From Jeremiah: “@Tom: I agree the issue of ‘not if, but when’ these reforms take hold is at the heart of this debate. Though there are those in China who argue that rule of law, free media etc. are forever ill-suited to “Chinese culture.”

I would disagree that an evolution of rights is an inevitable outcome of current circumstances in China.

I am not one of those that says that freedoms are ill-suited to some inherent “Chinese Culture,” culture is amorphous and ever-changing, which is precisely why I would disagree that an evolution of rights is an inevitable outcome of current circumstances in China, rejecting the “not if but when” argument.

Again, it goes back to the ability of those in government to wield arbitrary power without consequences. Rights are inherent checks against the power of the state, and the State in China does not seem to want to have these kinds of checks to its power.

My point was that the Olympics indicates a general attitude in Chinese government. If freedoms are inconvenient, then they can do away with them. Indeed, if rights can be swept way arbitrarily, then there is no real progress.

In other words, if a decade’s or so worth of progress on freedoms can be pushed aside for the Olympics, even if it is a “big event,” what does that say about the substance of that progress, the commitment of the government to rights? Rights require a deep dedication and China has proven it does not have that in them, at least right now. What will be the next “big event” that will justify this kind of crackdown?

Rights require the commitment of the government and the ability of a government to face injustices and problems, a capacity for self criticism and self evaluation China does not have enough of currently, in my opinion. If reporters can be bribed not to cover something, if rights lawyers and reporters jailed, criticism smashed on the internet, then how can this consciousness develop?

People have been saying for at least two decades that they do not like how China is handling rights, but it is getting better. This is like saying, “Yes that man beats his son, but the way he is treating his daughters is getting better.”

Indeed, gradualism was not an answer to the American Civil Rights movement, at least when Dr. King railed against it, and I doubt its validity in China. Do Chinese citizens have less of a need for rights than African Americans? If not, then what possible reason could there be for denying them? Rights come when people demand them and the government chooses to respect them. Many reports and books like Philip Pan’s “Out of Mao’s Shadow: The Struggle for the Soul of a New China” shows that when people stand up for their rights, they are beaten down.

While it might not be fair to depict China according to individual incidents or events, how many occurrences does one need before there is a pattern established?

Just a couple of quick points:

1) The ideas I suggested are not uniquely mine nor are they uniquely “Western,” we can find similar prescriptions in Chinese writings both of yesterday and today. It should also be noted that free speech is enshrined in the Chinese constitution, despite current practice.

2) @Tom: I agree the issue of ‘not if, but when’ these reforms take hold is at the heart of this debate. Though there are those in China who argue that rule of law, free media etc. are forever ill-suited to “Chinese culture.” Where I might quibble on the speed perspective is whether issues of corruption, economic inequality, environmental degradation etc. might require more immediate drastic action than a ‘wait and see’ approach. It all depends, I suppose, on how one views the severity and acuteness of China’s current challenges.