A gay and lesbian film festival due to be held at China's Beijing University was forced to move venues after campus officials banned the event.Interesting. The gay and lesbian film festival might not be found on a Chinese campus, but it manages to carry on at a nearby abandoned factory. One habitually imagines that the CCP controls everything everywhere within China -- yet this story indicates otherwise. Does the regime only exert limited control in places like abandoned factories, much less rural areas like Huaxi? I'm just asking -- because I suspect that the perception of the CCP having an iron grip throughout China is fast becoming a chimera.The festival was billed as an Aids and sexual health event as organisers feared university officials would block the screening of gay films.
An event spokesman said: "If we had told them what it was about they would never have agreed to it."
The event, which began at the weekend, was moved to a nearby disused factory.
The spokesman said organisers believed the ban was "because of the festival's subject matter".
The festival featured four Chinese feature films, two Hong Kong movies and one from Taiwan.
I would like to get a clearer picture on Western assumptions and attitudes towards the Chinese Communist Party. With respect to Islamofascism, the general trend on the left (with many exceptions) appears to placate Muslims as oppressed and downtrodden, while overlooking the misogyny and homophobia that is prevalent among many of them. Liberal values are suspended to champion a greater cause, such as a Palestinian state or fighting American corporatism in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So how about the Chinese regime? Will liberals have a soft spot for the autocrats, or take a hard line? I've seen many 'Free Tibet' bumper stickers in Berkeley disfavoring Chinese occupation. Then again, I see lots of Mao t-shirts for sale there too. Tienamen's freedom fighters appeared to be commended by conservatives and liberals alike in 1989, at Beijing's expense. Blurry lines.
I also wonder what the conservative consensus on China's regime might be. Realpolitik might plausibly dictate supporting order within such a large country, thereby backing the regime in the name of practicality. The morality of that would be debatable. Considering that the CCP is at least keeping chaos at bay for now, I find myself hoping that it just stays that way -- so am I inadvertently rooting for the regime? I don't intend to support Chinese communism; I resonate with the idea of a free Chinese democracy.
It's difficult to know what to wish for in market-communist China. My own views on China lack cogency, and are largely reactive. I suspect the same is true for the regime.
I asked Simon at Simon World that question -- he's optimistically hoping for a gradual evolution into something like present-day Russia:...I'd say some morphing into a system similar to Russia's is the most likely. China's history is littered with strong central rulers followed by years of chaos. I think the last 60 years have been amongst China's quietest on the domestic front and people like that. There has never been a Chinese democracy outside of Taiwan -- it is an alien concept. That's not to say it's not right for China. It's just that it will take time for it to take root, and that will be a crucial time for the country, especially given its tendency to strong central rulers. So put me in the quiet optimist camp.One hitch might be that Russia's shrinking population is around one ninth the size of China's, and spread across a much vaster expanse -- so the politics on the ground are quite different. And besides, where is Russian democracy heading these days? Is a Putinocracy the best wish for China? Perhaps China can build a better ramp from Communism than their Russian counterparts. Here's hoping.
How can freedom and control be made compatible for 1.3 billion people?
"So how about the Chinese regime? Will liberals have a soft spot for the autocrats, or take a hard line? ... Tienamen's freedom fighters appeared to be commended by conservatives and liberals alike in 1989, at Beijing's expense. Blurry lines."
Here's one possible answer: Ignore it.
The other night I watched a movie called Liberty Stands Still. If ever there was a dead giveaway BLEEDING HEART SCRIPT, it was that one.
The main character (a sniper who is shooting people to make a point about gun control, and to prove that liberals are not wimps) compares himself to the Tiananmen demonstrators: "Tiananmen Square boiled down to one man standing in front of a tank, that couldn't move or shoot, because human dignity was stronger than steel or bullets. It changed a nation."
It occurred to me that the scriptwriter thought that the pro-democracy demonstrators won at Tiananmen Square. China is all changed now. Into a democracy, probably. Who cares? China doesn't fit into any good or evil category in Liberal Metaphysics, so it might as well not exist.
OK, is anyone else here TOTALLY recalling a certain Simpsons episode now?
"The event, which began at the weekend, was moved to a nearby disused factory."
Episode 186: Homer's Phobia
Bonus points to any reader who can name the song that played as the steel mill transformed into a gay bar.
Extra bonus points and a thank-you to any reader who can remember what the steel mill was called after it had turned into a gay bar.
"Extra bonus points and a thank-you to any reader who can remember what the steel mill was called after it had turned into a gay bar."
Cockamamie's ?
"We work hard, we play hard." -gay steel worker.
Not to hijack the thread, but Andrew Sullivan posted this link as an example of the impending theocracy overtaking America:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/26/eveningnews/main691106.shtml
Some Alabama cracker tried to ban books by gay authors from public libraries. Apparently he was 'convinced' to allow Shakespeare and confine the proposed ban to only school libraries. As creepy as this is (ie, real creepy) the punchline is the bill died when not enough legislatures showed up to vote on it. I think this contradicts Andrews argument. Yes there are some jumped up morons who want to impose the Christian thought police on us, but more importantly they are a small minority even in their own cliques. Have some faith in the common sense of America. This is why we kick China in the ass, like the Brits like to say "America always does the right thing. After they try everything else."
Yeah, no "root cause" trail leading back to the only real evil they see in the world, "American Capitalist Imperealism"
After all. it was the Deng capitalist roaders that ordered in the tanks. China isnt a cause celabre because it isnt the current usefull tool to attack the USA.
As for what we see them able to express. remember the tanks wasnt ordered in very fast, not much different than the polution riots we have seen and other unrests. when the disorder presents a percieved threat, it will be delt with.
I have little doubt the organisers will become memebers of the organ donor tissue bank for the Eurosocialist Elite in due time. with the cost of the bullet mailed back to their family.
The real reason the left has little love for China is because Dengs capitalist Roaders run things, if Maos Cultural revolutionaries was still in charge. we would still be hearing the left extol its Socialist virtues.
What did people think of the Bush press conference last night?
I was reading about the Italian counter-reformation last night, and was amused to read that the inquisitors were dissapointed to find that books listed on the Index of Forbidden Books often became as popular as the Church's reccomended reading lists. 16th Century Italy was not a hotbed of Protestant agitation. The Church had unquestioned political and moral authority. Yet, it was incapable of controlling the information absorbed by the small class of people that could read.
China's own attempt to censor homosexual content is pathetic in comparison. Forbid the movie from one venue, encouraging interest in another. Its like China was taking advise from a Hollywood mogul.
This ain't Mao's China.
Mark
Whats your opinion of the schools forcing Homosexuality on kids ?
Because thats what he was fighting, or do you accept the leftist media depiction of what thats about ?
link
Its foolish to accept the leftist media line on what this conflict is about, a piece of a wider war.
When I was in school, we might have had our "hot for teacher" moments. but the teachers wasnt willing, not near as willing as these new teachers fresh out of our cultural marxist universities. brainwashed with the current leftist doctrine that any kid 12 and up is fair game.
Mark,
That was the line... but not the song. Alas, I can't judge the name of the bar because I don't member. Does "The Anvil" ring a bell with anyone? I'm hoping someone will know.
Raymond,
The guy wanted to ban books by gay authors. He wanted to ban Shakespeare. "Forcing homosexuality on kids"? I'll grant you, for the purposes of argument, the unlikely premise that he was in fact fighting for this. There is no connection between that and his means.
His "line in the sand" is the same kind of control-freak personal "make me feel better and screw your freedoms" therapy you'd scream about if it was coming from the left. Grow up.
As for the article you linked, there are some bad activist actors in the educational system, and NAMBLA sucks. Beyond that it was hard to get much coherent out of it, or see a connection to Cicero's post. Or Mark's comment.
Trying to go over it again isn't going to advance the discussion of Cicero's post, either. How about we concentrate on Cicero's post instead?
Im not going to hijack this thread any further, but just to echo Joe's sentiments, having Shelley in a public library sound like one step on the road to the gay revolution. Email me if you want to argue further, or maybe someone will start a thread.
Besides the fact that the festival was moved rather than canceled, I thought it was interesting that most of the movies shown (4 of 7) were made in China. Depending on how recent they were, the 2 Hong Kong movies may also have been made under Chinese rule.
How did the makers of these 4-6 movies get away with making them under Chinese rule? I suppose some or all of them could have been made 'under cover' (trying to resist bad puns here) on tiny budgets with anonymous actors and directors and only now shown in public, but that's not what "feature films" usually implies.
Marcus Cicero, neither the Left nor the Right have any monopoly on the inability to face China squarely and realistically. You simply don't will the end if you don't will the means. Get China out of Tibet? How?
We won't use military force. We won't use economic leverage. We can't persuade them. We can't shame them. We can't negotiate because there's nothing we're willing to give up.
Dr. Weevil: How did the makers of these 4-6 movies get away with making them under Chinese rule?
It's sort of a paradox, but people in a repressive regime get used to living a semi-outlaw resistance. Normal life is impossible without a little illegality: trading in the black market, "speculating", and such. As long as the activity is not overtly subversive or political, they'll probably get away with it.
This is a pronounced phenomenon in Cuba. For many years there was no Carpenter's Union in Cuba. Since it's illegal to perform any kind of labor unless you belong to a government-controlled union, carpentry was essentially illegal in Cuba. Guys went around fixing roofs anyway (after the manner of Harry Tuttle in Brazil).
This works out well for the forces of oppression. Since everyone is forced to engage in some sort of criminality to survive, everyone is guilty and feels intimidated in the face of power. Any political dissident can be probably be convicted of black marketeering, or of violating one of the other ten million rules - avoiding the appearance of political persecution.
a semi-outlaw resistance
I meant to say existence, not resistance. But what's the difference?
Whatever the U.S. does, it must not advocate the spread democracy in China, a land of 1.2 billion people. Democracy already is responsible for the overpopulation there. It's all those elections, you see.
Yup, there I go responding to the commentary on one of the leftist media's smear jobs, (like, dont be so gullable guys, havent you learned their game yet ?) and heh boy do I lose the plot.
Back on track, the Chinese dont think like we do, the people I mean, and thats important to understanding the rulers as well.
You can start with how ideogramic languages work, unbeknowsnt to the lingistics chump Noam Chomsky, peoples with ideogramic languages (this includes Japan too) think differently, you can start at this root and work your way up from there.
Others perhaps can elaborate on just how Important "face" is to them, and how that affects relations, and the semi-fact (its not quite certain) that they got the "face" concept from the Japanese. Possibly an artifact of the occupation by Japan.
There are other stark differences, but ponder, that when the govt brings down the iron boot, and greases their tank tracks with blood, it has as much to do with "face" as it does the maintinance of control.
Do you know the key factor in when they decided to let us have our Spyplane and aircrew back?
It was when the walmart people told the PLA it was gonna hurt sales, that Americans was getting pissed, and boycot china, was in the air.
But we wasnt allowed to repair the plane and fly it out, we had to chop it up and float it home instead, and that was all about "Face".
Do not underestimate how important this is to them, they will defy logic, the will smite their own nose, to save "face".
>>Normal life is impossible without a little illegality: trading in the black market, "speculating", and such. As long as the activity is not overtly subversive or political, they'll probably get away with it.
This is very useful for the totalitarian authorities. Once everyone is breaking the law all the time just to survive, the police have cause to arrest anyone who they find inconvenient.