Tolerance issues!

[Lysander]

Imagine what could be done if proper research could be done. In time we might be able to regrow (parts of) organs from peoples own cells, with all the benefits thereof.

I remember seeing the Manufacturing Body Parts video in this site a while ago. The similar article and video with the finger may be of interest too. (Warning: while there is little to no blood, there are body organs shown)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/22/sunday/main3960219.shtml

[Alondro]

Australia seems to be on the verge of passing a bill that will demand the filtering of their entire Internet for anything adult-rated and block it.

Even an evil Conservative hate-monger like me thinks this is stupid

Now THAT'S extreme right-wingism!

User Friendly points out the flaw in this plan.

Feh.  They're actually supposed to be called 'tsunami'.  Mmmmm... porn tsunami... kinda like when a hentai manga warehouse in Kobe collapses.   

[Valynth]

Australia seems to be on the verge of passing a bill that will demand the filtering of their entire Internet for anything adult-rated and block it.

Even an evil Conservative hate-monger like me thinks this is stupid

Now THAT'S extreme right-wingism!

User Friendly points out the flaw in this plan.

And the flaw in that idea is that China has been successfully doing it for years.

Also:  porn tsunami added to my vocabulary.

[Noone]

And the flaw in that idea is that China has been successfully doing it for years.

I wouldn't say they've been doing it very democratically...

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

And the flaw in that idea is that China has been successfully doing it for years.

I beg to disagree. China has been doing it with varying degrees of success, for most of the people. Anyone technical can walk around the limitations with ease. Anyone semi-technical can also walk around the limitations, simply by either using a different search engine, or by using Tor, just as an example...

"Relatively successful" might better describe it. And China is a lot more restrictive on where the network lines come in than you might think; heck, it might be relatively trivial to set up a satellite link, which would bypass all the filtering at the expense of some latency...

[Vidar]

And the flaw in that idea is that China has been successfully doing it for years.

I beg to disagree. China has been doing it with varying degrees of success, for most of the people. Anyone technical can walk around the limitations with ease. Anyone semi-technical can also walk around the limitations, simply by either using a different search engine, or by using Tor, just as an example...

"Relatively successful" might better describe it. And China is a lot more restrictive on where the network lines come in than you might think; heck, it might be relatively trivial to set up a satellite link, which would bypass all the filtering at the expense of some latency...

You might not even need one of those. A foreign proxy server with SSL would be enough. All it takes is someone tech-savvy outside China with a distaste for dictatorial censorship and a bandwidth surplus, and there's no shortage of those.
The internet has ways of routing around censorship.

[Omega]

The internet has ways of routing around censorship.

True, but that takes time and effort and to the many, it isn't worth doing so.

I'm not sure if I want to say that what China is doing is wrong. One has to understand that for the past century there has been many major riots in that country. If all of those people would be allowed to think and do as they'd please, there would be even more riots and unrest. Alright, so some of the riots have been pro-China riots, but I bet that the number of those too would sky rocked if the information would be made available for the common folk.

Apropo, China is going to face some major difficulties in few years. The millions of single men might be an unpredictable factor, because the one-child-policy has broke the balance between girls vs. boys quantities. There just aren't enough women for all the men  in that country. Then there's the pollution, world's economy crisis, lack of oil etc.  Ooooh... There's a one helluva messing brewing in the East and I dread to guess what will happen in a next generation.

[Valynth]

I'm not sure if I want to say that what China is doing is wrong. One has to understand that for the past century there has been many major riots in that country. If all of those people would be allowed to think and do as they'd please, there would be even more riots and unrest. Alright, so some of the riots have been pro-China riots, but I bet that the number of those too would sky rocked if the information would be made available for the common folk.

That's about like saying "at least Stalin kept the peace" despite killing more Russians than Hitler killed Jews.

The primary flaw in your logic is that they have a reason to riot, namely the lack of any civil rights and being near-constantly starving due to the inadequacies of the system that they can't question(and thus fix) because they'd be killed or imprisoned(again see civil rights).  Another flaw is that other countries who have even less authoritative governments have been able to exist peacefully without bursting into riots despite their citizens being able to think for themselves.

\can't tell if you were sarcastic, but I think you're being serious
\\just because their economy is becoming capitalistic doesn't mean they're "free"
\\\slashies!

[Omega]

heh...



Let's concentrate on those two "flaws" that you mentioned.

The primary flaw in your logic is that they have a reason to riot, namely the lack of any civil rights and being near-constantly starving due to the inadequacies of the system that they can't question(and thus fix) because they'd be killed or imprisoned(again see civil rights). 

The civil rights are all fine and dandy, but unlike the illusion of freedom, they do come with price. The more the people, the higher the price. One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children. These are Chinese that we're talking about, (and I know this is gonna sound a bit prejudice, but...) they do not think like you. Hell, even I don't think like you.

Before I strand away from the topic, I just wanna put emphasis on one very important point that proves my argument: There are too many people in China. The more the people, the more difficult it is to control them. To give them what they want. So, instead of filling their stomachs and wallets, they fill their minds with ideas that they are the mightiest of the nations; that they are the righteous ones. It'll keep them happy, for time being.

Another flaw is that other countries who have even less authoritative governments have been able to exist peacefully without bursting into riots despite their citizens being able to think for themselves.

Again: Chinese. If there's one thing that I've learned about them, it is that they are proud and never want to admit that they are wrong. This is a generalisation of course. Not everyone from there are like that, but majority likely is (or at least the noisiest.) You can find same kind of traits from Koreans and Japans. That's also one of the reasons why they are so hardworking.

What works for some people doesn't apply to others.

That's about like saying "at least Stalin kept the peace" despite killing more Russians than Hitler killed Jews.

I loath Stalin more than Hitler, but that's probably because I know more about him than Adolf.

It's all about perspective, my friend 

[Lisky]

Hitler, ordered the killing of 8-10 million people in cold blood
Stalin, ordered the killing of 45 million people in cold blood

Hitler, villain of the world
Stalin, National hero, and pre-cold war ally of the free people of the world

the difference, Stalin had people killed in his own country as well as in places his army "took back", Hitler killed people in his own country, and places his army took over

amazing how history plays out, isn't it

(just as a side note, history is always written by the victor)
Edit: Not saying that i prefer, defend or even like either leader, merely pointing out the hypocrisy of that whole era...

[Tapewolf]

I'm not sure, but I suspect Stalin had a longer stretch of time in which to do his stuff.
Hitler only had a window of about 5 years, I think.  And probably less territory.

[Sunblink]

Why exactly are we grading ruthless dictators on a scale, again?

Also, why the hell is this forum suddenly becoming filled to the brim with generalizations?

[Tapewolf]

Why exactly are we grading ruthless dictators on a scale, again?

I don't know.

Also, why the hell is this forum suddenly becoming filled to the brim with generalizations?

That may itself be a generalisation.

[Sunblink]

Also, why the hell is this forum suddenly becoming filled to the brim with generalizations?

That may itself be a generalisation.

I concede the point.

(Should I make a "struck my weak point for massive damage" joke or something?)

((Edit: woah, what happened to the quote tags?))

[Cogidubnus]

One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children.

And what's wrong with that? Making people angry and smoking children, I mean.

[Angel]

One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children.

And what's wrong with that? Making people angry and smoking children, I mean.

Well, jeez, Cog, smoking children is a bit of a long way to go if you're in need of a fix. Try smoking puppies first, they're easier to take and the fur makes them easier to light. 

[Omega]

One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children.

And what's wrong with that? Making people angry and smoking children, I mean.

It increases the entropy

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Well, jeez, Cog, smoking children is a bit of a long way to go if you're in need of a fix. Try smoking puppies first, they're easier to take and the fur makes them easier to light. 

A little lighter fluid sorts that problem out easily...

[Sunblink]

YOU'RE ALL CRAZY. THE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO INFLICT YOU ALL WITH LUNG CANCER BY LEGALIZING THE SALE OF SMOKING PUPPIES AND CHILDREN. YOU'RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THEIR HANDS.

MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE HARDCORE

</sarcasm>

...God, this reminds me of how I tried to convince my mom not to smoke. I pushed every "Smoking is bad" educational book on her like she didn't already know that stuff. And when somebody online acted as though the addiction was no big deal and said if she was smart she would simply drop the habit altogether (he didn't seem to know what an addiction meant) I ripped him a new one.

((EDIT: I should probably clarify that I was seven when I did the educational book thing and eleven when I got into that asinine argument about smoking.))

[Cogidubnus]

One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children.

And what's wrong with that? Making people angry and smoking children, I mean.

It increases the entropy

Mm.

Orderliness does not imply that something is better, only that it is orderly. I assume you do not mean entropy in the form of them becoming particles of smoke, as that will happen either sooner, or later, whether they die of fire or age.

[Omega]

What I mean is that entropy equals chaos, uncontrolled energy, radical factors that have potential to cause even more pain, misery, sorrow and rest of that kind of general unhappiness 

[Mao]

Mmm, pass that puppy over the left man.. I want to get a hit of that.

[Valynth]

The primary flaw in your logic is that they have a reason to riot, namely the lack of any civil rights and being near-constantly starving due to the inadequacies of the system that they can't question(and thus fix) because they'd be killed or imprisoned(again see civil rights). 

The civil rights are all fine and dandy, but unlike the illusion of freedom, they do come with price. The more the people, the higher the price. One does not simply let others speak freely, because they can abuse this freedom and make other people angry. One does not simply let people to choose their professions, because they would start dealing drugs or children. These are Chinese that we're talking about, (and I know this is gonna sound a bit prejudice, but...) they do not think like you. Hell, even I don't think like you.

Another flaw is that other countries who have even less authoritative governments have been able to exist peacefully without bursting into riots despite their citizens being able to think for themselves.

Again: Chinese. If there's one thing that I've learned about them, it is that they are proud and never want to admit that they are wrong. This is a generalisation of course. Not everyone from there are like that, but majority likely is (or at least the noisiest.) You can find same kind of traits from Koreans and Japans. That's also one of the reasons why they are so hardworking.

Wow, much racism in these quotes.  No matter how I try to slice it, it seems that you're trying to say "the Chinese are inferior animal-people who will constantly kill themselves if they are allowed freedom."

Again, as I've pointed out, other nations have been able to work peacefully without needing to control the people (mostly in Japan and South Korea ironically enough).  At this point the only real argument you have is that "well...  They're Chinese and subject to my racial view of them."

Oh...  And they're good workers not because they never want to be corrected, it's because of a cultural precedent to be diligent in ones work (as well as the Chinese government forcing them to work at penalty of death).  If the source of their work ethic was, as you said, "to never be wrong," they would be horrible workers whose clashes with their employers would render them constantly unemployed.

[Lisky]

Personally i saw his point of view more of a, they've got a different culture, and therefore different way of reacting, i saw a program last week on the discovery channel... did you know that McDonald's had to train the people of china how to use a drive through... they'd buy the food, then park, and eat it inside... i found the whole thing perplexing... apparently until 2007 china had never had a drive through...

[Valynth]

Personally i saw his point of view more of a, they've got a different culture, and therefore different way of reacting, i saw a program last week on the discovery channel... did you know that McDonald's had to train the people of china how to use a drive through... they'd buy the food, then park, and eat it inside... i found the whole thing perplexing... apparently until 2007 china had never had a drive through...

I'm not saying that they don't have a different culture (again they have a precedent for diligence in their work), but I'm also saying that the culture is hardly an excuse for oppression.  Keep in mind this isn't a Dynasty they have (which would be culturally relevant), it's a communist dictatorship whose realised that communist economics are shit.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

it's a communist dictatorship whose realised that communist economics are shit.

... when run by corrupt people (ie, humans) and hence not following at least some of the base concepts of communism.

[Omega]

Wow, much racism in these quotes.  No matter how I try to slice it, it seems that you're trying to say "the Chinese are inferior animal-people who will constantly kill themselves if they are allowed freedom."

No. nononononononononononono-no-no-no-no-niiiiie.

You are not getting what I'm trying to tell you. I blame myself. Well, at least basilisk got what I was after.

Your point seems to be that the government is the evil. I'm trying to tell you that the society is created by the people. In other words, you cannot blame the people in charge without blaming the people. China is not ruled by a tyrant (not after Mao anyway). It is ruled by a small group of people who are balancing on the edge of a knife. Make a wrong decision and you got millions of people wanting to kill you. A perfect society is created by perfect people. Not so perfect society is created by not so perfect people.

I'm not a racist. I've proven that to myself time after time after time again. A racist would say that these people suck be cause they're Chinese. I say that these people are Chinese, because they think different from us. Please don't mix the order of these. If I don't like some members of minority, because they are noisy, tend to do nothing and offending everyone else, does not make me a racist. I dislike them because I don't like them as a person, not what they are. Besides, I've never said that I hate Chinese or that they wouldn't be equal to the rest of the world! I said (or at least very much tried to) that there is probably a very good reason why their freedom is limited. If they want it to change, they can damn well do it by themselves.

Again, as I've pointed out, other nations have been able to work peacefully without needing to control the people (mostly in Japan and South Korea ironically enough).  At this point the only real argument you have is that "well...  They're Chinese and subject to my racial view of them."

I'd not say that I have a "racial view" but a national view or cultural view. If other nations have worked their way to the human rights, then what's stopping China? Oh wait, now I remember: The masses. You can't just feed, educate, protect every Chinese out there. There's just too many of them. They're trying their best, I'm sure, but nobody wants to sacrifice the present for the future. If it were up to me, I'd just leave them with their own problems for a while. They don't want other nations medling with their affairs. Besides, telling other people what to do what you think is right is kinda naïve, no offence.

[Mao]

China is not ruled by a tyrant (not after Mao anyway).

*whistles innocently*  What?

I have to say I see what you're getting at Omega.  Their culture and upbringing are different from ours (I've been host to three young Chinese girls who have come to Canada for school) and it's a completely different concept from what you find out here in North America.  As a result to try and apply our cultural methods, standards or concepts to them won't work.  They don't see it the way we do and we don't see it the way they do.  It's as simple as that.  This isn't to say that they can't see or understand our view, just that by the way they are brought up that's just not how it's been put to them.  This as a result will give them a likely hood to react very differently from you or I.  What they need based off of what they expect and have been raised to understand is different from ours.  Neither is inferior, just different.

[Omega]

exactly!

[Cogidubnus]

What I mean is that entropy equals chaos, uncontrolled energy, radical factors that have potential to cause even more pain, misery, sorrow and rest of that kind of general unhappiness 

Order does not imply happiness. I can be quite happy smoking my children, thanks.

With that train of thought in mind, happiness doesn't imply better either.

If I have two piles of shit - one very messy, uncontrolled pile, and one very tidy, easily tracked and controlled pile, I still have a pile of shit. I say this to demonstrate that orderliness itself does not infer anything positive about what is organized. One can have an organized mass slaughter, or organized tanks rolling through Tienamen square, just as much as orderly streets or a census.

A lot of horrifying things have been done in the name of the preservation of order, if you consider certain things to be more important than keeping order.