between it and the rest of the developed world is they have chosen to go about it as a matter of policy unencumbered by notions of rights, whereas we do it in a more haphazard way, declarations of rights notwithstanding.

    The Hong Kong protests show what happens when Chinese with a tradition of rights sense their freedom being reduced. Doubtful the other 1.5 billion will catch on. It’s always instructive to witness what people will trade for economic gains, in China, or in our own societies.

    1. 25% or whatever on Chinese steel are about human rights now?

      That is not even on the table.

      Kim just wrote a beautiful letter. Yes wonderful man he is. North Korea has great economic potential and beaches.

      The Uighurs are the Jews of China. It has nothing to do with Trump. Nobody cares about them.

    2. Not to disagree with what you wrote.

      I see people here using human rights and “red Chinese” as an excuse for tariffs. What a load of bologna.

    3. “The Hong Kong protests show what happens when Chinese with a tradition of rights sense their freedom being reduced. Doubtful the other 1.5 billion will catch on. ”

      The Chinese have long had a tradition of rights, only they don’t call it rights, but ‘the mandate of heaven,’ the right to govern. It’s not the same as the European concept of rights, but what do you expect from people who eat with knives and forks. Atrocities committed against protestors in Hong Kong could widely be seen as a withdrawal of this mandate and the loss of legitimacy. This didn’t happen during the days of Tiananmen when most of the population, who were aware of the tumult there, sided with the government over the students whom they saw as spoiled and privileged. This time it could be different. The Hong Kong protestors seem to know what they are doing.

  23. The Israeli government has been doing this for decades.

    israelglobalrepression.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/israels-worldwide-role-in-repression-footnotes-finalized.pdf

    deadlyexchange.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Deadly-Exchange-Report.pdf

  24. buh buh buh … Reason has assured me that there is no possible downside to enriching Emperor Xi!

  25. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h – $72h…how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

    Heres what I’ve been doing… ,,,

    CLICK HERE►► payhd.com

  26. China, the most oppressive global superpower since the Soviet Union

    I would be a bit more dubious about using the term “global superpower” in the same sentence as China, particularly in an article regarding the disturbingly paranoid lengths they are willing to go to to suppress a sliver minority in an extreme western province of their own nation..

    As this technology improves and gets cheaper, it will likely become affordable to every two-bit dictator on Earth

    Free and open global markets, baby! We gotta take the bad with the good. The time for developing effective countermeasures is.. about a decade ago..

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.