Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:16:24 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu>, "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Frank Pawlak <fpawlak@execpc.com>, drifter@stratos.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Tiananmen square (was: Does it's true?) Message-ID: <19980629091624.M28872@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980628151901.2460H-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu>; from Jason C. Wells on Sun, Jun 28, 1998 at 03:27:43PM %2B0000 References: <199806281732.KAA15832@hub.freebsd.org> <Pine.BSF.3.96.980628151901.2460H-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, 28 June 1998 at 15:27:43 +0000, Jason C. Wells wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Jonathan M. Bresler wrote:
>
>> ownership of small arms is insufficient for the task.
>> if one embraces the purpose of the second amendment, rather
>> then just the language, we must allow the citizentry to own
>> heavy weapons. no one that i know of advocates this.
>
> I feel that a rag tag militia that has heart and the support of the
> population is incredibly difficult to defeat. I have heard commanders of
> the South East Asian theater make this statement.
Which country are you thinking of?
> I feel that an auto loading rifle is sufficient for the purpose of
> opposing tyranny. This is a personal opinion.
It may make a token gesture. It won't help if they're about to run
over you with a tank. On the other hand, it can be quite useful for
killing individuals, innocent or otherwise.
>> what would it have availed the chinese students to have
>> small arms in tianamen (sp) square. it would not have
>> forestalled action by the gov't.
>
> No it would not have forstalled the government. Here I will avoid
> discussion (I am a proponent) of civil disobedience as an instrument of
> power. Still, if the citizens of the nation of China were given the
> weapons that the only the civilians of the US owns, there would be a shift
> in power.
Indeed. There would probably have been a civil war.
China's government is repressive, shuns western-style human rights,
and ended the Tiananmen square problem in a bloody manner. Before
condemning them completely, look at how democracy and human rates
score in other countries:
1. In many US cities, the crime rate is so high that you really
*wouldn't* go walking alone at night. You can walk at night in
any part of Beijing, despite the higher differences in income and
living standards. The Chinese might see this as a result of
overly lax treatment of criminals, or, as the Americans call it,
"human rights".
2. India is in complete political and economic chaos, the result of
50 years of "democracy" in a country which can't handle it. The
average tenure of an Indian government is less than 12 months. In
view of the level-headed government they're currently getting,
let's hope that this remains true.
3. Russia is in turmoil. The government is no longer in control, and
crime is rife.
On the whole, if I had the choice of living only in one of the four
locations above, I'd choose Beijing.
The Chinese government consists of people elected by a small body for
their merits, not their ability to campaign. Generally, they're no
fools. China may be lagging behind the West in many areas, but
they're slowly and steadily improving, and they're doing it without
significant incidences of the problems other countries face.
Considering the enormous problems facing them, I think they're doing
as good a job as anybody could expect.
Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980629091624.M28872>