[governance] China Global Times editionial on Google issue

[Ian Peter]

This is interesting and worth reading. Similar to arguments about free trade
and protectionism.

The real stake in "free flow of information"

Source: Global Times [04:55 January 22 2010]Comments
With her seemingly impassioned speech Thursday, US Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton may be said to have raised the stakes in Washington's clash
with Beijing over Internet freedom.

"We stand for a single Internet where all of humanity has equal access to
knowledge and ideas." Clinton's words may sound perfectly right to some in
the West, but would be regarded as a new threat by people in other parts of
the world.

The US campaign for uncensored and free flow of information on an
unrestricted Internet is a disguised attempt to impose its values on other
cultures in the name of democracy.

The hard fact that Clinton has failed to highlight in her speech is that
bulk of the information flowing from the US and other Western countries is
loaded with aggressive rhetoric against those countries that do not follow
their lead.

In contrast, in the global information order, countries that are
disadvantaged could not produce the massive flow of information required,
and could never rival the Western countries in terms of information control
and dissemination.

Keeping that in mind, it must be realized that when it comes to information
content, quantity, direction and flow, there is absolutely no equality and
fairness.

The online freedom of unrestricted access is, thus, only one-way traffic,
contrary to the spirit of democracy and calculated to strengthen a monopoly.

Countries disadvantaged by the unequal and undemocratic information flow
have to protect their national interest, and take steps toward this. This is
essential for their political stability as well as normal conduct of
economic and social life.

These facts about the difficulties of developing nations, though understood
by politicians like Clinton, are not communicated to the people of Western
countries. Instead, those politicians publicize and pursue their claims
purely from a Western standpoint.

This practice is morally unworthy and has been resisted by intellectuals in
developing countries.

Take Google's threat to pull out of China for example. It has stirred
widespread debate among the public in China. The recent poll conducted by
huanqiu.com shows a growing number of people voicing opposition to an
unregulated or uncensored Google in China. As many as 81 percent of those
polled are opposed to Chinese government accepting Google's demands.

It is not because the people of China do not want free flow of information
or unlimited access to Internet, as in the West. It is just because they
recognize the situation that their country is forced to face.

Unlike advanced Western countries, Chinese society is still vulnerable to
the effect of multifarious information flowing in, especially when it is for
creating disorder.

Western countries have long indoctrinated non-Western nations on the issue
of freedom of speech. It is an aggressive political and diplomatic strategy,
rather than a desire for moral values, that has led them to do so.

The free flow of information is an universal value treasured in all nations,
including China, but the US government's ideological imposition is
unacceptable and, for that reason, will not be allowed to succeed.

China's real stake in the "free flow of information" is evident in its
refusal to be victimized by information imperialism.


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t