Topic: Fomenting Democracy
China is the new Soviet Union Speechmaking against Communist China. By China Support Network's Director Emeritus John Kusumi, at a large human rights rally welcoming the Human Rights Torch Relay as occurred on the Boston Common, Boston MA on Sunday, March 30 2008.by John Kusumi
(Centrist Liberal)
Friday, April 4, 2008
China is the new Soviet Union
Speech from joint rally for Human Rights Torch Relay; Boston Massachusetts, March 30 2008
Viewable at YouTube: http://youtube.com/watch?v=3HDcX7ibse4
Chinese Communism is killing people today. This simple statement is obvious to those who have watched the news out of Tibet during this month, which has been quite intense as for issues of China, human rights abuse, and the summer Olympic Games, which must not take place in Beijing, beginning August 8th.
America used to know that a nuclear-armed, communist superpower is a bad thing. But, especially for our young people, it has become important to have a refresher. Younger folks may not remember when the Soviet Union was America's enemy, and when certain things were widely and consistently upheld in America: national security, American values, and fundamental principles took precedence, and were more important than free trade. There was no free trade with the Soviet Union, and when they held Olympics in 1980, America boycotted the Games. America's media was "with the program, on the same page;" between America and the Soviet Union, the was no question and no doubt: They were on America's side.
We all were. There are always some in opposite positions politically, but Americans by and large were united in the Cold War with the Soviet Union. We all did -- what was best for national security -- which included no free trade with a nuclear-armed, communist superpower. As an aside, why is free trade bad with such a regime? Because it enriches the dictators, and all parts of their regime. When Tibetans have been shot this month, the bullets are financed by such money, as you yourself may have spent in Wal*Mart. When free trade means a free lunch for communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs that is a flawed and faulty policy. And indeed, this is why Tibetans are telling us to boycott products that are Made in China. The China Support Network, my group, agrees and stands with the Tibetans in the Boycott Made In China Coalition.
Dictatorships are only maintained by hurting people. There is no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship, although in Chinese history the Tang Dynasty is remembered like it was the good old days of just and fair rulers. Some Chinese would be happy to turn back the clock to the Tang Dynasty; but leading Chinese dissidents actually have the year 1947 on their minds. It is not literally possible to turn back the hands of time, but it would be possible to have a rollback of China's situation to 1947. That was two years before Communists came to power, and Chinese parties had conferred after the Second World War. They drew up a new Constitution to guide the new Republic of China, or ROC. That was a democratic Constitution; China did arrive at democracy in 1947. The entire reign of the Communist Party has been a rude interruption to Chinese democracy.
And that Constitution served to guide and govern Taiwan, a remnant of the ROC, for the past 61 years. Taiwan just had a presidential election last week. Taiwan is a splendid example of Chinese democracy, and congratulations are in order for the winner, Ma Ying-jeou.
I am also happy to greet a campaigner who is with us on today's program. Yang Jianli, the Boston-based Chinese dissident, recently spent five years as a prisoner in China. Yang Jianli, welcome home to freedom, and may freedom go with you on your next trip to China. Congratulations on one victory, and may more success come your way in the future.
I'd say that America's young people already know that a nuclear-armed, communist superpower is a bad thing. It's a dictatorship that is hurting and killing people. That's easy to learn, and it's plain to see. Who needs a reminder might be Washington, DC. They have been absolutely remiss about Communist China, its abuses, its spying, and its threats to national security. Washington simply likes to keep up appearances while the free trade goes on and on, building up a nuclear-armed, communist superpower.
The very least that America's politicians could do is to get behind a boycott or a change of venue for the Olympics. That's the least they can do, short of economic sanctions, which may be preferred by some Chinese dissidents. They understand that a regime of cunning, conniving, and treachery will only respect pressure and strength. To stop the killing in China, every kind of pressure is in order.
The West should pressure China -- the world's leading abuser of human rights -- and all of us, from the grass roots to the politicians, should pressure the IOC, the International Olympic Committee and its president, Jacques Rogge, to change the venue of these Olympics. Once again, I feel it is the least they can do in the West's halls of power.
Alright then, what is the least that Chinese politicians could do? China's politicians are now using Cultural Revolution rhetoric against the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans. Propaganda such as that is a laughable throwback to the Cultural Revolution, the time in China between 1966 and 1976.
I may feel that China's leaders should simply surrender to a regime change. However, short of that, there are other steps, and I'll name three: Stop the killing; release the prisoners; and talk to the Dalai Lama. It is the very least that Chinese leaders can do, and this is a call that is echoing all around the Western world, and from Chinese dissidents.
The intransigence of Beijing's top Communists is hardening the hard line attitudes of Beijing's opponents. I have worked to assemble the Freedom First, Olympics Second Coalition, and I bet that it will continue to grow, based on Beijing's embrace of evil.
My group, the China Support Network, is still here in the wake of the Tiananmen Square massacre. That is when we began to assist Chinese dissidents. When you are on the web, surf on over to www.chinasupport.net. And in this year's campaign, at the bottom line, our proposition is simple: Let's pressure the IOC to pressure China to stop the killing. --This campaign has its own web site: NoOlympics.org.
At this time, I want to present you with our next act: The band called Light Club is newly formed and making a debut appearance here. They have written a new song for our human rights situation, and so here and now, we are being treated to the first performance of the Freedom First, Olympics Second theme song. There may be one song or two which follow, and I thank them for being here. I thank the organizers once again, and please help me welcome -- Light Club.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 0 thumbs so far
2008 John Kusumi, all rights reserved.
Published: Friday, April 4, 2008
Last modified: Friday, April 4, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of John Kusumi only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. John Kusumi is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2008-04-04 18:15:21
Dear John,
I will reply to your first sentence of "Chinese Communism is killing people today" with the comment that "American Democracy is killing more people today than Chinese Communism." We lost 3,000 civilians on 9/11, over 4,000 US soldiers in Iraq alone, and probably by now killed well over 1,000,000 Iraqis, whether civilans or 'insurgents'. I reference you to my articles on the Iraq war.
Also, keep in mind that people in glass houses should not throw stones, and you are living in a glass house (civil rights-wise and economically as well). You could be arrested, striped of all your rights including right to a jury, habeas corpus, improper search, etc, etc. The lack of trade barriers and most favored nation trading status came from Our government. So are you really that free?
That said, I do see your points. It is never a good thing when people die. Please keep writing.
Jake, in reply to an entire article, in which a woman wrote similar sentiments elsewhere, I said this:
Faulty reasoning
Argumentation like that in the above article is intellectually sloppy, and actually crosses my "pet peeve" lines. Who is "we"? Could the author speak for herself? She surely doesn't speak for me, nor for my group the China Support Network, nor for the Freedom First, Olympics Second Coalition, nor for the Chinese democracy movement where those groups originate -- nor for our colleagues in the Tibetan freedom movement, nor persecuted Christians, nor persecuted Buddhists or Falun Gong practitioners, nor for others subject to persecution in China: Uighur Muslims, Chinese environmentalists, AIDS activists, human rights attorneys, journalists, and plain old pro-democracy political dissidents.
Actually, the author isn't alone; there is a common pattern in the logic here. My group began at the grass roots of America, when it was right after Tiananmen Square's bloody massacre and a wave of shock and revulsion went around the world. It was like watching TV and seeing Hurricane Katrina -- this was an eye opener; people sat up and paid attention; and many, many people wanted to help. Hence the China Support Network was born, and soon it connected with top leading Chinese dissidents, who escaped China and arrived in exile. There is a well reasoned campaign by Chinese dissidents, Tibetan freedom fighters, ourselves, and others who object to evil on the part of the Chinese government.
Now consider the nature of the logic above. In Step A, someone from our side (against evil) stands up and says "boycott the Olympics!" In Step B, a collectivist-minded critic like the above merely seizes the occasion to object, with a soapbox litany of criticizing the U.S. government. Are WE the U.S. government? No, we're human rights campaigners. The implication by the critic is that WE, as human rights campaigners, are wrong and should sit down and shut up.
What's literally true is that Step B has nothing to do with Step A. In other words, it is possible to criticize the U.S. government in its own right -- on the merits, the critic may have a point and there may be many things wrong and things to be critical of, if Washington DC is the point. However, in Step A, the point was Beijing China. Critics of this ilk "step on" the issue of OTHER ACTIVISTS; human rights campaigners looking for world improvement or social justice. The human rights issue becomes stepped on and used while the critic drags out a soapbox to lecture about Washington DC.
I can repeat that Step B has nothing to do with Step A. Furthermore, two wrongs do not make a right. Suppose that the critic is fighting against wrong #1, and the human rights campaigners are fighting against wrong #2. So, if the two critics kill each other off, does that solve the world's problems or make a right?
Who are the people who say 'boycott the Beijing Olympics'? Are they the architects of the Iraq war, or White House policy on civil liberties? No. I remember in 2001 on the day they announced that Beijing had won the host city status for these Olympics. My group sponsored a joint press conference, with Chinese dissidents, and at that occasion, they became the very first to call for a boycott of these 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Some of those Chinese dissidents are people who were shot at in Tiananmen Square. And you would say "Shut up!" to them? --Because why? Because the American government is terrible? (Doesn't that sound like your problem, not the Chinese dissidents' problem?) If anyone values what Thomas Jefferson did at the start of America, then they REALLY ought to value what the students did at Tiananmen Square: stand up and demand their liberty. It would be heartwarming if we could see American people getting behind the Chinese democracy movement and being supportive of the Olympic boycott.
That's like a return to our roots. It already happened in 1989 - that American people joined the China Support Network in the first place. However, if the writer has collectivist leanings, Thomas Jefferson was an individualist. America is indeed far away from its roots, and I am disappointed in argumentation like the above. --I agree that anyone has the right to criticize American evil. But, while doing that, it is not necessary to become an enabler of Chinese evil.
And, activists should have enough respect not to step on each other's causes. In fact, solidarity would be better. I'm enjoying the news from London, Paris, and San Francisco, where huge protests have stopped the Olympic torch relay. Kudos to those activists!
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 John Kusumi, all rights reserved.