Recently, China criticized Secretary of State John Kerry for his words regarding the Communist nation to engage Internet freedoms, along with his support of human rights.
China’s Foreign Ministry called Kerry’s comments “naive.” He may be on many subjects, but in this case, clearly the pot is calling the kettle black.
Kerry spoke to a group of bloggers assembled in Beijing when he made his remarks. China was quick to rebuke the Secretary, attempting to use — of all devices — sarcasm and claimed that the U.S. had “no right to pass judgement and misunderstood the real situation”:
If China’s Internet had not gone through enormous development in the past few years then where would these bloggers have come from?
Where, indeed, could China find a group of people to assemble under threat of jailing them or their families, or killing them or their families? The only thing easier in a Communist nation is for Kim Jung Un to find someone to feed his dogs, literally.
The spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, continued:
China’s affairs must be decided by Chinese people based on their own national condition. Using methods like this to push China in a direction of change they want, isn’t that rather naive?
I would be one to agree with that; China’s affairs must be decided by Chinese people. But that’s not what is happening; China’s affairs are not decided by Chinese people. China’s affairs are decided by a few Chinese elites and are then dictated to the Chinese people under threat of jailing them or their families, or killing them or their families.
Isn’t the naive thing, here, not knowing the utter fabrication of Chinese life that you are attempting to sell the world?
China, for all their manufacturing of iPhones and bed sheets and children’s toys and game consoles is an oppressive regime. They seriously monitor and control online activities, they have labor camps, oppose any real reporting (and will rough up journalists for no reason.)
As Commentary Magazine stated:
China is not quite the totalitarian nightmare that it was under Mao as free enterprise has blossomed there, but neither is it remotely free. Political and religious freedom doesn’t exist there. Nor can private property truly be safe in a system where there is no rule of law. For all the talk about the lunacy in North Korea and other tyrannical nations, the scale of human rights abuses in the world’s most populous country dwarfs anything happening anywhere else.
It’s all together odd that China would oppose Kerry’s “pushing” of freedom and human rights through a speech to bloggers. Is it really wrong to speak openly about the importance and fundamental desire for freedom? Perhaps Kerry should have done it the China way, with torture and fear.
How naive he is.
This article originally posted on Rare.