Raging Against the Machine

The career of Xu Zhiyong, who has worked to advance the cause of civil liberties in China, illustrates how the Chinese government manipulates modern technology to hamper the work of human rights activists -- and provides a valuable lesson to Google in its own standoff with the regime.

BY AMANDA RIVKIN | JANUARY 19, 2010

Xu Zhiyong was watching the 2004 Democratic convention in a shared common area at a Columbia University dormitory when we first met. After just a few words, I knew he could understand little of the speeches on television. It is so different from China, he said. Political conventions in his home country were pageants: Officials waited their turn, sat erect in their seats, and clapped only on cue and never too wildly.

Last July, my friend was the subject of a different form of high stakes political theater when he was arrested, detained, and held incommunicado for one month.  As a young and extremely enterprising attorney in Beijing, he has represented a slew of disadvantaged clients in China, from a newspaper owner beleaguered by the authorities to the victims of the contaminated baby formula sold by the Sanlu company.  When he disappeared, the first news I received appeared on the New Yorker's website in the form of a headline that questioned directly, "Where is Xu Zhiyong?"

With Google's threats last week to withdraw from China amid suggestions that the Chinese government was behind recent cyberattacks on its corporate infrastructure that specifically targeted the email accounts of prominent Chinese human rights activists, I was reminded again of my friend. This episode sheds light on the obstacles faced by those struggling to improve civil liberties within China and the consequences of Google's potential withdrawal from that country.

In the summer of 2004, we lived across the hall from each other at Columbia University. A few nights a week, we held impromptu English lessons to improve his conversation skills.  We began by reviewing formal pleasantries, one of the first steps in English language courses for foreigners. Toward the end of our first week, I realized he had only introduced himself with an English name, Sunny, and that I knew very little about him. He typed the English spelling of his name, Xu Zhiyong, into my laptop.

He told me he was a lawyer, but he struggled to describe his work in English so he reached for Google. A few articles had already appeared on his work and career, including a profile in the New York Times covering his campaign for a seat on Beijing's city council from the prestigious academic district of Haidian.  He also worked as an advocate for China's disenfranchised petitioners who convene in the capital on the basis of an ancient tradition that allows citizens to petition the state for redress of grievances.

While we continued our formal classes, the conversation continued on the weekends, in nearby restaurants and bars. We watched gavel-to-gavel coverage on C-SPAN of both American political conventions. I will not forget how my new friend's eyes grew wide when Bill Clinton spoke. When Clinton finished, to raucous applause, he offered just one reflection, "Wow!"

LIU JIN/AFP/Getty Images

 

Amanda Rivkin is a photojournalist and writer based in Washington D.C., where she attends the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University's Graduate School of Foreign Service.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

TIAN

6:19 AM ET

January 20, 2010

What should Google do? Pull out, or stay the course?

Ms. Rivkin: your view of the possibilities should Google follow through with its threat to pull out of China entirely is one that certainly has much merit; of that there can be no doubt.

However, let me offer another, more hopeful possibility.

Please consider this: given Google's enormous global influence -- even people who loathe it acknowledge that reality -- it's possible they could spark a trend. China (where I lived a total of 8 years in three separate assignments spread over a 15-year period, including in Beijing itself) has made stunning advances in just about every field since I first alit on Chinese soil in mid-1985. However, the country isn't to the point yet that it can easily dismiss foreign expertise.

I've been a China watcher (and have written about it extensively on my own website and other places on the Internet, plus in a small handful of print publications) for over 25 years, and my take is that there is a good possibility -- IF enough foreign companies follow Google's lead to some degree, then the Tired Old Men in Zhong Nan Hai will sit up and say, "HUH? Those stupid foreign devils care THAT much???"

What they're learning -- but only very, very slowly -- is that generally, when the Emperor received petitions, he really did, and sometimes actually acted on behalf of the petitioners. The Party leadership has rarely, if ever, done so (and hasn't, as far as I know).

Slowly or not, they *are* learning, and a massive reaction among foreign investors against the regime would be a might knock aside their heads. True, it also would be a sharp slap in the face, so could backfire, given Chinese concepts of "face."

But they themselves have too much invested to abandon ship now. I believe the only reason they're still saddled with state-owned behemoths is they don't dare simply close them down; the risk is entirely to great for mass social disorder to follow, a challenge to the state. They *are* aware of threats to the state.

And for foreign companies to collectively draw their own lines in the sand could be -- and I think probably would be -- a highlighting of their need to loosen up politically, and to realize that the stupid comments they make their Foreign Ministry spokesperson spout are almost universally (1.) intensely ridiculed and (2.) taken as pure lies. On those two points, they still remain in the pre-Deng Xiao Ping era, believing "saying it makes it so." (Note: see North Korea as an instructive reference. After all, Deng famously said that China and North Korea are "closer than lips and teeth.")

I hope your friend is safe, and that he will remain free, both in the physical sense and the social sense of being able to do his job as a lawyer. And I hope, for his sake, and the sake of everyone like him, that I'm more likely right and you are more likely wrong.

I'm not attacking you, Ma'am; were *my* friend to be in such a horrible predicament, I'd be every bit as worried as you are. But although I don't know either of you, I hope you might draw a little hope from the alternative possibility I've outlined here.

Respectfully,

Tian

P.S., I'm not Chinese, neither by citizenship or by ethnic identity. I'm a Caucasian Westerner. If that matters, which I suppose it does. "Tian" is part of the Chinese nickname Chinese friends bestowed upon me many years ago.

 

EMILYPATINEE

11:56 PM ET

January 20, 2010

Raging Against the Machine

They were raging about the machine..............silly,
http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/proactol-review-does-proactol-diet-pills-work-for-weight-loss-1707237.html

 

MIKAEL

12:17 AM ET

January 23, 2010

Gmail is encrypted

"that messages may be read, intercepted, and occasionally blocked"
As long as you access gmail through "https" (note the s) then the traffic between your browser and the gmail servers is encrypted and safe.

As long as google doesn't voluntarily give out the content or their servers are hacked that is..