Blogs » Politics » Japan launches “tits charity” to encourage people to donate
Blogs » Politics » Japan launches “tits charity” to encourage people to donate |
- Japan launches “tits charity” to encourage people to donate
- PREVIEWING THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ELECTION: Its Democratic Half
- Boy injured as frozen cola exploded
- The Most Famous Blogger You’ve Never Heard Of
- Huawei, ZTE Continue Playing D.C. Lobbying Game, But Where Are the Results?
- Playing Games in Dreamworld
- Lawyers Decry Draft Rules That Would Kick Social Media Out of Chinese Court Rooms
- Tibetan Teenagers Set Themselves on Fire in China
- Rumor Watch: Did Former Guangzhou Party Boss Try to Commit Suicide?
- China, India Press Each Other For Greater Access
- AIDS Patients Topple Government Gate
- Great American dupe (or dope?)
- For a Chinese Student of English, Learning to Forswear Perfection
- I Will Not Allow Minxin Pei to Underestimate My Cynicism
- The Daily Twit – 8/28/12: A Mishmosh of Maladies
- They Got the Same Shit Over There That We Got Here – Going Postal
- Chinese Style Romance
- China: Editor's Suicide Prompts Reflection, Reproach
- Apple vs. Samsung: IP and Consumer Choice
- China’s concubine culture is back
| Japan launches “tits charity” to encourage people to donate Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:20 PM PDT
On August 25 and 26, a special AIDS prevention camgaign was held by the TV program "24-Hour TV: Eroticism Saves the Earth" in Tokyo to encourage Japanese to make donations to fight AIDS with exposed breasts of AV models, according to ifeng. Any participants making a donation of 1000 yen to the charity can have a chance to grasp the models' boobs at the 10th campaign of the telethon that raised the fund annually to help prevent the spread of AIDS, with the slogans like "Stop! AIDS," and "Let's put on a condom." It was reported, as of the afternnon of August 26, the program had attracted over 4,690 contributors, and raised more than 4.2 million yen that doubled the amount fetched last year. Interestingly, some men made donations for 20 times throughout the campaign. All the money raised would be given to Japan Fundation for AIDS Prevention. The TV program added, they focued on AIDS among many social problems in Japan, because the reported AIDS cases have steadily increased in the country. This year, the program featured as many as 10 AV models for participants to choose from. |
| PREVIEWING THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ELECTION: Its Democratic Half Posted: 28 Aug 2012 10:42 PM PDT How times have changed. In Hong Kong's first election to allow universal suffrage for a minority of Legislative Council seats, pro-democracy politicians swept the field. They liked to call themselves liberals in those days and won all but one of the 18 seats being contested in 1991. So fearful were the powers-that-be of the havoc liberal majorities might wreck that not only was the Legislative Council's colonial-style complexity carved into Basic Law stone for post-colonial use, but proportional representation was decreed for all the seats directly elected by universal suffrage after 1997. The reason, said officials when challenged, was that in Hong Kong's nascent democracy, all kinds of people must be given a chance and pro-Beijing politicians would have none at all without proportional representation. APPORTIONING VOTES That method of allocating votes remains in use for half the Legislative Council: the 35 seats to be filled by direct election on September 9 (for the other half, see previous post). But in an ironic reversal of fortunes, it is now pan-democrats who are the beneficiaries of proportional representation while pro-establishment candidates are beginning to dream about the possibilities of life without it. Without it, pan-democrats might suffer the same fate at the Legislative Council level that they experienced in the District Councils election last November (Nov. 14, 2011 post). At that level, constituencies are small, each is represented by one councilor, and the first-past-the-post candidate wins a seat on one of Hong Kong's 18 District Councils. In contrast, votes for half the Legislative Council seats – the 35 filled by one-person-one-vote from the Geographic Constituencies – are apportioned within each of the five districts listed before (Aug. 20 post): The Geographic Constituencies: 5 districts, 35 seats, 67 lists, 216 candidates. Hong Kong Island: 7 seats 14 lists (pan-dems, 5; pro-establishment, 5; independent, 4) Kowloon East: 5 seats 9 lists (pan-dems, 4; pro-establishment, 2; independent, 3) Kowloon West: 5 seats 9 lists (pan-dems, 4; pro-establishment, 2; independent, 3) New Territories East: 9 seats 19 lists (pan-dems, 8; pro-establishment 6; independent, 5) New Territories West: 9 seats 16 lists (pan-dems, 8; pro-establishment, 6; independent, 2) The system works like so. The 35 legislators are elected directly by universal suffrage on a one-person-one-vote basis. But each person's vote is transferrable and allocated proportionally within each of the five districts. As for the candidates, they can run individually or as members of lists, in which case "excess" votes over and above what the first listed candidate needs to win a seat can be transferred to the second candidate on his/her list. Since the proportion of the total vote count needed to win a seat on Hong Kong Island is 14.3%, its seven seats will be filled by candidates in relation to that proportion of the total HK Island vote. If a "list" has only one candidate, all votes in excess of 14% will be "wasted." Otherwise, they will be transferred to the second candidate on the first winner's list. If no other candidate wins 14%, the district's remaining six seats will simply be filled in order by the candidates receiving the largest number of votes, regardless of how few. The second listed candidate will take his/her place in line along with all the others. If no candidate wins 14%, all seven seats will be filled in that order. As vote counting proceeds down the lists on Election Night (and into the early hours next day), the last seat in each district can be filled with only a small number of the full portion needed to win the first seat. PARTISAN GAME PLANS This arrangement is naturally conducive to a proliferation of small parties. There are even more now than there were in 2008 for the last election. Proportional representation also works nicely forHong Kong's great array of issue-oriented small-group activists (an aspect of the local political scene that extends far back in time to the 1949-1979 decades when people were always talking about political reform but never actually got around to it, for many reasons). The system encourages everyone to try their luck and provides an easy platform for publicizing causes, even when candidates know they have little hope of actually winning a seat. The game is open to any list (or any one candidate standing alone) with a HK$50,000 deposit, and nominating signatures from 100 registered voters in the district. The deposit is forfeited only by those who fail to win 3% of the total vote in the district.* Unfortunately, the system is also conducive to fragmentation and infighting, especially prevalent among pan-democrats. It can put them at a considerable disadvantage when competing with anything as big, well-organized, and disciplined as the Chinese Communist Party – especially since it's only the party's surrogates who are out in front orchestrating local operations (without ever actually admitting who and what they represent). In the beginning this didn't matter. Pan-democrats were winning virtually all the votes cast and could afford the luxury of their familiar happy-go-lucky small-group ways. Their proportion of the total vote began to shrink in the early 2000s, but still they didn't worry too much, due to the 60:40 pattern that developed. That means 60% for democrats and 40% for "pro-establishment" candidates (about 30% for pro-Beijing plus conservative others). Pan-democrats have comforted themselves during the past decade with a 60% share of the total vote count that they continued to receive in Legislative Council elections – allowing them to ignore the slow steady take-over by their opponents at the District Council level below. Additionally, pan-democrats had the back-up safety net of the single transferrable vote system which has benefited them especially by allowing their small parties and individual candidates to slip into the last seat in each district with only a few thousand votes. In 2008, one-time firebrand and top vote-getter Emily Lau won the last seat with only 33,000 votes in New Territories East where the total vote count was 361,000. She became a moderate shortly afterward and joined the Democratic Party. On Hong Kong Island, two pan-democrats benefited in the same way: Audrey Eu of the Civic Party and Cyd Ho, then an independent loner. The popular Eu was deliberately ranked second on her party's list in order to guarantee first-ranked party new-comer Tanya Chan a better chance of winning and hopefully give the party two seats, a risky strategy that just barely succeeded. Cyd Ho has since helped set up the new Labor Party. As a result, even though pan-democracy candidates did just barely meet their 60% threshold in 2008 (59.4% if all the also-rans are also counted), they were able to win 19 of the then 30 directly-elected seats in the Legislative Council. The pro-Beijing camp was especially chagrined at losing what it thought would be a safe seat for its party's second candidate on the Hong Kong Island list. In that district, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB) received 60,400 votes, which netted only one seat while the Civic Party's 82,600 votes elected two legislators. This year, pro-Beijing forces are preparing to fight fire with fire. At an open academic forum last spring, a DAB vice chairman, Horace Cheung, explained the strategic calculations that had resulted from its 2008 experience. The forum was co-sponsored by Hong Kong University and the U.S. National Democratic Institute, an organization that the local pro-Beijing press loves to hate (April 25, 2012 post). In the past, the DAB rarely showed up at such events. But on this occasion, Horace Cheung not only explained how they were aiming to win as many seats as possible on September 9. He also revealed that they were thinking big thoughts about ways of marginalizing small parties and moving Hong Kong toward a "two-party system." Cheung used the example of New Territories East where the DAB had received 100,000 votes in 2008 but won only two seats. In contrast, the Democratic Party's two lists together received fewer votes (86,000 total), but they too won two seats. The lesson we learned, he said, was that under the present system many lists can win more seats with fewer votes. For that reason, they are running more lists themselves and their ally, the Federation of Trade Unions (that already controls three Functional Constituency seats) is also contesting with its own separate lists. The union is fielding its own candidates separately from the DAB in four of Hong Kong's five geographic constituencies and in the all-city super seat constituency as well. In years past, the FTU with its tens-of-thousands of affiliated union members had performed mainly back-up canvassing and get-out-the-vote support work for the DAB. This year they are making a concerted effort to translate that supporting role into additional pro-Beijing Legislative Council seats. The FTU claims 300+ affiliated unions. The DAB now has 20,000 members making it Hong Kong's largest political party by far. The FTU and DAB have always worked closely together focusing, respectively, on working and middle class concerns. But Cheung then went on to share some of the DAB's thoughts about the long term. They had now learned how to win direct elections in the small and medium sized constituencies that elect district-level representatives and Legislative Councilors. The next step, was to see how well pro-Beijing candidates could do on a straightforward all-city basis with the five new super seats. These seats will be elected by all voters with the entire city serving as a single constituency (Aug. 20 post). The innovation, he said, would provide valuable experience for Hong Kong's future political reform. Instead of trying to phase out the Legislative Council's Functional Constituency seats by replacing them with indirectly-elected District Councilors (as they tried to do with the 2010 reform project), the DAB is now thinking that the all-city super seats can point the way forward. Small parties can't win a super seat, noted Cheung, so if Hong Kong could replace the FCs with super-seat legislators, it would pave the way toward emergence of a "two-party" system.** In 1997, proportional representation was introduced as a crutch for pro-Beijing candidates to lean on. Today, the small parties it encourages have become the mainstay of continuing pan-democratic victories and the September 9th election is being fought on that basis. CAMPAIGN ISSUES Unfortunately, such long-term strategic thoughts are not part of anyone's platform or campaign trail stump-speech. DAB leaders rarely discuss their plans in public. If they did, pan-democrats would doubtless worry less about mobilizing their people to get-out-the-vote. Such a prospect as Horace Cheung described might impart the same sense of urgency that defensive pro-Beijing loyalists have always been able to muster among partisans for their come-from-behind candidates. As it is, pan-democrats like to speak in general terms … high-sounding variations on the theme of "Hong Kong values" and universal suffrage … while assuming voters will get the point. Everyone does. They just don't necessarily see the urgency of casting a ballot without some additional clear and pressing reason. There were such reasons in 1998 and 2004, when turnouts peaked at 53% and 55.6% of all registered voters. This year the chief hot-button political issue is "mainland-ization," epitomized by the government's plan to introduce national political education for all students (July 31 post). Whether that plus the "consciousness-raising" effect of Hong Kong's recent political reform and Chief Executive election campaigns will provide the necessary incentive remains to be seen. What can be seen is the way pro-Beijing candidates and their conservative allies avoid direct political questions. They have responded in support of the new national education requirement when asked directly. But a forum for the seven super-seat candidates was more typical. Democratic Party chairman Albert Ho challenged his three pro-Beijing opponents to raise their hands if they agreed with him on three controversial mainland-related issues. All three failed to respond one way or the other. The three are Chan Yuen-han (FTU), Lau Kong-wah (DAB), and Starry Lee Wai-king (DAB). Their published circulars and platform statements are even more revealing for revealing nothing at all about their political beliefs and plans for Hong Kong. Unionist Chan, known as her camp's "queen of votes," is circulating an impressive platform statement full of policy positions on labor, housing, welfare, health care, and economic wellbeing for all … but not a word about any of Hong Kong's pressing political concerns. Ditto Lau Kong-wah. Starry Lee's campaign material mentions "universal suffrage" only in passing. To find forcefully-stated political concerns up front and center, voters can turn to either People Power or League of Social Democrats candidates, led respectively by "Mad Dog" Raymond Wong and "Long Hair" Leung Kwok-hung. Their radical good intentions ended in the District Councils election debacle last November. But if those two parties saw any urgency in winning as many Legislative Council seats as possible for pan-democrats, they would not have opted to run against each other (and against like-minded but less flamboyant Civic and Labor Party candidates) in all five districts. At least one seat already looks like being lost to the opposition as a result (in Kowloon East). The Democratic Party and especially its chairman Albert Ho have been working overtime to recover from the badgering they received after his 2010 compromise decision on political reform. His participation in the Chief Executive election campaign was part of that effort and so is the party's election platform being carried into battle by lists in all districts. Its credentials as a mainstay of pan-democrats' devotion to the cause of human rights in China remain untarnished and are now a plus for the party exploited whenever possible. Additionally, the first two points of the party's 15-point platform aim to remind voters that the party has not given up the struggle in Hong Kong either: (1) no Article 23 national security legislation until comprehensive political reform has been achieved; (2) safeguard Hong Kong's "core values," especially the freedom of all forms of political expression in accordance with the "one-country, two-systems" promise. Other points address labor and livelihood issues, not unlike the pro-Beijing camp except that the latter (ironically) avoids "class war" talk against tycoons, property hegemony, and the wealth gap. STRATEGIC VOTING Probably there are two good reasons for the lackluster turnout rates that have determined past elections and may do the same for this one. Pollsters seem never to ask people why they don't vote, but one reason must surely be the lackluster nature of the Legislative Council itself. In Hong Kong's "executive-led" Basic Law system, the government proposes and the legislature debates and usually approves. This is because it is not just the electoral arrangements that were designed to keep democrats at bay. A split-level system (intended to simulate a "two house" legislature) was created whereby the conservative-dominated Functional Constituency legislators and directly-elected proportionally-representative legislators vote as a single house on all government bills and initiatives. These pass with a simple majority of all members present This doesn't necessarily give the government automatic victories but it helps. On their own, however, legislators cannot move any substantive policy proposal without the executive's permission and none that concern public expenditure, political structures, or government operations (Basic Law, Article 74). For the most part, only symbolic proposals and motions can be raised from the floor. And all of those must be voted on separately, by each "house," which gives conservatives effective veto power. As far as pan-democrats are concerned, all of this means that the Legislative Council is essentially a platform for debate only and increasingly for frustrated protest gestures. Hong Kongers are always taking to the streets, says a note attached to the Democratic Party's platform, reminding everyone that without meaningful political reform Hong Kongers have no other means of making their voices heard. Unlike 2004 when the public was galvanized by opposition to the government's national security legislation, pan-democrats can no longer even dream of winning half of all Legislative Council seats. Campaigning pan-democrats today are pleading with voters to elect a scant 24 legislators (total, including a few Functional Constituency seats), which is about the most they can realistically hope to win. That number also represents the one-third minority needed to veto future legislation on political reform, as mandated by the Basic Law. Super-majorities are not required for anything else. Hence pan-democrats have already, in effect, ceded everything else to the majority that will be returned by the alliance of pro-Beijing working class and conservative big business interests. A second probable reason for Hong Kong's habitual lackluster turnout must be the lack of much opportunity to make a difference. Pollsters have been busy throughout the past month and Ming Pao Daily has been providing the most regular updates (Aug. 6, 7, 13, 20; also, youtube.com/watch?v=JKpUb3Te1iU). Unless there is a major groundswell one way or the other, the contest on September 9 will essentially be decided by who can fill the final seat in each of the five districts and who will win the last of the five new super seats. Nevertheless, it is at this point that the fun begins and it's called pei-piao 配票 or strategic voting. Hong Kong University's Public Opinion Program recently asked voters if they would pei-piao and 72% of the respondents said no. But for reasons known only to the pollster, the question was asked in a strange way: if your camp issued instructions based on your HK ID card number or birth date would you be willing to pei-piao?*** Any such intrusive order would undoubtedly be resented. Had the question been phrased differently, the answer would undoubtedly have been different as well since it has become a favorite practice. For everyone who is interested in the outcome, intends to vote, and regards themselves as being committed to one camp or the other, the polls are now essential reading. Consequently, people tend not to decide until they have seen the last pre-Election Day print-outs and consulted one last time with friends, relatives, and anyone who can (hopefully) be trusted. Ming Pao's August 20 poll showed about one-quarter of the respondents still undecided in all five districts. Before making their final decisions, partisans (on both sides) are waiting to see which candidates on their side: not only need the extra votes, but are also in a position to benefit most from a few more. Of course, that's also why pollsters turn up so many undecided respondents. Partisans would not want to show their hands too soon … (to be continued). * www.elections.gov.hk – "Legislation" ** www.ourtv.hk — April 21, 2012 forum, panel 2. *** http://hkupop.hku.hk/english/features/lc2012/dc2012/datatables.html#2greatest
|
| Boy injured as frozen cola exploded Posted: 28 Aug 2012 01:15 PM PDT
A young boy from Shanghai sustained serious cuts to his cheek, after a can of Pepsi cola exploded when he took it out from a freezer and opened it on July 25. The explosion ruptured the can, and forced the lid to cut through the boy's left cheek. As a result, the young victim got 31 stitches on the face of his cheek and 7 other stitches inside the checck. Respoding to the accident, a staff from Shanghai Pepsi-Cola company said they have made a report to the company. But as of press time, Pepsi hasn't yet released any comments publicly. However, it was learned it was not the only case that people got injured in cola explosion. A can of Soda can explode in high temperature, as well as in freezing temperature. When the soda freezes, it expands and pressurizes the gas inside the container, which would eventually strain or burst it. |
| The Most Famous Blogger You’ve Never Heard Of Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:03 PM PDT In the Atlantic, Jeffrey Wasserstrom looks at the work of Han Han and asks why he isn't a household name in the West, despite being perhaps the world's most popular blogger:
Read much more by and about Han Han via CDT. © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Huawei, ZTE Continue Playing D.C. Lobbying Game, But Where Are the Results? Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:11 PM PDT
On the one hand, this is exactly what these companies should be doing. They are trying to change minds up on Capitol Hill, and you can't do that with wishful thinking. As with everything else in D.C., it requires money, lots of it. I also wonder how much cash these companies are throwing around on Congressional campaigns. I would bet that donations are being made, and done so indirectly. U.S. politicos want the money, but they probably don't want anyone to know that it's coming from Huawei or ZTE. Lucky for them U.S. campaign laws allow for anonymous donations to certain types of political action committees these days. Good old American corruption at its finest. It looks as though Huawei is dramatically increasing their budget, which I suppose is better late than never. On the other hand, neither company should expect much this year, given a U.S. election cycle where China bashing is seen as a winning proposition for members of both political parties. Additionally, Huawei has yet another patent dispute in front of the ITC, so if anyone on the Hill wants to bloviate about IP infringement, that issue is teed up and ready to go. If you spend the money and buy the right people, you will eventually get what you want in D.C. For these companies, though, I have a feeling this will turn into a long-term strategy. And by the way, why is that Marbridge news blurb attributed to the U.S. Senate? Why do they have this information, and if so, why is it public? Is that all normal, or is someone in the Senate playing PR games? Just wondering. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:51 PM PDT Xu Youzhen, head designer of the online game Dreamworld (梦想世界) and chief manager of its parent company, Duoyi, vents on Weibo about an enervating phone call he received from a local official looking to get ahead virtually:
The government is often in collusion with online gaming companies. Reports surfaced last year about large subsidies for the industry. The state gives even more support through "gold farming"—prisoners are forced to play games in order to earn virtual money and goods for players abroad. One prisoner told the Guardian, "Prison bosses make more money forcing inmates to play games than they do forcing people to do manual labour." In this light, a government official asking for a boost from the game creator himself is not so far-fetched. Via SneezeBloid. Translation by Irene Hsiao. © Anne.Henochowicz for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Lawyers Decry Draft Rules That Would Kick Social Media Out of Chinese Court Rooms Posted: 28 Aug 2012 01:22 PM PDT
Section 249 of the draft rules forbids most trial participants from bringing sound recorders, cameras or cell phones to court, and prohibits real-time reporting of trials via email, blogs or microblogs. In effect, the regulation gives a death sentence to real-time online trial broadcasting via social media, a burgeoning practice which promised to be a force for greater transparency in China's normally opaque judicial system. Writing on Sina Weibo, China's Twitter, attorney Cui Jianan (@女律师崔家楠) argues that the draft rule encroaches on citizens' right to know, making transparency and justice harder to guarantee: "The Supreme Court's interpretation illegally deprives citizens of the right to supervise open trials. It makes open trials secret and protects under-the-table dealing."[1] For attorneys, more threatening is Section 250, which grants courts the right to unilaterally ban attorneys who "severely disrupt court order" from legal practice for up to a year, and to "advise" the Justice Bureau to ban attorneys from legal practice permanently. Lawyers infuriated by the provision were quick to take to social media. As attorney You Feizhu (@游飞翥) claims on Weibo, "The new Judicial Interpretation can be called the Defenders' Right Restriction Act!" The bar regards the regulation as the court's illegitimate attempt to expand its power vis-a-vis the legislature. @刘晓强2011's comment is representative: "The Judicial Interpretation should only be the elaboration of what the Criminal Procedure Law says; it cannot create provisions which are not granted by the Law. The addition of new punishments infringes the legislative rights of the NPC."[2] Attorney Chen Youxi (@陈有西) adds that according to the Law on Lawyers (律师法), the courts are not entitled to ban attorneys from legal practice. "The courts are in charge of court order, but cannot interfere with lawyers' right of legal practice, which is the province of the Justice Department and the Bar Association."[3] Legal professor Xie Youping (@谢佑平) even alleges that the Supreme Court lacks the right to interpret the Criminal Procedure Law. "Theoretically, judicial organs cannot interpret the Criminal Procedure Law, which is inherently a law to restrict their power. The judicial organs are the controlled, instead of the controller, of procedural laws. "[4] Notably, the Judicial Interpretation excepts judges and prosecutors (as opposed to defense lawyers) from the requirement that "participants" leave sound recorders, cameras and cell phones outside of court, and does not say what would happen if judges and prosecutors disrupt court order. It seems clear that if implemented, the provisions would further tilt an already-skewed balance of power between prosecutors and defense lawyers. Some have expressed pessimism about the future of the criminal justice system if the Judicial Interpretation becomes effective. @杨阳CUPL-sunshine is one of them: "Considering that the rate of defenders' appearance in criminal courts is so low, the addition of such an arbitrary regulation would possibly make it harder for criminal attorneys to work, edging more attorneys out of criminal defense." [5]  Li Qinghong's case was closely watched on social media Online, attorneys have reached evident consensus that the Supreme Court is using the Judicial Interpretation to counteract the lawyers' increasingly intense fight against corruption in China's judicial system, a battle evidenced by the Li Zhuang case, the Beihai case, the Changshu case and the Li Qinghong case. Zhang Jun, the vice chief judge of the Supreme Court, was dismissive of such efforts, stating in May that "a few immoral lawyers insulted the court, severely disrupted court order and talked nonsense," calling the lawyers fighting hard in the forementioned cases "troublemakers." Some netizens have taken to calling Section 249 and 250 of the Judicial Interpretation the "Zhang Jun Bill." Netizens are also annoyed that the Supreme Court limits the discussion of the draft only to the court system. @福君律师's opinion is typical: "When the Criminal Procedure Law was amended, the NPC solicited public opinion. However, the Supreme Court [then] closed the door of discussion to the public. Many lawyers wish the Supreme Court would announce the draft and make discussion public."[6] Unless the Supreme Court is willing to listen to public opinion, their reasoning goes, the bar can hardly defend itself against unjust regulation. Instead of surrendering, lawyers are trying every possible channel to have their voice heard. On August 20, the Bar Association of Jiangsu Province sent a statement to the Supreme Court, listing eight sections which should be amended. Five days later, lawyer Qin Xiyan (@秦希燕律师) and Chi Susheng (@迟夙生律师), who are also members of the National People's Congress, announced on Sina Weibo that they would submit a joint statement urging the NPC to stand up against the provisions. Footnotes (? returns to text)
|
| Tibetan Teenagers Set Themselves on Fire in China Posted: 28 Aug 2012 12:43 PM PDT Two more Tibetans have died outside Kirti Monastery in Aba County, Sichuan, after setting themselves on fire in protest again Beijing's policies in Tibet. Exile Tibetan groups say the deaths mark the 51st self-immolation since 2009. The Guardian reports on a news release from London-based Free Tibet:
Read about the previous self-immolations by Tibetans, via CDT. © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Rumor Watch: Did Former Guangzhou Party Boss Try to Commit Suicide? Posted: 28 Aug 2012 10:50 AM PDT  Former Guangzhou Party Boss: Fallen Star? This S-election year may be a dangerous one for local party bosses in China, when the country's ruling Communist Party does its once-in-a-decade house cleaning. After rumors of Chongqing party boss Bo Xilai's downfall turned out to be true, the social media rumor sharks are circling Zhang Guangning (张广宁), the former party boss of Guangzhou, one of the largest and most important cities in China. Rumor has it that Zhang tried to commit suicide by jumping off a building after being investigated for corrupt dealings during the 2010 Asian Games, which Guangzhou hosted. Some netizens say Zhang tried to commit suicide along with his secretary and hurt his legs, while others insist that only Zhang's secretary tried to jump, but her attempt led to an investigation into Zhang's dealings. In December 2011, Zhang ceased to be the Guangzhou party secretary due to "age and term change factors" but awaited "other assignments," according to an official press release. Zhang has received no assignment in 2012, however, leading to speculations about his fate. However, it is the political fortunes of Wang Yang, the provincial party boss of Guangdong and widely viewed as a champion of liberal policies in China, that have stirred the most discussion on social media. Many seem to believe that Wang started the investigation into Zhang's affairs, and it may be part of Wang's attempt to earn political capital ahead of the 18th Party Congress to be held in the fall. If his star is on the rise, Wang may get a seat on the Standing Committee and head the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the organization responsible for investigating corruption within the Party. Regardless whether the rumors are true, some Guangzhou locals seem to believe Zhang had it coming. Writing on Sina Weibo, China's Twitter, one commented, "This is payback. The Asian Games spent four years worth of Guangzhou's budget." Another agreed, "I heard this rumor about a month ago when I was having my dim sum, but the news was suppressed. Zhang's white elephant projects destroyed so much of Guangzhou's culture! Those were Guangzhou's roots!" Another just wants to see a good show: "Guangdong is going to have an earthquake! Let's get a chair and watch what happens." |
| China, India Press Each Other For Greater Access Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:45 AM PDT While Chinese firms have been buying U.S. firms amid the economic slowdown, China and India have pressed each other for greater market access at a meeting between the countries' trade ministers, Reuters reports:
Despite this meeting, Market Watch reports the China-India talks have little to offer in tackling the trade gap:
China and India have been strategic rivals in the past, but India has invited Chinese companies to invest in its manufacturing zones, New York Daily News adds:
Aside from investing in the manufacturing zones, China plans to import more Indian commodities, according to China Daily:
© Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| AIDS Patients Topple Government Gate Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:29 AM PDT As the AIDS mortality rate in China has dropped, other reports found people with AIDS in China were denied hospital care. The Associated Press reports about 300 patients and their relatives toppled the main gate of a government building at a protest due to unmet demands for financial assistance:
As the blood-selling scandal continues to affect China, a man was reportedly pricked by an HIV infected needle inside a taxi. From China Daily:
According to The Times of India, there has been a big increase in AIDS cases among Chinese over 50 years old:
See also Progress and Shortcomings in China's Fight Against AIDS, via CDT. © Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Great American dupe (or dope?) Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:33 AM PDT
One of the greatest American heroes in recent memory has lately fallen from grace. Lance Armstrong was considered one of the greatest sportsmen in the world and his story of coming back from cancer to win the Tour de France inspired millions. He was seen as an All American hero embodying everything Americans value: hard work, determination, charisma, and moral character. So when the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) found that he had cheated by using performance enhancing drugs, the reactions of the US public was predictable. It was predictable because we know how effectively the media works in a society with a cult-like mentality.
It is a cult of personality that made Armstrong who he is. Like all the pop images of people the media creates, it has a shelf-life longer than is warranted. His image has a momentum which leaves reality behind. People will continue to think he is a hero despite the facts. The media will continue to represent him as a hero because he is their creation and like all media darlings, he must be protected at all costs. Reports like this are common in the US media trying to cast doubt on the damning evidence against Armstrong (positive drug tests for a host of banned substances and even a blood transfusion using the most sophisticated detection methods available to science and ten eye witnesses who were his teammates and coaches). Or this NYT article which makes the outright false claim that he has never failed any drug test. The media also continues to paint him in a relatively positive light or even shamelessly demand that he be made into an exception so that he will not be punished. More telling are the comments in these stories from posters supporting Armstrong. They display fierce, obstinate refusal to accept the facts of the matter. We live in a culture where the public is at the whims of the media. All the evidence cannot destroy a media-made image in the minds of the masses no matter how contrary to reality that image is. Once it is created it is nearly impossible to kill. But negative portrayals also have the same shelf life. The masses cannot get over demonizing or denigrating images either. They have been inculcated by the media to see someone or something in a certain way which becomes written in stone. Contrast Armstrong's case with the baseless character assassination carried against someone who has no history of positive drug tests or other evidence of cheating, Ye Shiwen. The media damned her before any evidence came out while Armstrong continues to receive positive support after. The negative image of Ye as a cheater or all Chinese athletes as cheaters is just as difficult to destroy as the positive image of Armstrong. Both are created independently of the facts and both will live on in the minds of Americans dupes. |
| For a Chinese Student of English, Learning to Forswear Perfection Posted: 27 Aug 2012 04:36 PM PDT In third grade, I had my first private English tutoring lesson. My teacher was a 21-year old English major at Peking University. "Say 'Thank you.' Xie xie—Thank you." "S…ank you." "It's not 'sank you.'" She leaned over, tucking a strand of her glossy black hair behind her ear: "Th—ank you. Stick your tongue out, between your teeth." "Th—sank you," I muttered, my tongue shyly sliding back the instant I stuck it between my teeth. "Look at my mouth," she leveled her face to mine, stuck an inch of her tongue out of her mouth and hissed: "Th—th—ank you." Her eyes fixed on me.
My dad, who had been sitting at the sofa behind an opened newspaper, sighed "Why is it so hard?" as he tossed the paper aside. The clock ticked loudly. The one-hour lesson turned into a hide-and-seek game between me, and this common but bedeviling English word. By the end, my cheeks ached and the tip of my tongue hurt. Dad and mom stood at the door to see off the teacher. "We are so sorry! She is just nervous," they laughed, rubbing their hands. I was still sitting by the desk with my back facing the door, repeating the phrase to myself: "Thank you, thank you, thank you…" The words were now flowing with ease, but it was too late. I kicked the leg of the chair and bit my tongue. Months and years after that first lesson, further along on my journey of English study, I find myself often thinking of that evening, of the girl in third grade struggling to pronounce that alien, yet most basic English syllable. I had left her there sitting by the desk, I thought, as I moved on to recite English passages in middle school, to transfer to an American high school at 17, and to attend Yale, where I wrote papers on Jane Austen and the Canterbury Tales. After years spent flipping through flashcards, I saw the gibberish on novel pages gradually transform into compelling narrative; after hundreds of TOEFL listening practice sets and season after season of Friends, a favorite show for Chinese learning American English, the jumble of sticky syllables now obediently group themselves into meaningful phrases and sentences as they pass by my ears. Yet there are other moments. At the discussion table in my college English seminar, or in the crowd of a Friday night happy hour, the air suddenly feels thicker, my tongue heavier. I find myself haunted by an uneasiness I remember from my first English lesson, an uneasiness, I've found out by talking to others, shared by many advanced foreign language speakers. *** The awkwardness of opening our mouths stalks almost all of us as language beginners. The most mundane utterances take painful deliberation, as we orchestrate our facial muscles to pronounce those new syllables. The daily conversations are limited to short, rehearsed exchanges, the ones we have spent hours memorizing from textbooks. Meeting my American friends for the first time, I wanted to describe to them, say, the delicious jianbing sold in the alley next to my childhood apartment. After groping in vain for the right vocabulary, I shook my head and asked, instead, if they had been to my hometown, Beijing. Don't give up, we tell ourselves, because we know hard work always pays off. Soon enough, tireless repetitions begin to loosen our jaws and relax our cheeks. Confusing sentence structures start to take root in our mind as we apply them time after time in our speech. As diligent practice knocks over the original barriers in language study, our learning starts to race forward. The stock of vocabulary piles higher every day; each new idiom gives our speech a little more native touch. We toy with the new language as if it were a tool, excited with its novelty and eager to test out its functionalities. We search for the right word to spill out the flood of thoughts we've been forced to hold back. We toss out phrases and sentences, stumbling, stuttering, but determined to speak. "You cut the watermelon skin into slices, burn them in a hot pot of water and wait until they cool down and then you fridge them…" My right hand imitated the cleaver and left hand acted as the cutting board before I cupped them into the shape of a pot—I was describing to my college roommates our home recipe for a dessert made with watermelon rind. It was a Friday evening in the first month of our freshman year in college. We lingered in the dining hall after dinner. Sitting across the table, Julia cocked her head to listen, nodded in understanding as her smile grew wider. Sarai nudged me and laughed: "Burn them in water? Helen, you boil them!" "Ah, I knew it! It just came out." "Also, by fridge you mean 'put them in a fridge?'" "Yeah…" "Well, fridge isn't a verb. You put them in a fridge…" I laughed and shrugged. "Thanks! Anyways, you know what I meant," before diving back into my rambling. *** After years of hard work, the thrill of gaining fluency in a new language can be intoxicating: We giddily accost strangers in street parks, and proudly announce the names of our favorite dishes in local restaurants. Like riding a bike and rushing down a slope, we loose our hands from the handlebars and close our eyes to enjoy a sense of liberation — until the bumpiness of the road sets in, for the first time. "Hey Sarai. Can I borrow some changes for the laundry?" "Borrow some change, not changes." Sarai corrected me as she dropped four quarters in my palm. "Oh, thanks." I repeated the phrase silently to myself a few times, and wondered how it had escaped me for so long. Sitting in the laundry room, I stared at my clothes spinning in the washing machine. How long has my language study been spinning in circles, I asked myself, rife with petty negligence invisible to me? It may take an artist months before he starts to recognize the exquisite brushstrokes on a dazzling masterpiece, or a violinist years before she begins to pick up the subtle chords in a grand symphony. Somewhere along the road of our language study, we learn to use our sharpened senses to examine our own speech. Those mistakes, small though they may be, sneer back at us in the mirror of our newfound self-reflection. We avert our eyes, but can't drive those imperfections out of our mind. Slowly, the realization starts to keep us from light-heartedly throwing the advanced vocabulary we just learned into our speech, or from jumping unreservedly into a fast-paced conversation. The flooding urge to speak dries into a creek, navigating itself meticulously around potential error. *** I sat at the discussion table of my English seminar, my course packet open in front of me, the pages a sea of highlighted passages and scribbled notes. I had spent the night before pondering every sentence in the reading material, weaving together eloquent responses for the discussion questions our professor had passed to us before class. Now, surrounded by the chatter of my classmates, I tried to tune out the noise and rehearse the answers in my mind one last time. "So who wants to start?" The professor glanced around the classroom, which fell silent for a moment. I opened my mouth, but no words came out. Is my answer well articulated? Is it going to make sense to my classmates? Having repeated it to myself for so many times, I could no longer tell, not in this stifling silence. I guess I'll wait, I told myself, and throw it in at an interval between my classmates' answers. I'll just jump onto the train after it picks up speed. But the train flashed by in a blink. I hesitated each time I had a chance to latch on, swallowing my words right before they came out. Before I knew it, the discussion was over, and I walked out of the classroom feeling like I had just lost a battle against myself. Once again, I was my third-grade self, sitting next to the tutor and tripping over the simplest syllable. This time, however, it was not the tutor's gaze that tied my tongue. Once deaf toward the difference between my speech and those of others, my trained ears can now hear the language on a more nuanced level. It is an ability that can be exhilarating as well as intimidating for advanced language speakers, for it motivates us to strive for more precision in our speech, but also shackles our mind by overloading it with rules and restrictions: As we aim to be correct, each attempt to communicate becomes a minefield to cross. I miss "burning the watermelon skin in water," I murmured to myself. *** In the evening after my first English lesson, as my parents stood at the door apologizing profusely for my disappointing performance, the tutor shook her head: "It's OK. The first lesson is always a hurdle. I'm sure next time will be better." Hearing her heading down the stairs, I jumped off the chair, dashed to the door and squeezed myself through my parents. "TH–ANK YOU!" I yelled to her back, biting the tip of my tongue hard between my teeth. She stopped on the stairs and turned back, a smile blooming across her face. "Thanks. Thank you!" She waved. I stood there as she walked away, the rhythmic click-clack of her heels echoing in the hallway. |
| I Will Not Allow Minxin Pei to Underestimate My Cynicism Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:09 AM PDT Minxin Pei's latest column, "China in the Eye of the Beholder," is all about how Westerners are fooled by China's leaders:
Pei then goes on to state that between Westerners and Chinese people, the latter are in a much better position to evaluate their leaders:
OK, hold on there a second. While I don't necessarily think of myself as a "China Hand," I have been around the hutong a few times, and I can tell you with some authority that most expat "China Hands" are jaded, cynical and possess excellent bullshit detectors. They are also not likely to be easily impressed with the usual tricks used to seduce foreigners and hardly ever do any cheerleading. I for one rarely believe anything anyone tells me. Come to think of it, this explains why my wife is so fond of hurling cutlery and glassware at me. Pei's article is all about businessmen, and I think his use of the term "China Hands" and focus on folks over here for a "considerable" amount of time was a mistake. In my experience, the foreigners most likely to fall for the China leadership song and dance are the guys who come over here for a short period of time (anywhere from a week to a year), talk to a few officials who sound reasonably intelligent, and assume that everything they heard in terms of policy reform is: 1) true; and 2) likely to be adopted. We could call this the Tom Friedman Syndrome. It's possible that Pei regularly runs into naive business types whose experience with the system here has been pretty good. That's definitely possible, and if your life revolves around your job, then that positive experience will bleed over to your overall impressions of the country. It's also possible that Pei talks to multinational executives who are afraid to voice their honest opinions of China for fear of repercussions. Either way, expats are some of the most cynical folks I've ever met (even compared to your average Chinese person, which is saying a lot), and to mistakenly lump us in with businessmen on short-term junkets to China is neither fair nor accurate. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us |
| The Daily Twit – 8/28/12: A Mishmosh of Maladies Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:06 AM PDT Today we've got the full range of China stories. From the environment to legal reform, IP infringement to nationalism and violence, we've got a little of everything. Guardian: Japanese flag torn from ambassador's car in Beijing — The juvenile antics of the South China Sea dispute are ongoing, with yet another genius move by a "patriot" here in Beijing. Lovely. Most amusing, the Global Times even came up with a quick Op/Ed saying how stupid this vandalism was. I'm shocked. The Diplomat: Breaking the Ice: China's Emerging Arctic Strategy — The next frontier. Hopefully there won't be stupid territorial claims, but I wouldn't bet on it. Global Times: Hebei lake sees fish decimated due to 'lack of oxygen' — Fishermen vs. local government on what actually caused this. Sounds to me like it was either direct (dumping) or indirect (runoff) pollution. Either way, it highlights pollution enforcement problems. China Daily: Draft law stresses govt role in environmental protection — More federalism tensions at play here. Minxin Pei: China in the Eye of the Beholder — Have Westerners been hoodwinked by Chinese leaders as to the latter's professionalism and competence? Marbridge: Youku Tudou Faces Insider Trading Probe — Not exactly a surprise. Mega-high profile China M&A deal. Yeah, I'd expect some insider trading. CBS News: China AIDS patients topple gate of gov't office — More health care issues and a dispute with a local government. As I said, we're covering all the bases here today. Wall Street Journal: Warning from China Film Watchdog: Not Enough 'Co' in Co-Productions — China is worried that foreign film studios are taking advantage of the co-production regime. China Daily: Trademark speculators bet on Olympic Games — Your daily dose of IP infringement, specifically trademark squatting. Guardian: Domain name disputes hit record high as brands defend virtual shop doorways — While the Olympics and sports have been motivating trademark squatters, e-commerce has done the same thing for cybersquatters. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| They Got the Same Shit Over There That We Got Here – Going Postal Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:30 AM PDT
Compare and contrast with last week's atrocity in New York City:
Designer of women's accessories? No wonder he went nuts. Both of these incidents can be accurately placed into the "Going Postal" category. You may not be old enough to remember this, kids, but the term "Going Postal," which has been bastardized to mean any sort of uncontrolled outburst of anger, originally stems from folks who did so in post offices. To the Wiki Machine:
Ah, the good old days. China has had its fair share of work-related murder sprees, although most of them involve psychos with big knives. Don't let the higher numbers in the Jinan incident make you think that the U.S. isn't serious about body count. The New York incident was an anomaly; we usually do our best to push the stats up into the double digits. Why do you think we allow mental patients to buy machine guns with magazines so large that they have to carry them around in wheelbarrows? That being said, with the Jinan immolation, China does deserve style points. I mean, the guy in New York used a handgun, which is hardly original. But bursting into a board room with a can of gasoline, dousing everyone and throwing a match? Let me tell you, that's some Keyser Söze gangsta shit. Not that I'm encouraging it, of course. So who wins in the Going Postal sweepstakes? Look, I don't want to diss China or anything, but the U.S. has been in this business for a long time; we've even lost American presidents to disgruntled workers. We're the originator of Going Postal, the world leader, and we're not likely to relinquish this status anytime soon, even if we have to arm every single U.S. resident with a bazooka. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Posted: 28 Aug 2012 01:08 AM PDT Jing Gao from Ministry of Tofu has translated a Chinese video that explains the material conditions of love relation in China. Written by Oiwan Lam · comments (0) |
| China: Editor's Suicide Prompts Reflection, Reproach Posted: 28 Aug 2012 12:50 AM PDT Xu Huaiqian, the chief editor of the People's Daily's "Earth" supplement committed suicide last week on 22 of August, 2012. He once said during his lifetime that what pained him was that what he dared to think he dared not say, what he dared to say he dared not write, and what he dared to write he dared not publish. (via China Media Project)
The number one cause for suicide is untreated depression. Depression is treatable and suicide is preventable. You can get help from confidential support lines for the suicidal and those in emotional crisis. Visit Befrienders.org to find a suicide prevention helpline in your country. Written by Oiwan Lam · comments (0) |
| Apple vs. Samsung: IP and Consumer Choice Posted: 28 Aug 2012 01:34 AM PDT
Several readers wrote comments to the effect of "You idiot, don't you understand what "Intellectual Property" means?" This is unfortunate. The author knows exactly what IP is, but is posing the provocative question in order to illustrate the fact that aggressive patenting has negative welfare effects on the economy overall by reducing competition and consumer choice. It's a reasonable question, although presented in a rather ham-handed, cold-blooded economist fashion. Then again, the answer, or possible answers, seem readily apparent, so I'm not sure why the post was concluded with "I don't have an answer for this." Really? Let's see. 1. Passion — The passion that drove folks to protests against Apple/Foxconn working conditions were all about empathy towards fellow human beings. Whether you agree or disagree with the complaints (I personally thought they were way over the top and unfairly singled out Apple), you have to admit that they were emotional and driven by concerns with working conditions, child labor, etc. Where's the passion and human compassion in a patent case? And remember, this is coming from an IP lawyer who has more of an interest in these issues than most people. I don't think we can compare a consumer's inability to buy a mobile phone with a worker being forced to pull a 24-hour shift. Sure, the former is a direct effect on the consumer, while the latter is a concern for an unknown third party in another country, but that's what empathy is all about. And don't forget the media angle here. They have certainly been following this patent case very closely, but probably in muted tones. What makes for a better news story, a depressed worker committing suicide or the pinch-zoom patent? What's the visual for the latter story, an empty shelf at a Best Buy? 2. The Law — The Apple/Foxconn protests involved alleged violations of labor law, while Samsung was found to be a patent infringer. So in one case, protesters were on the side of law and high labor standards. If folks complained about the Samsung decision, they would be going against the established legal regime and supporting an IP infringer. I'm not sure how many people see it in those terms, but having a jury announce that someone/some company committed an infraction does carry with it negative baggage, and most people are not going to second-guess a decision like that. 3. Complexity — If someone tells you that Apple is using underage Chinese slave labor to make iPhones, that's easy to grasp. Whether it's true or not is a separate issue. However, trying to get most folks to understand the Samsung dispute is a bit more difficult, and rousing their passions over such issues is a tall order. Patent cases are so complicated these days that I'd actually support the U.S. switching to judge-only adjudication for such disputes (i.e., no juries). 4. Cult of Mac — One reason so many folks were upset with Apple over Foxconn working conditions is that they felt betrayed and/or used. They were Apple customers and felt tainted. If only Apple stopped doing all those awful things, they could go back to using their iCrap without that annoying guilt. And yet, almost none of these people abandoned their phones, laptops and tablets, nor did they stop buying new equipment. Brand loyalty trumped compassion when it came to that purchasing decision. Samsung doesn't have that sort of connection with its customers. I'd personally rather have an S2 running Android than an iPhone, but that doesn't mean I particularly care if that consumer choice has been taken away from me by a jury in San Jose. I'll give the IP system the benefit of the doubt. So why aren't folks rioting and pillaging in San Jose over the verdict? I think the answer is quite clear. Whatever you might think of Apple's aggressive IP strategy, that criticism isn't likely to rise to the level of public protest. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| China’s concubine culture is back Posted: 28 Aug 2012 12:35 AM PDT SHANGHAI – The saying "Behind every successful man, there is a woman" has a twist in China, where it seems that behind every corrupt male official, there is at least one concubine. A top anti-graft official recently acknowledged in public that 95% of the corrupt officials netted in Beijing's crackdowns kept mistresses. China's millennia-old culture of men keeping concubines is back, with many communist party and government officials now keeping at least one "second wife" as a status symbol or to satisfy his sexual needs.  a corrupt official in China shouting 'don't trust her' to the police, while his mistress is presenting the evidence of his corruption. Click here to read more about the story of second wifes in Taiwan. Addressing government and party officials in the prosperous city of Dongguan in Guangdong province earlier this month, Qi Peiwen, a senior official with the party's Central Commission for Disciplinary Inspection, warned officials against "beautiful women," saying that having a mistress proves an easy way for an official to become to corrupt. Qi's comments prompted a flurry of responses in domestic media and Internet chat-rooms about the resurgence of China's ancient concubine culture in officialdom. He claimed that a shocking 95% of corrupt officials kept one or more concubines. Some people have joked that the trend has made it even more difficult for non-officials to find a wife, given China's imbalanced sex ratio. (According to the semi-governmental All-China Women's Federation, the sex ratio among newborn babies in 2005 was 119 boys to 100 girls.) The ancient Chinese tradition of men keeping concubines was attacked by the Communist Party when it came to power in the 1949 revolution. With its "iron fist", the party under Chairman Mao Zedong also successfully weeded out other "social evils" such as prostitution and drugs. Bigamy is still outlawed today, at least on paper. With the advent of economic modernization and capitalistic values in China, an undercurrent of sexual liberation and material decadence has also emerged, resulting in the return of concubines and an increase in extra-marital infidelity. For the rich and the powerful, keeping extra-marital relations has become fashionable, particularly in officialdom. It seems that from senior party and government officials to grass roots organizers – anyone who has access to power has access to mistresses. The highest-ranking official to fall from grace in recent years was Chen Liangyu, the former Shanghai party chief and a Politburo member. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison for corruption and was said to have kept at least two mistresses. The current record holder in terms of number of mistresses is Xu Qiyao, the former director of Jiangsu province's construction bureau whose death penalty over corruption was reprieved. Xu, who was in charge of infrastructure projects in the eastern Chinese province, had kept more than 140 mistresses. Anti-graft officials were astonished when they found Xu's sex diary which recorded the names of all his mistresses and his sexual experiences with them. Corrupt officials and their mistresses has now become a target of humor among Chinese media and bloggers. Chinese netizens have compiled a list of records made by corrupt officials in terms of the number and beauty of their mistresses, as well as the amount of money spent on them. The list was widely posted on popular websites. Power, money, and sex With China's reform and opening-up, the orthodox Marxist-Maoist ideology was discarded and the vacuum has been filled with materialism. Material desires are "liberated". People need more power, more money, and it seems, more sex. Keeping a "second wife" is now in vogue among the rich and powerful. Jin Weizhi, the general manager of a State-owned milk company who was convicted of bribery and embezzlement in 2000, once said: "Keeping mistresses is not only for physical needs. It's more about a symbol of status. If you don't have several women, people will look down upon you." Second wives are often accused of convincing officials to to take bribes or commit other abuses of power. In trun, officials often shower mistresses with lavish gifts, money – or contracts for profitable projects. In an extreme case, Deng Baoju, a banker in the booming town of Shenzhen, spent 18.4 million yuan (US$2.7 million) of his bank's money on his fifth mistress within 800 days, averaging 23,000 yuan each day. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison for the fraud. Corruption and concubines go hand in hand, according to a 2008 report by Guangzhou-based newspaper Southern Weekly, which surveyed 41 provincial-level officials under a graft probe between 1998 and 2008. It found that 36 of them kept mistresses. The Southern Weekly quoted the wife of a high-ranking official in central China as saying that the residential compound for officials where she lived "like a widows' village" because men seldom returned home. Many wives were aware of their husbands' infidelity, but chose to keep silent over family interests. Committing bigamy is punishable with up to two years in jail according to the Chinese law, but in practice keeping mistresses seldom brings a bigamy charge, as long as the men don't formally register marriage. Curbing the concubine culture Still, almost every senior male official under graft investigation has been found to have keep one or more mistresses. This has led the media to suggest anti-graft organizations start graft probes with finding out whether the officials have concubines. To stop mistresses from making use of their official connections, China's judicial authorities have expanded the legal interpretation of bribery to include the act of giving gifts to an official's mistress. Earlier this month, the government of Meishan City in Sichuan Province banned "abnormal relationships" between officials and women. However, the ban was widely criticized for being impractical – the government did not specify what an "abnormal relationship" is or what penalties officials would face. Like most media in the world, the Chinese press laps up juicy stories about corrupt officials and their mistresses. Still, if the perpetrator remains in power, few dare to question his fidelity to his wife or his cleanliness from corruption. In the United States, South Carolina governor Mark Sanford – who almost lost his job for meeting his mistress – must be envious of his Chinese peers. Stephen Wong is a freelance journalist from Shanghai. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Update » Blogs » Politics To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Comments