This is just another (and possibly final) chapter in this sorry story. In April, 20,000 residents fought off 3,000 armed policemen with shovels, rakes, and other farm implements. There have been many deaths this year as the peasants defend what little they have. It looks like the government has decided to end the fight once and for all.
There were photos smuggled out of that April battle. I can't find them right now, but they were remarkable. posted by ewagoner at 1:44 PM on December 9, 2005
I was about to post this myself. 74,000 riots or serious public disturbances in 2004, more than ever as China slowly take steps in an economic liberal direction, and the Times is reporting 20 dead. There's no point in comparing this to the US, this is a serious trend in itself. What will the long-term government response be? It cannot be capitulation to public demands under the current system. It's either crackdown hard or lose its grip on the country. posted by loquax at 1:48 PM on December 9, 2005
loquax: I think you're using an odd definition of "ever".
But that said, this is why democracy in local government is the most important kind. Corrupt 'leaders' in one area can cause unrest, and OK leaders in others can cause OKness.
The Chinese peasant today is much better off then they were 30 years ago, that's for sure, although you could make the argument that they were better off under the KMT. Maybe.
Anyway, this system is pretty similar to the way china has been run for the past, oh, 2000 years or so -- at the local level. posted by delmoi at 1:55 PM on December 9, 2005
The Chinese peasant today is much better off then they were 30 years ago
The peasants who are not being shot, I assume.
This is interesting. The Chinese are pretty keen on keeping all eyes on the cities and the coast. The real action, however, is going down the countryside. posted by elwoodwiles at 2:16 PM on December 9, 2005
loquax: I think you're using an odd definition of "ever".
You're right. More than recently anyways. Say more than usual since economic liberalization began in some earnest, which I think is the key. posted by loquax at 2:20 PM on December 9, 2005
This is certainly not good news. For context, can anyone post some Gross National People-killing statistics for developed nations? posted by StickyCarpet at 3:03 PM on December 9, 2005
Thank goodness that we invented guns. Imagine how horrible it must have been to just have the local police/army machette their way through villages like this. posted by Balisong at 4:21 PM on December 9, 2005
This is not communism.
The villagers in Dongzhou said their dispute with the authorities had begun with a conflict over plans by a power company to build a coal-fired generator in their area, which they feared would cause heavy pollution. Farmers said they had not been compensated for the use of the land for the plant.
This is command capitalism. If China wants to advance, this is what they must do unfortunately. Free market captialism doesn't work well in industrializing societies and is often chaotic.
-----------------------------
However, we can put those into a different context here. posted by j-urb at 5:12 PM on December 9, 2005
It's funny how nobody here in Guangdong has read anything about this in the papers, yet everyone is talking about it.
It's going to be pretty nasty if the government continues to ignore the needs or requirements of the farmers and the poor in China.
But everybody look, they've got the Olympics coming in 2008! And they've had 2 manned space missions! Wow! China's become so modern and civilized and efficient and wonderful! posted by taschenrechner at 7:36 PM on December 9, 2005
Subscribe
posted by sourbrew at 1:22 PM on December 9, 2005