China has a long and authoritarian history of suppressing free speech even though some academics now believe that it has been right all along on such suppression on the Internet. Just when you thought China could not get more bold and outrageous in its anti-free speech actions, it surprises you. This week China sanctioned Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz for criticizing its treatment of minority Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang.
The two senators were listed by the Chinese government as targets of the “corresponding sanctions” with an array of others like Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom, Sam Brownback, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith, and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China. Now, mere political criticism of China is deemed to “seriously interfere in China’s internal affairs.” It is another example of how China would reshape free speech in areas as it seeks to expand its economic and political hold over areas like theAsia-Pacific area.
It’s not clear what the new sanctions against U.S. officials will entail.
China was outraged by the statement of the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that “The United States will not stand idly by as the CCP [Chinese Community Party] carries out human rights abuses targeting Uyghurs, ethnic Kazakhs and members of other minority groups in Xinjiang, to include forced labor, arbitrary mass detention and forced population control, and attempts to erase their culture and Muslim faith.”
One of the common aspects of state censorship is that officials become more obsessed and sensitive to criticism that it cannot silence, even from other countries.
The Atlantic published an article by Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Arizona law professor Andrew Keane Woods calling for Chinese style censorship of the internet. They declared that “in the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong” and “significant monitoring and speech control are inevitable components of a mature and flourishing internet, and governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with society norms and values.”
This is not the Internet censorship that Goldsmith and Woods so readily embraced but it is an example of implications of embracing China’s approach to dissenting opinions and actions. Presumably, China already censors the views of both senators and these human rights organizations on the Internet as part of that “mature and flourishing internet.”
In the meantime, China continues to censor stories about Hong Kong and this week declared opposition polls a national security violation.
60 thoughts on “China Sanctions U.S. Senators For Criticizing China”
Take the cost of manufacturing something subtract the cost of transport to the USA and replace it with the same thing from over the border production from Mexico. USA doesn’t have the available work force for when things are back to normal. Cannot do infrastructure rebuilt without turning some of the jobs over to the unions leaving who to do the unions are doing now? The few percent left as unemployed will end up about the same or better so whose going to replace them. Import Chinese? Leave it to Pelosi and they’ll import north korean slaves.
North America for the North Americans.
You are funnier and much more affable when you use your other suckpuppet accounts.
What do your connections with George Soros trolling organizations get you when the revolution is done? Free red CCP shirt or your own Chinese water torture jug?
Sorry, where I wrote “Goldsmith and Keane Woods even discussed the widespread misinterpretation …,” that should be “Woods” rather than “Keane Woods.” I had assumed that Woods had a double surname, but I just checked and it looks like “Keane” is his middle name. My mistake.
CTHD is not honest and not committed to anything besides Democrat talking points
Right now Democrat leadership has turned its back on law and order
Turned its back on anybody with white skin
Turned its back on anybody with dark skin who is a law abiding orderly citizen
Turned its back on anyone born on American soil
That means they’ve turned their back not only on us the the white folks, obviously so, even though a lot of them are lilly white crackers like Pelosi too.
No they’re turning their back on decent “people of color” too. The middle class which they seek to harass, annoy, intimidate, and DESTROY
why? globalism in a nutshell. Soros owns her, and them, and BLM. he wants to END America. End nation states as such. Most of all, US.
Democrats have sold out America as a viable nation, to a billionaire born in Hungary, and others like him. A handful of billionaires, like Mikey Bloomberg, a centi-billionaire, and Jeff Bezos, the richest man on Earth.
CTHD is just another mercenary out there doing his part for Soros effort to destroy America.
Re: “CTHD is not honest,” I dare you to quote anything I’ve written that’s false and where I haven’t corrected the mistake. (I’m not talking about things where you falsely assert that I’ve said something dishonest, but don’t back up your own claim with valid evidence, or where you infer something that I didn’t say or imply and then attribute your mistaken inference to me.)
And me pointing out that Turley is misrepresenting someone’s work isn’t a “Democratic talking point,” nor am I a “mercenary” of any sort, much less doing anything for George Soros. And the “his” in your last line is mistaken.
I could care less about your phony schtick. What you say is total distraction and irrelevant trolling.
If you are doing this rhetorical work for free, then you even worse than a mercenary. at least they get paid.
it’s possible you are sincere; i know there are tons of stupid, sincere white liberals out there. i see them holding placards sometimes saying “defund police.,”
talk about a self-abnegation! sad and pathetic
If you think it’s “total distraction and irrelevant” for me to accurately note that Turley misrepresented the work he cited, that’s sad.
FFS, it should matter to all of us whether claims are true.
Turley isn’t being honest about Goldsmith’s and Wood’s argument, and it’s important to call him out on it.
Kurtz notably does not address the issue but goes right to his new found paranoid conspiracy beliefs. He can’t handle the truth or democracy.
A bit off-topic, and not an endorsement necessarily of any particular ‘conspiracy theory’, but sometimes there is truth regarding conspiracies.
If you establish that something is true, it’s not a conspiracy theory (in its everyday sense, a “theory” is a “conjecture,” and if you know something is true, it’s no longer a conjecture; FWIW, “theory” has a different meaning in science).
Kurtz’s garbage about “Soros … wants to END America. End nation states as such. Most of all, US. Democrats have sold out America as a viable nation, to a billionaire born in Hungary, and others like him” is a bulls*t conspiracy theory.
Theory aside Soros open statement in the past is useful “I want to replace the present Constitutional Republic with a Socialist Government.” The proof is in the pudding as we watch the socialist regressive party do exactly that. Socialism of course is just another way of saying a fascist for of government such as communism, nazi-ism, or progressive liberalism in it’s regressive form. End of conversation. More proof. 1909 to present under the incrementalist Woodrow Wilson through FDR, LBJ, Carter, Clinton, Obama governments including their high war rates, and high taxes and their incremental never ending efforts to destroy our Constitutional Republic res publica of, by, and for the citizens.
You may be not be telling the truth.
A Google search on [Soros “I want to replace the present Constitutional Republic with a Socialist Government.”] yields “No results found for Soros ‘I want to replace the present Constitutional Republic with a Socialist Government.’”
But I recognize that Google searches don’t pull up everything. So how about you either link to a reliable source for your “quote”? If you can’t, then you should admit that he didn’t say what you placed in quotation marks.
Is there any proof that the CCP does not own the NYT?
Since the NYT is acting like the CCP, it stands to reason China owns them just like the DNC
The CCP governs the PRC despotically.
I’ll bet the Chinese don’t like hate speech. Those darn senators.
Comments are closed.