On 2/11/06, Carlos Royo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tens of thousands of dissidents executed a year? What's your source? I > know that they execute several thousand people every year, sometimes > even for petty crimes, but not what you say. There are conscience > prisoners in Chinese prisons, but the regime isn't fool enough to > execute them, they have learnt a big deal since the times of the > Cultural Revolution and repression is much more subdued nowadays. By the > way, I am against death penalty, no matter where. > China is a dictatorship, the same way as many other countries, including > some so-called "democracies", and I see why you feel strongly about this > matter. But exaggeration doesn't help you make your point.
You're right, Carlos, my figures were not accurate. Last year (according to a New York Times article of Dec. 31, 2005) China executed at least 10,000, but not all of those were dissidents. In fact, you're correct in that many of those executions were for petty crimes. The number of dissedents killed is unlikely to be ascertainable, as they aren't actually executed for being dissidents per se, but have phoney or trumped up charges laid against them. In any event, my earlier figure was an inadvertant exaggeration, and for that I apologize. . > > Perhaps you are right, Frank. Then we should boycott China, and also > extend those measures against some other evil governments who invade > other countries based on lies, or that keep a several decades long > occupation of territories, evicting by force their inhabitants, etc. Why > do we stop with China? > That boycott wouldn't work. But if "the West" really cares about human > rights, they should start by demanding that China, and others like > India, Indonesia, etc., pay a decent salary to their workers, and give > them human labour conditions. They won't demand that, because the > corporations which profit from the exploitation of workers in the > developing countries are mainly Western (and Japanese). Besides, that > keeps a permanent threat over the heads of workers in Western countries, > that their jobs will be outsourced if they don't bow and accept worse > salaries and the loss of their hard earned rights. > The supposed boycott against South Africa didn't make it change, it was > mainly the internal situation which made the regime fall. I say > "supposed" because the economic restrictions were largely imaginary and > never stopped the trade ties that big business kept with South Africa. > I know a boycott against China would be unworkable. I will attempt to continue my own "personal" boycott, but I have no expectations that it will ever become an international effort. As someone (maybe Juan?) said, it's even impossible to do on a personal level, as Chinese parts and components are too widespread - but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try... As for other evil regimes, well, it would be nice if we stopped trading with them, too, but I'm realistic enough to know that won't happen either. The global economy simply wouldn't allow it. I'm also aware that the boycott against South Africa wasn't the primary reason that the regime fell, but it was a part of it, even if it only raised awareness of the situation around the rest of the world. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
