HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re:      Russia: Chaos or back to dictatorship?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 11 Sep 92 19:42:55 GMT

In article <79544@ut-emx.uucp> joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.231543.23612@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>>  1. Yeltsin's "Shock therapy" was engineered by a professor from Harward
>>University, It was a cover story in Time magazine when He did it and was
>>praised by the magazine for his "talent";
>
>I saw an interview with the inventor of "shock therapy," and his point was
>that the Russian economy was in such bad shape that "shock therapy" was
>the only option.  Without it, the economy would completely collapse.

I doubt the Russian economy was worse than the Chinese economy in 
1976.  

>"Shock therapy" seems to have improved the situation in Poland.  True,
>there are problems with distribution of wealth, but the economic situation
>there is no longer critical.
Not if everybody in their solidarity tradition and go on strike to demand
more pay, and start a new round of deficit spending - inflation - striking
cycle.  

>
>>  3. Russians thought they can be like West Europeans get aid from U.S. and 
>>other West nations, They were so naive. U.S.'s Marshal Plan was to build up
>>Europe against Soviet. There is no free lunch;  
>
>I think the main difference between now and the post-world war II
>situation is the economic situation of the United States.  Right after
>World War II, the United States had the economic strength to undertake
>the Marshall Plan.  Today, the United States doesn't have the spare money
>to help bail out the ex-Soviet Union.
>
And Some people might not want to wholeheartly help their former arch-rival,
letting them rot in the winter might give some cold war warriors the
ultimate satisfaction.  


>>   4. The direction of Russia is not clear, but there is tremendous sentment
>>among general population and many elites that Yeltsin's bowing West policy
>>should be stopped, going China's way.
>
>One problem is with this, is that Russia has, since at least the time
>of Peter the Great, tried to think of itself as a Western country and
>has always wanted to look westward toward Europe rather than eastward
>toward China, Japan, and the Islamic states.  Perhaps one of the many
>reasons that Yeltsin was so willing to let go of the former Soviet
>republics is that once the Baltic states and the Ukarine left, what
>remained (the southern Turkic states) would have tended to pull Russia
>away from Europe.
>
I doubt it, Yeltsin knew he cannot be the top-banana in the union,
so he did the next best thing, be top-banana in Russia and "screwed" the
rest of the country.  

>I think it would be very difficult for Russia to make the psychological
>shift needed to look toward China rather than the West.


Especially when all Chinese leaders are protraited as a bunch of blood
sucking vampires at the moment.  Their work on the economy is being
completely ignored by the rest of the world.  
  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Tak To <tto@aspentec.com>
Subject:      re: supporting Shen Tong
Reply-To: Tak To <tto@aspentec.com>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:55:19 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Gents,

I have been reading this thread for a while and it seems that some people
are confusing the following issues:

  1) Is the Chinese Government "wrong" in arresting Shen Tong?
  2) What should one do to help Shen Tong?

We do not have all the details about the circumstances under which Shen Tong
was arrested.  Nonetheless, based on the information we have at hand and my past
experience with the CG, I would guess that _most probably_ Shen did nothing
that was truely harmful to the government or China in general.  He _might_
have crossed some minor legal boundaries.  All in all I would say that his
human rights was violated and I deeply sympathize with him.

Now, #2 is a totally separate issue.  First of all, one is entitled to
decide how much of one's limited resources should be spent on helping
Shen Tong.  If one decides not to do anything, it does not necessarily mean
that one is against or indifferent to Shen; it simply means that one thinks
it is better to reserve one's resources for other causes.  Everyday all
over the world (and in China alone), there are many cases of human right
violation.  One cannot help _all_ of them.  Let's not call the non-
supporters names.  (I recall that in the student bill case, many chose to
help the Chinese [indirectly] at the expense of the Haitians.)

More important, when one is asking others to help, one should be considerate.
Try not to ask too much or too often, _even_for_the_sake_of_worthy_causes_.
Do not tire out the Congressmen (and do not overwork their fax machines and
phone lines); do not tire out the Press; and most importantly, do not tire
out the interest of the American public.

Now, when deciding how to help Shen, it is entirely reasonable to take his
his motive, his timing, etc. into consideration.  After all, one does not
want the Congressmen helping him end up thinking that they are helping a fool
(albeit a lovable fool) or a calculating extremist.  Even though a lot of
people (including myself) do not want to discuss it in the public in the fear
of hurting his case, please do not shout down those who want to discuss it.

As for Shen's interest vs China's interest etc--I have no desire to enter
the debate.

Tak To.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Subject:      What happens????
Reply-To: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 02:59:04 GMT

Hello, chief netter, (or  person in charge of this net whatever)

I have been cut off from this net since I sent out my last message
on last Saturday, against the suggestions of censorship. I thought
the net was down for some reasons but some friends told me they had
been able to get mail from this net every day.

I hope this happens to be a computer technical problem. If it is not,
I need your explanation for having revoked my  nettership.

Thanks,

Dongning Mao
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Subject:      remind William Deng, please answer yes or no!
Reply-To: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 05:40:00 GMT

After I posted the questions to William Deng publicly, I did not get any
answer. I am waiting! The question is: William Deng, Do you support CG to
arrest Shen Tong? Please answer yes or no publicly!  Dawei Zhou, Florida
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Haosheng Zhou <philz@ee.umanitoba.ca>
Subject:      Proposal and Suggestions -- follow up
Reply-To: Haosheng Zhou <philz@ee.umanitoba.ca>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 05:34:43 GMT
Comments: To: China-nt <china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu>

I further propose that IFCSS assign a speaker (or administrator) to keep
this net in order. I think most of you have seen how debates are
conducted in common house etc. A neutral speaker is necessary by all
means.

As a comlement to my previous suggestions, I further suggest that

7) no personal attack is allowed;

8) messages which do not concern with majority of netters should be sent
via private email;

9) it is assumed that no one in this net is ugly; freedom of speech [1]
should be guaranteed in practise and every netters are equal.


Haosheng Zhou

[1] So far, the only well-known limit is that one cannot incite hatred.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Thanks,apologize and disagreement.....
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:47:46 GMT
Reply-To: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University

Dear netters,

I got messages from two members of management committee of this net after
I post my inquiries to Mr. Huang Guyang. They both thought I did not get any
mail just because of technical problem. I appreciated very much for their help.
I still could not get anything until I signed on to this net again yesterday
afternoon. But all the mails from last Saturday to yesterday evening are lost
(only from china-nt). If this is really a technical problem, I am ready to
appologize for what I have been said in the mail to Mr.Huang Guyang.

Well, since I have my new mouth installed, I want to warm it up a little bit.

I do not agree with Mr. Your comrade:X.Pi. To my (not very brilliant) mind,
if china-nt uses name of IFCSS, it should allow all kinds of speech. Other
wise the peoblems will be:

1) How could these ridiculous rules such as 'only two people from a University
   can join this net' work?  Who decided who these two people were? Even IFCSS
   itself is not recognized by all CSSs, especially it before it started its
   protection bill campaign. <:-(
2) How can a refree (if we should have) define message as garbage or not? My
   this message could be considered by someone as garbage and so is the message
   sent by Mr.Your comrade:X.Pi.
3) How can a refree judge a message as triggering a debate? In fact, any message

   can cause a debate even an anouncement by IFCSS, for example, about ST a few

   days ago.
4) What kind of message can we expect to see in this net if all these
   restrictions in Mr.Your Comrade X.Pi message become effective (suppose they
   could)?  Weather forecast? As a new netter, I have not seen any message for
   three month which meets requirements by Mr. Your comrade X.Pi.

If these problem can be solved, then this net will be as perfect as what Mr.Your

comrade X.Pi hopes. (of course I will be DEFINITLY purged by then)

Donging Mao
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Yao Li <li@sce.carleton.ca>
Subject:      ACP info needed
Reply-To: Yao Li <li@sce.carleton.ca>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 13:42:55 GMT
Comments: To: on internet <china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu>

Hi, there,

I am interested in the constitution of the Association of Chinese Professionals
If someone could send me one at li@sce.carleton.ca, it'll be grateful.

In my impresion, this association is mainly in USA. The above name may not be
exactly same to their official name. Any info. on contact person is also
welcome.

Thank you

Li Yao
Ottawa
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Subject:      RE: Three Goals
Reply-To: dnmao%mich.hepnet@LBL.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 01:51:13 GMT

Mr. Deng Gang,
I have some questions:
1) Tribe independent, what do you mean? I do not believe you forget following
   facts: A chinese robber could be sentenced to death if his target was a
   foreigner; A foregner can easily pass through the chinese custom than
   chinese....
2) Economy first, democracy second. Sounds great. Can you give me any such
   an example which happened in communist country?
I hope you can answer these questions, not only keep telling us yesterday's
weather was cold etc.
Dongning Mao
U of Michigan.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194)
Subject: test
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 02:27:00 GMT


test

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Subject:      Re: He, Baoping. Hold fire until S1216 passed!
Reply-To: UFDZ@UFPINE.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:17:00 GMT

After reading the public fire of He, Baoping to Ji, Ingquan, I would like
to advise Mr. He, baoping to hold your public fire until S1216 to be passed.
you start the public fire about whatever registration fee at wrong time. Dawei
Zhou
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: zhu@cs.UAlberta.CA (Eric Y. Zhu)
Subject: Re: A typical case
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:05:40 GMT

Jin-hua Yuan <YUAN@NIEHS.BITNET> writes:
>trip for interview was canceled simple because I am not a PR despite I was under
>Bush protection order and was fully qualified for the interview.
>Therefore, this bill is essential for our future job hunting.
Yeah, This IS typical. A bill that protects you from being
kicked out. What a big deal.
--

===
Zhu Yuchen, Edmonton
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: jia@ROCKVAX.ROCKEFELLER.EDU
Subject:      Another reason to support the Protection Bill
Reply-To: jia@ROCKVAX.ROCKEFELLER.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 03:58:00 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Due to the Protection Bill, Chinese government recently announced new policy
to overseas CSS. This includes that people with for public affairs passports
can change to for private affairs passports.  Five of us went to Chinese
Consulate in New York on 9/8 to change.  Mr. Zhang Xiang-yang who is
in charge of CSS of New York City told us that their procedure is we still
have to show approval letter from our working units in China (the letter
must be from Si/Ju Ji).  We told him the new policy in the People's
Daily does not require this letter. He answered that this is our way to carry
the new policy.  Later we learned the Chinese Embassy in DC does make change
according to the People's Daily.  I then called the Education Section of NY
Consulate, they answered different consulate can do things differently.
If different representitives of the same government carry out the same
policy in different way, how can we trust them?  We can only conclude
this new policy is not really reinforced (at least under the NY
Consulate), it may be withdrawn if the protection bill fails.  To protect
our own rights, we must unite and push the Protection Bill.
CSS from Rockefeller Univ., Cornell Med College, Mt. Sinai School of Med.
Columbia Univ. College of P & S, Sloan-Kettering Cancer Inst. Howard
Hughes Med Inst.
R. Jia et al
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: 3011_6470@UWOVAX.UWO.CA
Subject:      Re: The logic of "New World Order"
Reply-To: 3011_6470@UWOVAX.UWO.CA
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 05:07:27 GMT
Comments: To: China-net <china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu>

>_ The U.S. Congress has asked to have China's MFN status
>conditioned, with the limitation of China's weapon sale to the
>Middle East being one of the conditions.

The following addition seems to be relevant:

  _President Bush just agreed to sell 75 F-15s to Saudi Arabia.
  Is that country in the so-called "sensitive Middle East" area?

Anyway, the whole world is after American weapons, which, as
President Bush proudly put it, are testimony to the American
technological and competitive edge.


Dave Sheng.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject:      Three Goals
Reply-To: XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 01:23:00 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

In the past 150 years, generations of Chinese have been struggling for
three goals: tribe independence, economic development, and, democracy.

For China, tribe independence (Min2 Zhu2 Du2 Li4) is accomplished.
Economic development is undergoing, and political democracy is still
far away.

The origin of most debates comes from different views on whether there
is a sequence between the second goal and the third goal. It is ideal
that these two goals can be achieved at the same time. But in reality
this ideal has never been realized.

In those developing countries with democracy, corruption is terrible and
economy is sluggish (such as India). Some even go back and forth
between democracy and autocracy (such as Peru). Some even fell into
tragic civil war. These countries have little hope to be a member of
developed countries someday.

On the contrary, countries following the sequence that economic development
first and democracy second have quite a few successful examples, such as
Taiwan (a area, though functioning as acountry) and south Korea. Both are
closing to be developed countries, and progress to democracy is going
smoothly. Interestingly, KMT, the once autocracy party, is much more
popular than its rival DPP (Democractic Progress Party).

I share the point that there is a sequence between two goals because of
, partly, above facts I see.

Spirit of freedom is also important. The deadlock is that the interpersonal
utility comparison is impossible. So, for somebody who prefer to stay in
Somalia to enjoy freedom of expression and organization though hunger
and civil war are prevail, rather than stay in China, I have nothing
to say.

But, I believe, for most people,(not just those elite) the desire of avoid
hunger goes ahead of the desire of free expression.



William Deng
From: ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM (Ignatius Ding)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Where are the Ex-SUMCC volunteers?
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:49:04 GMT
Reply-To: "Ignatius Ding" <ding@HPSMTC1.CUP.HP.COM>
Organization: Indiana University
Comments: To: Dennis.D.Lee@Eng.Sun.COM, donovan@csl.sri.com,
              hknet@cs.wisc.edu, ho@mips.com,
              ifcss%WAM.UMD.EDU@uga.cc.uga.edu,
              joseph_ng%5y@hp0200.desk.hp.com, jung_lin%40@hp1900.desk.hp.COM,
              sdc@longhorn.Corp.sun.com, ggach@pandora.sf.ca.us,
              xwu@janus.Berkeley.EDU, cnd-editor@sdsc.edu,
              melody@hpsmtc1.cup.hp.com, jchu@hpsmtc1.cup.hp.com,
              wuling@s1.msi.umn.edu, li@perry.berkeley.edu,
              jyee@eclair.berkeley.edu, Isaac.Chen@Eng.Sun.COM,
              ide!ide.com!cai@uunet.UU.NET, wwang@mail1.cis.umn.edu,
              china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Not longer ago, a group of volunteers in the United States assembled a
"committee" of more than a thousand Chinese students and some Chinese
immigrants from Taiwan and other countries in a few weeks to come to the
defense of the unconditional renewal of MFN trade status for China.  It was
very impressive in terms of organizational and communication skills.  That
"committee" drove a letter/phone campaign to call on U.S. Senators to support
their objective.  Many of the participants truly believed their cause and
dedicated their time and energy to do their bit.

Now the arrest of Shen Tong and the othe people, whom Shen met and talked to,
by the Beijing Public Security Bureau will likely cause a rather negative
impact to achieving such an objective - frequently referred to by the volunteer
"committee" as "the common interest of the Chinese people at large", then isn't
it the time for these volunteers rise to serve again?  This time they can call
on the Chinese government to let go Shen Tong and all others arrested before
the situation gets worse.  Remember, the vote for the CMFN bill, S2808, is
coming to the Senate floor in a matter of two or three weeks!!	"To Serve or
Not To Serve" is the big question and challenge.


Ignatius Ding
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Call or write to:

      Premier Li Peng
      Premier, State Council
      Beijing, People's Republic of China

      Minister Qian Qichen
      Ministry of Foreign Affairs
      Beijing, People's Republic of China

      Comrade Jiang Zemin
      Office of the General Secretary
      Chinese Communist Party
      Beijing, People's Republic of China

      Embassy of People's Republic of China
      2300 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 20009
      Washington, D.C.
      (202) 328-2500 (Phone) (202) 232-7856 (Fax)

      Consulate-General of People's Rep. of China
      1450 Laguna Street
      San Francisco, CA 94115
      (415) 563-4885 (Phone) (415) 563-0494 (Fax)

      Other Consulates/Embassy:

      New York		(212) 868-7752/330-7438
      Houston		(713) 524-8515
      Embassy (Ottawa)	(613) 234-2682
      Toronto		(416) 525-6288
From: XXU@AMHERST.EDU
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: An Economic Approach
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:42:09 GMT
Reply-To: XXU@AMHERST.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu


	There seems to be a dilemma regarding the recent proposals about
imposing more restrictive rules on posting messages to this network.
People are stuffed with so many junk mails that they want to do
something to curb it. But censorship may hurt freedom of speech, on the
other hand.

	Freedom of speech is not free, however. How about 50 cents for
each posting? Senders would think twice before dumping their messages,
many of which we have seen worth less than a nickel if not a penny. The
money colleted could be given to the Red Cross, or spent to buy an honor
plate for those who have served as a volunteer maintaining the net.

					Xiaonian Xu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 18:32:14 EDT
From: <SXS30@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: Bo Xiong

In article <Bu2yCA.9zM@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, XIAOJIAN@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU says:

  Some too hard to understand post deleted

>
>And Bo Xiong, you own me a public apology, or I reserve my right to see
>you in court. A CND guy publicly spreaded rumor, my God!
>
>
>William Deng

  I don't know from when this kind of threaten language become
 a Bible for the weak wine-bibber. Wake up, poor man. U're not
 getting any kind of apology from Bo Xiong. If you are seriously
 about what you said here, I am waiting to the court report. -)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: XUD@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU
Subject:      Don't argue with W. Deng
Reply-To: XUD@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 02:41:32 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Fellow netters,
	Please take Liu Zhiping's advice, just ignore W. Deng's post
on the netter. What he is talking doesn't do anything good for China,
for Chinese people or for anyone. Do we have other more important things
to do?  Yes.
	D. Xu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: jzhang@SDCC3.UCSD.EDU
Subject:      The logic of "New World Order"
Reply-To: jzhang@SDCC3.UCSD.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 04:34:20 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu, soc.culture.china@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu

I don't care too much about F-16s, but I do think the recent events
are quite revealing about the "New World Order":
_ The U.S. government has approved the sale of 150 F-16s to Taiwan,
arguing that it is not a violation of the "Shanghai Communique"
which pledged that the quality of arms sale to Taiwan not to be above
the early 1980s level;

_ In the mean time, the U.S. government is opposed to the sale of
France's Mirage-2000 to Taiwan, arguing that it is an offensive
weapon;

_ The U.S. has expressed opposition to China's sale of nuclear
reactor to Iran, even though Iran pledged full compliance with
the standard of the International Atomic Energy Commission;

_ The U.S. Congress has asked to have China's MFN status
conditioned, with the limitation of China's weapon sale to the
Middle East being one of the conditions.

It seems to me that the logic of the New World Order is not so new.
Just as the old Chinese saying: "The Governor is allowed to arson,
but the common folk is prohibited from lighting a candle. (Zhi3
Xu3 Zhou1 Guan1 Fang4 Huo3, Bu4 Xu3 Bai3 Xing4 Dian3 Deng1)"
I hope that on the MFN issue, IFCSS will retain its "independence",
and refrain from being used as a pawn by American politicians in
their so-called "New World Order".

Zhenqin Li
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china