All posts by bob - 8. page

The latest assault by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on freedom of information hit the popular weekly magazine Bingdian (Freezing Point), which is affiliated with the China Youth Daily. Publication of Bingdian was suspended by the Chinese communist regime on January 24, 2006. Editor-in-Chief Li Datong[1] and Assistant Editor-in-Chief Lu Yuegang were subsequently stripped of all editorial responsibilities.

The event that triggered this retribution was an article published in Bingdian on January 11, 2006, entitled "Between Modernization and the History Textbooks" by Yuan Weishi, a history professor at Zhongshan University in Guangdong Province.

In the article, Professor Yuan used the metaphor "children fed on wolf’s milk" to describe students in China who are taught distorted history. Citing numerous examples from a widely used history textbook, Yuan concluded that the content of this textbook was based on three premises: 1) present Chinese culture is superior to all others; 2) foreign culture is invariably evil and has corrupted the pure nature of the present Chinese culture; 3) it is right and acceptable to use political power and totalitarian means to eradicate evil in the realm of ideology. This article drew the attention of the CCP to the magazine and led to its suspension.

Founded in January 1995 and published every Wednesday, Bingdian was outspoken in its unreserved criticism of the Chinese communist regime’s policies. Most noticeably, in late 2003 the magazine published an article based on an interview with human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng. That article detailed the plight of property owners whose properties had been expropriated so that the state could lease them out to generate income. In 2004, Bingdian published an open letter directly criticizing Zhao Yong, who was the General Secretary of the Youth League, for his remark bidding good riddance to any news reporter who did not want to take Party orders.

Given how Bingdian has offended some senior Party members, many see the removal of its chief editors as a kind of revenge that also serves the purpose of "killing one man to terrorize a thousand."

The news of Bingdian‘s fate immediately caught the public’s attention in China. Thirteen senior Party members wrote an open letter in the magazine’s defense, among them Zhu Houze, the former Head of the Central Publicity Department; Li Rui, former secretary to Chairman Mao Zedong; Li Pu, Vice-President of the China News Agency; and Hu Jiwei, former editor-in-chief of People’s Daily.

Echoing the CCP’s confrontation with Bingdian is its encounter with Google. {mospagebreak}

Since 2000, Google has had a Chinese-language version of its website, which mirrors its English version with uncensored news and webpages. The Chinese authorities did not like it. Using the "Great Firewall of China" (online filters), the regime caused Google to run with annoying slowness and sometimes not at all. The option given to Google was to launch a new site in the Chinese language—Google.cn—which is heavily censored with the communist government’s preferences. China’s websurfers now have a choice: They can use either slow, often-interrupted, relatively uncensored Google.com or speedy, self-censored Google.cn.

As an example, typing in "Tiananmen" on Google.com brings up photos showing row upon row of tanks, the unforgettable afterimage of the tragedy of 1989, and links to that event begin the entries. Do the same search with Google.cn, and the result is innumerable links to tourist information on Tiananmen, with a snapshot of U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez and his wife posing on their visit to Tiananmen Square.

By purging dissident editors in the state-controlled Chinese media, the Chinese communist regime enforces its control over the Chinese press and its influence on the Chinese people. However, in the Internet age, this alone is not enough. To keep freedom of the press "below the freezing point," the regime also needs to seal off channels of free information on the Internet from overseas. The launch of the highly self-censored Google.cn by one of the largest American Internet companies indicates that the regime’s tactic of enticing businesses in but coercing them to conform to Communist Party standards is working.

To the top management of Google, this may sound like a simple trade-off. Yet, as a U.S. company, Google also has social responsibilities. When American companies give in to the Chinese communist regime and become helping hands in information censorship, they betray both American principles and 1.3 billion Chinese people.

References:
[1] Li Datong, Chief Editor of the magazine Bingdian (Freezing Point), was stripped of his position as ordered by the Ministry of Propaganda after he fallowed publication of an article that challenged the Chinese history books in the January 2006 issue. Bingdian under Li has been one of the more liberal magazines that has won the votes of its readers by has offended regime authorities in China.

While the Western world’s New Year starts in January, Chinese people are busy preparing for the biggest event of the year for them–Chinese New Year or Spring Festival, which falls on January 29 in 2006. On that day, schools are closed, offices empty, and factories dormant. Above all, it is a time when everyone takes a break after a long year’s hard work and family members get together to have a good time.

However, the Chinese media aren’t feeling quite so festive this year. On December 28, 2005, Chief Editor Yang Bin and Associate Chief Editors Sun Xuedong and Li Duoyu for The Beijing News, one of most successful stories in China’s media market since beginning its publication two years ago, were suddenly dismissed from their posts. Then on January 24, 2006, another popular weekly publication, Bingdian (Freezing Point) magazine, was ordered to shut down. Its Chief Editor Li Datong and Assistant Chief Editor Lu Yuegang were also stripped of all editorial responsibilities.

The orders came directly from the Ministry of Propaganda. In both cases, the publications offended the authorities for being too liberal in their reporting and daring to broach the country’s most sensitive issues. In the past, such punishments were usually carried out under the radar. This year, however, both cases have met fierce public reactions. More than 100 reporters from The Beijing News launched a strike to express their discontent. Many people, from both inside and outside of China, denounced the Propaganda Ministry after the Bingdian incident.

In contrast to the brave Chinese journalists who are fighting to emerge from the shadow of censorship, American stock market darling and rising star Google is casting aside its motto of "Doing No Evil" by surrendering to the Chinese communist regime. Following in the steps of Yahoo! and Microsoft, Google launched a new self-censored search engine in China on January 25, 2006, blocking topics that the communist regime does not like.

We have already tasted the grave consequences of media control in China. In 2003, when SARS first appeared, lack of timely knowledge of the disease’s spread due to media blockage caused delayed action to contain it, which eventually resulted in a global pandemic and loss of more than 800 lives. Now with the looming threat of an even more lethal disease in the form of the avian flu, China is again the most perilous area that requires particular attention (reasons detailed in the current issue’s feature article). Prompt, accurate media reporting will be vitally important in the battle against the disease. We cannot afford to learn another dire lesson before realizing that everyone has a responsibility to ensure the transparency and openness of the Chinese media.

[Editor’s note: The two articles below are excerpts translated from the Chinese communist regime’s official news agency, Xinhua. They are posted on its website Xinhuanet under the special topic "U.S. Defense Review Promotes ‘China Military Threat’ Theory."]

Rear Admiral Yang Yi Interprets American Defense Review: Taking China as a Hypothetical Rival Object

Xinhuanet, February 9, 2006

At the beginning of this month, the United States released the "Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)." The QDR contains extensive coverage of "China’s military expansion." It declared that China will develop the high-tech, non-asymmetrical military capability, including strategic nuclear weapons, tactical unmanned aerial vehicles, and so on. In an exclusive interview, Rear Admiral Yang Yi, Deputy Director of the Strategic Research Department and Director of the Strategic Research Institute, National Defense University, provided detailed interpretations of the report.

The Change in Quantity Draws America’s Suspicion

Reporter: Compared to previous reports, what are the features of America’s 2006 QDR as important indicators for American defense development?

Yang Yi: Compared to the QDR of 2001 or even earlier reports, the prominent characteristic of this year’s report is that the United States explicitly shows worry about China issues. The content of the "China threat theory" was also mentioned in the 2001 QDR, but in a relatively vague way. For instance, when it talked about the issue of "the precise attack of the theater," it actually referred to China.

The main reason is that, after the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the United States needs assistance from China in counter-terrorism affairs. Thus, it did not go public with the "China threat theory." However, China went through rapid development over the last four years. China’s developing model has been recognized by the international society, and its international position has been upgraded. Under the guidance of the scientific development concept, China has implemented a new military reform. On the other hand, after the Iraq War, the United States has been lacking the ability to do what it would like. This change in the balance of power draws the argument within the United States about "who overlooked China."

The United States wanted to maintain its absolute superiority from the ideology of pragmatism. Military strength is the important tool for maintaining its "absolute power." Therefore, under these conditions, the United States openly brought out the "China threat theory."{mospagebreak}

U.S. "Fever" in Taking China as a Hypothetical Target

Reporter: What is the purpose for the United States to openly bring up the "China threat theory?"

Yang Yi: America’s military strategic adjustment and development needs a target. During the Cold War, it focused on competing with the former Soviet Union for dominance. After that age, it targeted some regional big countries and in the post-9/11 period, it turned to the anti-terrorism. Now its strategic adjustment could be described as "one eye on counter-terrorism with the other on the challenge."

In the domain of strategy, "it is difficult to formulate a high-level policy without an enemy." As a result of the fast growth of its national power, China became America’s "hypothetical challenger."

Reporter: In the report, the United States includes Russia and India in the "Strategic Crossroad" countries.

Yang Yi: Yes. But we should notice that the United States gave India more positive comments than negative ones. Russia was "degraded" as a regional big country. The overall power of Russia will not have much increase in a short period. Therefore, taking China as a rival is easier to stir up America’s "fervor."

Don’t Make a Fuss Over It

Reporter: At this time, the United States is very concerned about the development of China’s navy.

Yang Yi:When we communicated with American military personnel, we found what they were concerned most about was the "uncertainty" of China’s military development. They thought that the "strategic border" between China and the United States should be on the sea. If China’s goal of development is to be a regional big country, it should not develop ocean naval forces. Therefore, the United States is always worried that China’s naval development is targeting the United States. It pays particular attention to this aspect.

Source: http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2006-02/09/content_4156441.htm

What’s Changed and Unchanged in the U.S. Quadrennial Defense Review

Xinhuanet, February 6, 2006, Source: People’s Daily Overseas Edition{mospagebreak}

On February 6, 2006, the U.S. Defense Department submitted to the U.S. Congress the new "Quadrennial Defense Review." Generally speaking, this report stays within the framework of the new national security strategy of the United States after the "9/11" incident. However, compared to the previous report four years ago, the new one adjusts the focal points for future defense. From the unchanged framework and the small adjustments, we can better understand the direction of America’s China policy.

In the new report, there are mainly two things unchanged. The first one is that the United States is still engaged in a long-lasting counter-terrorism war; that is to say, America’s No. 1 enemy is still terrorism. The second one is that the United States still sees China as a potential "military competitor." As early as four years ago, American strategy expert Cohen explicitly stated that those who formulated the national defense strategy had no doubt about two things: one, the United States would face longer and tougher threats from terrorists; and two, the rising China would become the rival of this region.

What are other changes in the new report that we should be concerned about? First, the new report for the first time uses the word "China." The previous report four years ago stated that in the East Asia region the United States would face the challenge of "a military competitor with a formidable resource base." But the new one explicitly mentions that, "as a major and newly emerging big power, China has the most potentials to engage in a military competition with the United States." Second, the new report proposes specific measures to strengthen the U.S. military’s operational capability in the Pacific region. At the same time, it also set the goal of increasing the long-range offensive capability as soon as possible.

These two changes show that the United States will increase the tracking and research of Chinese military development and will take this as the key goal for the future defense strategy. It is particularly worth mentioning that the United States will enhance its long-range offensive capability out of the consideration of the potential change in the political situation in the East Asia region. Once the United States encounters problems for its military bases in Japan, Korea, and so on to control East Asia, the only way is to increase its long-range offensive capability. Otherwise, it cannot effectively control this region. In the meantime, the increase of its long-range offensive capability would also enhance the deterrence impact of the United States against terrorists and so-called "rascal countries."

With respect to strategic focal points, the new report is different from President Bush’s State of the Union that emphasized more on China’s competition with the United State in the economic arena. But the report is closely connected with Bush’s speech. The latter emphasizes politics and diplomacy while the former concerns military preparation, which naturally would consider the China policy from the military preparation and prevention. From the U.S. strategy of "putting stakes on both sides," the United States is putting the "stake" of defense on the unpredictable side.

Translated by CHINASCOPE from http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2006-02/06/content_4141046.htm

The Chinese communist government has recently published new regulations for recreational businesses. The new regulations bar all gambling, pornography, and other illegal activities in Karaoke bars, massage parlors, and other recreational venues. The regulations also prohibit government officials and their relatives from running recreational businesses. How do ordinary people regard the regulations? Will the regulations work? Below are reactions from VOA’s (Voice of America) audiences toward the new regulations.

Regulations Are Only a Superficial Formality

Mr. Wu from Liaoning Province said that the government published such regulations merely as a formality. People are very clear about this. Mr Wu said, "Service businesses with pornography are all run by people having connections with power. These people either have money or connections with government officials. If police make an arrest, someone will manage to get the person released immediately. Some people are so special that no one dares to arrest them—they are above the law. Do you know how much money they give to officials every year? No one dares to touch them. The laws are only a show for the outside world. Everyone knows that the laws cannot be enforced. We should learn from the West and restrict the (pornographic) services to designated areas. This practice is good for social stability."

Legalized Pornography Good for Social Stability?

Mr. Zhao from Hebei Province believes that the Chinese government should legalize prostitution, as it will be good for social stability. He said, "I suggest that prostitution be legalized. China’s family plan has caused a huge imbalance in the gender ratio. Many men will never find a wife; if their demands for sexual relations cannot be met, it will cause social disorder."

For Every Government Policy, People Have a Counterstrategy

Mr. Shi from Shanghai used to work as a security officer in an entertainment house. He said the regulations in the entertainment business have always been strict. But for every government policy, there is a local strategy to bypass it—all the rules are useless. He said: "I have lots of work experience. I worked in a dance club and later in an Internet café. I think the government policies all look ok. But again, for every policy there is a strategy. Take the Internet café as an example. The rule says no students allowed; another rule says business must close at 3 a.m., 24-hour service is not allowed. But the place where I worked, every day it was open for 24 hours. Karaoke, dance clubs are even more so. All owners are very liberal; no one really follows the rules. They must have inside connections to the government."

Many Entertainment Businesses Have Government Connections{mospagebreak}

Mr. Du from Zhejiang said that many entertainment businesses have connections with the government. Therefore, they are hard to control; in fact no one can really control them. He said: "The Chinese government issued the regulations to control the businesses. In reality, they don’t really know how to control, nor canthey control. Why? It is because all the entertainment businesses and underground gambling shops are run by people with (government) connections. Why can’t they control—because the police are collecting protection fees from the businesses. Of course, they don’t call them ‘protection fees,’ they called them ‘security fees.’ If the government cracks down, everyone will close their businesses; then the police’s supplemental income will be gone."

Mr. Du believes that the sex industry will eventually be legalized. He said: "Years ago, laws and regulations against pornography and organized crime were all published. From Deng Xiaoping to Jiang Zemin, until now, every year, the government launched some campaigns to eliminate them. But China’s reality is that people look down on poor people, not prostitutes. Sex shops, beauty saloons, gambling houses are all over the place. In the past, people still had objections and didn’t like them. Now few make a big deal out of it. So it’s better to legalize them."

According to Mr. Zhang from Shanghai, "I believe that the measure (new regulations for the entertainment business) is claiming that (the sex industry) will continue. It’s like the fight against counterfeiting: The more you fight, the more counterfeits are made. I once read in a magazine that, sometime ago in Beijing, the government closed all the sex shops one night. If they really wanted to control it, they could do it immediately. But right now they don’t really want to control."

Translated by CHINASCOPE from http://www.voanews.com/chinese/archive/2006-02/m2006-02-18-voa49.cfm

The number of unauthorized mass protests and gatherings in China in 2005 reached almost 100,000, involving over eight million people, according to Trend magazine, a monthly Chinese periodical. Over 3,000 of them involved incidents of violent conflict between the police and Chinese residents. Almost 10,000 were injured.

On January 25, 2006, China’s State Council released the Summary Report of Mass Protests and Gatherings in Rural and Urban Areas in 2005, originally compiled by the Central Committee for Comprehensive Management of Public Security. Below are details from the report:

The number of unauthorized mass protests and gatherings across the country totaled 96,408, with 8,208,600 people involved.

Continue reading →

In rural China, substitute teachers are a neglected class of teachers who struggle below the poverty line. Substitute teachers are those in rural schools who are not included among the regular faculty and teach only on a temporary basis. They used to be called "local teachers." Those who had taught on a temporary basis before 1984 were either moved up to regular teachers or simply dismissed.

Starting in 1985, in an effort to improve the quality of teaching in elementary schools, the Ministry of Education banned the use of temporary "local teachers" across the country. However, regular teachers do not want to teach at schools in poor, rural areas, so these schools have to hire temporary teachers to fill the vacancies. They are now called substitute teachers.

As reported in Southern Weekend in April 2005, Dong Jianping, Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Committee in Weiyuan County, forwarded a report addressing the issue of substitute teachers’ income to his deputy Li Yingxin and asked Li to conduct a thorough survey. Li then launched a week-long investigation.

Three months later, Li sent his report entitled A Survey of Substitute Teachers in Weiyuan County to the CCP Committee and to the Department of Education of Gansu Province. However, he never received a reply from either one.

On July 28, 2005, Gansu Daily published Li’s survey. In Gansu Province’s Weiyuan County alone, there were close to 600 substitute teachers. Their monthly salaries ranged from 40 to 80 yuan (US$5 to US$10). Seventy percent of them made only 40 yuan per month. According to Li’s survey, some of them had not had a raise in 20 years.

For the Sake of the Kids

One in every seven to eight teachers in Zhangjiabao Elementary School, in Beizhai Town, is a substitute teacher, and some of them are the key resources for the Beizhai District. The first person Li interviewed at the school was Wang Zhengming.

The 62-year-old Wang is the oldest substitute. With his wrinkled face and hunched back, he looks like an old farmer. He was the first teacher in Zhangjiabao Village when he started teaching in 1958.

Wang proudly tells Li, "The generation of grandchildren in the village are my students; their parents are my students; even their grandparents are my students."{mospagebreak}

Li asks in surprise, "According to state policy, you should have been promoted to regular teacher because you started to work before 1984."

"I missed the opportunity," Wang replies with a humble smile.

When Wang started teaching, there were wolf packs in the vicinity of the school. He would teach during the day, watch the school at night, and do farm work when he had spare time. Regular teachers came and left. Wang was the only one who had taught at the school for more than 20 consecutive years until 1984, when he was let go after the school received several regular teachers.

In 1985, he was called back when there was a shortage of regular teachers. However, his previous years of service did not count. That’s why he was not moved up to a regular teacher later on. Wang has since taught at the school for another 20 years and has made 40 yuan a month during all these years.

The low pay became particularly hard for Wang’s family during the 1980s and 1990s, when his two sons went to college. The family still has to rely on whatever they can make from farming the family land. His wife has to do all the farm work by herself.

"Since I have to teach, my poor wife has to do all the man’s jobs. My daughter had to quit school to help out," Wang says with tears in his eyes.

"What’s your purpose for doing this all these years?" Li asks.

"Nothing. Not for money. Simply for the sake of the kids. I had to quit school when I was young, so my lifelong dream is to make sure that kids can go to school," Wang replies matter-of-factly.

300 Yuan (US$37) a Month Is a Dream

For those middle-aged substitute teachers who have kids in high school or college, their meager incomes have put them in serious hardship. "No matter which village you visit, as long as there is a subsititute teacher, he is for sure the poorest in the village," Li wrote in his survey.

Li Jianxin, who is almost 40, is a substitute teacher at Fuhe Hope Elementary School, in Luojiamo Village, Huichuan Town, Weiyuan County. Nearly half of the teachers in the school are substitutes. Li became a local teacher in September 1984, but for some reason he was not moved up to regular teacher. In Weiyuan County, although the regular teachers who have 20 years of service are making 1,200 yuan (US$150) or above per month, Li had been paid only 40 yuan a month until two years ago when he received an associate degree. Then his salary doubled.{mospagebreak}

Li Jianxin has received the Outstanding Teacher Award from the town and county multiple times. He still has last year’s county certificate for Outstanding Class Teacher hanging on his wall. Every year, he attends the teacher appreciation dinner given by his students who have been accepted by colleges. Although he’s short on money, he always manages to give each of these student five yuan (US$0.6) as a token.

"This year, Zhu Yanxia in our village has been accepted by a university. When I toasted her [at the dinner], she made a deep bow to me. I was very moved when I saw tears running down her cheeks. I feel that all my sufferings have paid off."

Yet, Li’s sense of accomplishment offers little relief to his hardship. Both his son and daughter attend middle school, and their tuition adds up to 3,000 yuan (US$370) per year. With his monthly income of 80 yuan, even if he does not spend a penny, he can save only at most 960 yuan (US$120) a year. He has to rely on the income from his farmland to just barely cover the tuition costs. "I have not bought any new clothes for either of my kids for more than 10 years," Li says with teary eyes.

When the reporter from Southern Weekend asked Li how much he would like for a monthly salary, he said he would like 300 to 400 yuan (US$40-$50), which is close to the figures given by most of the substitute teachers Li Yingxin surveyed.

Young Substitute Teachers Are Leaving

Liu Furong told the reporter from Southern Weekend that the only reason he could afford to get married and start a family was because of his parents’ savings. Many young substitute teachers cannot afford to get married.

This has to do with the betrothal customs in rural areas in northwestern China. Some young substitute teachers cannot afford a betrothal, which ranges from 10,000 to 20,000 yuan (US$1,250 to $2,500). With their annual salary of 400 to 500 yuan (US$50 to $62), even if they stop eating and drinking for 20 years, they can hardly save 10,000 yuan. They simply have to remain single.

Wang Weihong, 39 years old, is a substitute teacher in Beizhai Town. He’s also a key teacher in the Beizhai school district. He sadly tells Li Yingxin that while others’ lives are getting better and better, his is going from bad to worse. He is thinking of leaving after the semester either to pick cotton in Xinjiang or teach in a private school.{mospagebreak}

Yu Jianbang, the superintendent of the Beizhai school district, is deeply troubled with this situation. There are 101 regular teachers and 54 substitute teachers in Beizhai. Three schools in the remote villages are each assigned a teacher, but no regular teacher is willing to go there. Consequently, the work falls on the shoulders of the substitute teachers. Yu says that substitute teachers are sharing at least half of the teaching load in the district. If they leave, the district will fall apart.

At present, there are 32,000 subsitute teachers in the rural areas of Gansu Province. They represent 28.2 percent of all elementary school teachers. According to Wang Jiayi, Vice President and Professor of Education at Northwest Normal University, there are in total 506,000 substitute teachers in 12 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions in western China, which accounts for 20 percent of the total number of teachers in western rural China. He thinks that the condition of the substitute teachers in Weiyuan County is very typical in western China.

Helen Chou is a freelance writer based in New York.

When we hear others talking about Siheyuan, we think of the heart and soul of Beijing. So what is Siheyuan? "Si," in Chinese, means the four-sides: North, South, East, and West. "he," directly translated into English means unity. And "yuan" means courtyard. The Beijing Siheyuans are homes that consist of a four-sided wall with an enclosed courtyard in the center. This courtyard is surrounded by buildings that are generally one story high.

This ancient style of Chinese architecture, which dates back 800 years, has been around for centuries. Beijing Siheyuans are so popular because of their originality and honorable reputation. This unique construction style has been used in building not only various temples and royal palaces but also many ordinary residential homes. Its designs are typically rectangles with the four sides facing the cardinal points. The classical roofs, decorated corridors, and old pomegranate trees exist in an atmosphere of grace, tranquility, and elegance that truly captures the hearts of visitors. From the outside, onlookers are able to see only one side of one building; however, once you walk through the courtyard gates, you enter a completely different world. Because the courtyard is very spacious, trees, flowers, and stone sculptures are placed to add to the serenity of the Siheyuan. Some dwelling compounds are built in the absence of steel and concrete and rely solely on the strength of bricks and wood. An architect in Beijing once said, "The design, layout and material reflect the ancient philosophy of harmony between human and heaven."

Traditionally, the head of the family would reside in the main house which is positioned to the North. Mini bridges and/or halls connect the four buildings. The rooms of the buildings adjoining the main house are referred to as the "side houses" and were the living quarters of the younger generations or less important members of the family. The gate to the courtyard is at the southeastern corner. A screen wall prohibits outsiders from seeing directly into the courtyard and also serves to protect the house from evil spirits. Outside the gate of some large Siheyuans, it is common to find a pair of stone lions. In the past, the lions were symbols of prosperity. In fact, a prince’s palace, in ancient times, was actually a combination of Siheyuan courtyards, with one lying behind another. There were only a few differences between a prince’s palace and an emperor’s palace. The buildings of the emperor’s palace were greater in number, height, and size. Additionally, dragon head patterns were not allowed on a prince’s palace.

Today, most of the Siheyuans have disappeared due to two major waves of demolition. One happened after the Chinese Communist Party took power in 1949 and peaked during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). At the time, traditional culture was labeled as "feudal superstition." Mao Zedong, the former communist leader, enforced the "total elimination of influences from traditional values and old ideas." Many complexes composed of Siheyuans, together with other traditional Chinese cultural treasures including paintings, writings, plays, and books, were indiscriminately destroyed.{mospagebreak}

The second wave happened after China was open to the world for economic reform since the 1980s. The old structures have been giving way to modern high-rise buildings. Particularly in recent years, as the real estate market becomes a hot commodity, builders backed by corrupt officials seek profit with little consideration of cultural preservation. Subsequently, many new buildings have been constructed in Beijing at the sacrifice of old historic relics. Despite the outcries of many historians and environmental activists, little has been done to reverse the trend. According to Beijing’s Municipal Government statistics, an original 17 million square meters (20.3 million square yards) of Siheyuan buildings from the early 1950s, has shrunk to a striking 3 million square meters (3.6 million square yards) as of today.

The modern Beijing is looking more and more like an industrial metropolis than a historic center that symbolizes the tradition and wisdom of 5,000 years of civilization. Strict policies and regulations will have to be implemented to preserve the remaining cultural relics of Beijing and enable the Siheyuans to be a heritage of beauty for future generations.

No reader of America’s Declaration of Independence would be able to escape the power of the Jeffersonian self-evident truth that "all men are created equal," a proposition that gives America its identity and its enemies the most potent reason for rivalry. It is, however, saddening that it was 80 years later, and only after an internecine civil war costing hundreds and thousands of lives, that Americans’ embrace of such values was extended to their black siblings; and it took another 100 years before these values became the reality, nourished by bravery, hope, and the blood of people like Dr. Martin Luther King.

Without any doubt, the wicked nature and the apparent contradictions of slavery with their libertarian ideals were equally self-evident to the founding fathers when Jefferson penned the most often-quoted document America has ever produced. In the original draft of the Declaration, Jefferson labeled the morally bankrupt practice of trafficking and trading Africans in America as "an evil plot" imposed by the British King to corrupt the fabric of American society. However, that statement, a perfect fit in the text, never appeared in the final version of the Declaration. Indeed, as well as a torch-bearer for freedom, America has also been a believer in and practitioner of pragmatism; economic benefits of slavery were deemed so crucial to the survival of that infant republic that the emancipation was deferred to the future generations. By doing this, America carried for 200 years a crushing moral burden that used to be on the backs of their British masters, with legacies still palpable and ubiquitous to this day.

Now China is morphing into a force that can divide America, as did slavery many years ago. However deft the left-leaning scholars and business-obsessed media are in painting China in a different shade, no one can change the fact that the communist behemoth is and will continue to be the most viable threat to the principles upheld by Americans on a global scale, despite the economic buzz it has created. At a time when America’s Declaration of Independence, the most eloquent expression of universal values, is increasingly expanding its acceptance and governance throughout the world—into Russia, Africa, and Eastern Europe—it also draws a line to encircle, isolate, and accentuate an ever-shrinking coterie of non-believers in Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, and China.

Just as their founding fathers, Americans are enduring a clear affront to their collective conscience on the issue of slavery, by pumping money into China. While the moral validity of economically propping up an anachronistic regime in China is tenuous, flimsy, if existent at all, the commercial interest is overriding and the economic benefits tangible and enormous. The fact that China is being portrayed within certain circles of media, academia, and politics as a progressive society inching toward democracy, yet without any hard evidence and concrete timetables, only highlights the moral insecurity of those China apologists.{mospagebreak}

Minxin Pei, a prominent China scholar, argued in a recent article in Foreign Affairs, that China’s reform, while lining the pockets of foreign capitalists by the advantage of cheap Chinese labor and an extremely few elitists having connections within the Chinese Communist Party, is not pushing China toward "democracy," but instead toward moral and ecological "decay." On this, a recent AFP news wire probably offers a most poignant example reporting a Nazi-style concentration camp located in Sujiatun, Shenyang City, specializing in a highly secretive but lucrative business of removing and selling human organs, sometimes while the victims are still alive. Since 2001, over 6,000 Falun Gong adherents who refused to reveal their identities to authorities are said to have been unknowingly shipped into such a macabre facility, with a smoke-spewing crematorium. One employee stated that three quarters of detainees had been murdered and "processed"—and no one was ever expected to come out alive. Over the past decade, China has been the biggest supplier, and economic beneficiary, of human organ trading. While international human rights organizations have long identified China as an exploiter of human organs of executed prisoners, the collusion of government and medical professionals at the Sujiatun camp using Falun Gong practitioners to achieve their respective political and materialist goals adds a blood-stained footnote to Mr. Pei’s non-mainstream interpretation of today’s China.

If Americans stopped their money flowing into a Chinese regime straying from their values, they will be relieved of a heavy moral burden, just as were their founding fathers on the issue of slavery, but will face exorbitant economic costs. Especially at a time when the world is no longer round but "flat," in the words of some luminaries trumpeting globalization and economic developments—a supposed panacea for all kinds of social ills. Even today, we can easily imagine how embarrassing it was 200 years ago for those who had just freed Americans from the yokes of British tyranny only to perpetuate slavery in the face of their cherished Declaration of Independence. Fierce debates immediately ensued and became heated in the 1790s, up until the start of the Civil War, in the same manner as we now witness during the Senate and Congressional hearings on China. In those days the states of Georgia and South Carolina, two heavy keepers of African slaves, vehemently opposed emancipation on economic grounds. Their voices and logic are now echoed by Google and Yahoo! when it comes to assisting China in cracking down on its own people.