She's hunted 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

United Kingdom suspended extradition to Hong Kong in 2020 after the Chinese government cracked down on dissent. Chloe was one of the 150,000 fleeing government repression who allowed to come to the UK in 2023. 

One Hong Konger who dared to publish pro-democracy material has been held in solitary confinement since 2020. Sometimes families are interrogated. Recently dissidents are alarmed at the deepfake videos China has produced to intimidate them. Bounties like the one on Chloe were placed on 34 others. 

They're afraid that the British government seeks a friendlier relationship with China. It's even likely to allow a "super embassy" to be built on five acres in the middle of London that could become a surveillance hub for the Chinese government on the edge of the financial district. The U.S. is concerned about it.

Chloe and the others are worried they could become a trade-off for the government.

from "She Fled Repression"

She's hunted 1

At 20 years old, Chloe Cheung (photo) checks behind her back every time she leaves her home. She doesn't take the same route to work even two days in a row, and continually checks the rear view mirror while driving.

Though she lives in London now, there's a bounty on her head of a million Hong Kong dollars (about $128,000). She's living in constant fear.

Her crime? As a student back in Hong Kong, she protested against the government and in favor of democracy in 2019. When the government started arresting protesters, she fled to Britain. Maybe she expected a sympathetic welcome, because Hong Kong was ruled by the British under a lease agreement with China for 99 years.

That lease ended in 1997 and they officially pulled out. China re-established control.

from "She Fled Repression in Hong Kong"

(cont'd tomorrow)

No saddles

Thomas Jefferson was the primary writer of the Declaration of Independence, that document which told the world that the American people intended to cut their bonds to England and take their place among the sovereign nations. 

An invitation to Washington D.C. to celebrate the signing of that document was sent to him fifty years later, in 1826, but he couldn't go because of ill health. 

It's clear how passionate he still was about the people's liberty and rights in his reply to the invitation, and he's still right about this: human beings are not born with saddles on their backs so that some elites can ride them with spurs and reins.

Vibe shift 4

Follow-up to these posts

Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos (photo) just made an additional change to the newspaper. In perhaps another example of the "vibe shift," he directed the opinion pages to write in support and defense of two new themes. He calls them "pillars," probably in the sense of American foundational values: personal liberty and free markets.

 

Not everyone is happy about it, so I have to wonder just what they have against personal liberty and free markets (rather than forced or coerced ones). When he asked his opinion pages editor to manage this new direction, the man chose to quit his job instead.

Other subjects will be addressed, but the policy shift is clear. "Viewpoints opposing those pillars," he says, "will be left to be published by others." 

from his X post

Stop hiding

A widespread, public discussion about immigration is urgently needed across the United Kingdom and the West. Despite that vote (yesterday's post) against investigation in Parliament, grooming gang crimes should no longer be hidden (photo) in Britain.

Konstantin Kisin names a basic issue that should be talked about openly, civilly, honestly, without censorship and without fear of reprisal:

"Western countries won't stop suffering terrorist attack after terrorist attack until they let go of their most cherished belief: that all people are equal and that all cultures are the same."

A crime is a crime in Britain and everywhere, whether it's committed by natives of your country or by immigrants to your country. 

Freer FB

"Destroyed trust." Head of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, says that his former policies of content moderation and fact-checker censors have destroyed the public's trust. Maybe he was actually sincere last September when he seemed to regret the censorship that Facebook has practiced.

It sounds like the message that Jeff Bezos delivered to Washington Post. It could be a trend, a good one. Many Americans have had enough of media efforts to force their own views down our throats. As they both said, we don't trust them anymore.

Zuckerberg says that Facebook is going to adopt something like X's community notes to function in place of fact-checkers.

Skeptical people think he's just kissing up to the new administration. Whether he is or not, Facebook will be a freer platform . . and that's a good thing.

Old year 2024

On this last day of the year 2024, there are probably many lists of 2024's memorable events and they will differ wildly depending on whose point of view was used. Here are a few events from a list I like:

• Spectacular catching of a 250-ton rocket in free fall, the first ever
• A NYC subway rider defended the lives of his fellow passengers of multiple races, then those passengers told the court that he was a hero
• A pro-football player stood up publicly for family and faith, then stood strong against being cancelled and earned a new contract
• A female university volleyball team took a stand against biologically male players

What a year this has been.

from Stream

Free debate 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

C.S. Lewis was a proponent of civil liberty, for much the same reason that I am: who is to say that one person (or some group) will make better decisions for your life than you? Who is so superior that we should trust them to run our lives for us?

He's talking about oppressive government, socialism/dictatorship - power seized by "a small, highly disciplined group of people  . . I do not think any group good enough to have such power. They are men of like passions with ourselves."

image of King James VI of Scotland

"For every Government consists of mere men."  Think of some past European monarchs who claimed a "divine right" to their throne, their rule over other men and women. No one thinks today that they were superior beings. They were at least as flawed as me and you.

The traditional American way is the way of free and civil debate, grounded in personal virtue and a conscience trained by churches that teach the Bible. Note to my global readers - as you may know, this is less and less a description of today's America.

Free debate?

While my laptop is freed of a virus, enjoy this re-post from 2018:

 "Free debate" will not continue to be the American way if Christianity loses much more of its influence and moral authority in American society. 

There's a movement in the U.S. to replace the traditional American way with more coercive government. Voluntary virtue and faith are widely derided today. As they lose public support, something else will have to suppress bad behavior for society's sake - and that something else will be the government. 

China's government sets itself in that role of moral authority. As the enemy of religion, it destroys churches, captures believers, forcibly changes speech - until the religion submits itself to the rule of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party). 

At the very beginning of America, John Adams said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people." This founding father of America knew that it would work only for a people whose Christian faith was their primary influence.

Attacking Elon 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

How gullible are people? Some completely trust those in power to tell them what is true and what is "dis/mis/information" -- so they approve of government censorship.

The White House today, like tyrants everywhere, is afraid of free speech so they must suppress and control public opinion. What a contrast to President Kennedy (assassinated in 1963) who trusted the public (us Americans) with our constitutional right to free speech.

Elon is not one to humbly submit to coercion. He bought Twitter and let go of over half the staff since "content moderation" or censorship would no longer be their goal. He published documentation that Twitter had been bowing to government pressure. 

Elon's businesses make him vulnerable. This White House and its left wing political party really don't like him, and it shows (yesterday's post). So he's gone from having little interest in politics to . . joining the other political party and its presidential candidate (photo). 

As he has said in the past, Game On.

Resisting 6

Follow up to this post

In spite of Maduro's threats, X (Twitter) would not comply with his demand that they censor his political opponents. So a much higher penalty was set.

X is banned in Brazil. Some citizens might want to switch to a VPN (virtual private network) to get around the ban and continue reading X, but that strategy is squelched as well. A justice speaking for their Supreme Court announced that anyone doing that will be fined US$8900/day--more than the average yearly salary.

The CEO of X says, “This is a sad day for X users around the world, especially those in Brazil, who are being denied access to our platform. I wish it did not have to come to this – it breaks my heart.”  She added that Brazil's constitution forbids censorship.

X's legal representative in country was threatened with imprisonment so she resigned, and even then all her bank accounts were frozen. 

Both in America and in other countries, we take the freedom to speak for granted. But it's gotten to the point where we'll have to fight for that freedom because: "Just about every tinpot dictator on the planet wants to stamp out our right to hear alternative voices . ."

from Mind Matters

Try socialism 3

When Cambodia shifted to economic freedom, things got a lot better for the people. No, we don't want socialism. Freedom is best for Americans.

(cont'd from yesterday's post).

Freer market reforms during the 1990's opened the door to optimism. Mr. Lim's parents had no hope for a better future, but his own generation saw that grinding poverty as rice farmers was no longer the only option: they saw freedom to improve their lives.

From 1995 to 2017 Cambodia's economy grew at an average rate of 7.7% per year. (To compare, good growth in the U.S. used to be about 3% per year.) In 2007 the poverty rate was still about 47%, but by 2014 it was at 14%.

photo

What does Cambodia look like now? This author recently visited Mr. Lim and reports:

"Mr. Lim works in tourism. He drives a Lexus SUV on paved roads. He buys groceries from a thriving local market, and his daughters go to school. His brother owns a pharmacy in Phnom Penh. Another brother is a nurse at a major hospital . . There are entrepreneurs everywhere . . I witnessed family-owned coffee shops, restaurants, general stores, and roadside markets."

In one generation the grim poverty was turned around. Mr. Lim says it came because of: "Peace, education, technology, and the entrepreneurial spirit of Cambodian people.”

from "Entrepreneurship Lifts Cambodia from the Clutches of Extreme Poverty in a Single Generation"

Zuck regrets

Did you doubt it when you heard that social media censors speech? Or when you heard that the current American administration was pushing them to do it, because the government we have now wants to silence some of us?

If so, doubt no more. Mark Zuckerberg (photo), founder and CEO of Meta, confirms it in a letter he wrote to the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives:

"In 2021, senior officials from the . . White House repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content . . and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn't agree." There were other subjects, too, that the government wanted censored.

He says they would handle the situation differently today than they did then and expresses some regret. "[W]e're ready to push back if something like this happens again." 

Meta cooperated with the government to violate the First Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing free speech. Zuckerberg seems to admit it, now that the House of Representatives is investigating.

Price control

One of our candidates for president of the United States says she wants to start controlling prices in this country. She claims that food would be cheaper, for example, because greedy evil companies in the food business would be forced by the government to sell at low prices.

Would that be good for the people? Here's a report from National Public Radio about the outcomes in one nation where that plan has been done by the socialist government for years.

photo

Venezuelan citizen Anny can shop only on certain days and at government-run stores. She is limited in how much she can buy. She must prove her identity. And, of course, many shelves are empty and food shortages are common.

NPR published this article in 2015, nine years ago. I doubt that it would be published today. Why not? Because of this: our political party on the left wants similar controls now, and NPR is a mouthpiece for the party's policies. This article would tell voters that price controls are a bad thing.

from NPR, "The Nightmare of Food Shopping in Venezuela"

Prof fired

Freedom to speak your opinion even when it disagrees with the powerful, one of the American freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in our Constitution, can't be assumed here in the U.S. anymore. Powerful people tell us that THEY hold the right to define truth.

Sadly, our colleges and universities have been bullying individuals for many years with regard to speech. A California professor with tenure was accused of immoral and unprofessional conduct and then fired in 2021. An official compared free speech advocates like him to "livestock that needed to be culled from the herd."

The prof said he was fired for speaking things the college didn't like, and filed a law suit.

 

 photo

The college claimed innocence but were willing to pay a hefty sum to avoid having to defend that claim in court. They settled for paying $2.4 million this summer.

Loss of free speech here in America and other places is what happens when those holding power don't want to go to the trouble of civil discussion with people who disagree. This example is the fourth one this week; the other examples of power denying freedom of speech were Venezuela (Tuesday), Britain (Wednesday), and Facebook (yesterday).

from Pen America

Before you post

Maybe you've seen the videos of protest, mobs and riots taking place in Britain in the last week. As one Brit puts it, the UK has been on fire.

Their new Prime Minister wants to crack down on the turmoil. To squash the protests, he's going after freedom of speech. His government called on big tech firms to do more censoring. The owner of X doesn't feel compelled to comply.

Now they're warning all individual users of social media:  

"You may be committing a crime if you repost, repeat or amplify a message which is false, threatening, or stirs up racial / religious hatred." Wait, who is the judge of social media posts? Who decides what is false or hateful? They have police who scan for guilty posts and arrest the perp.

This author traces a pretty long decline in freedom of speech in Britain.

from Spiked

 (cont'd tomorrow)

Resisting 5

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

Nicolas Maduro still holds power in Venezuela, in spite of losing July's election (in the view of many countries) and in spite of massive protests. We know his tactics include accusations and threats against his opposition, but that's not all.

A dictator cannot be too careful of allowing influencers to speak. So he has ordered X (former Twitter) to be blocked from the country for ten days as a punishment for X owner Elon Musk. Why? Because--shock--Elon has made mean statements about him, like calling him a dictator and a clown.

(Actually, I call him a dictator too, but for some reason Maduro's not coming after me 😄)

 

from Seattle Times

Resisting 3

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

People of Venezuela, drawing courage from Maria Corina Machado, are taking to the streets to protest against Maduro's claim of election victory. Both sides say they have evidence to support their claim. Machado says her candidate received 73% of the vote.

.

"Venezuelan elections under Mr. Maduro have long ceased to be considered free or fair, beset by voter suppression and other irregularities." Some Latin American countries have downgraded their relationship to Venezuela in protest.

The NYT reports that the analysis of a non-government research group is consistent with an independent exit poll conducted on Election Day. Their conclusion? The opposition party beat Maduro by 66% to 31%.

A fight for power is taking place right now.

from New York Times

Resisting 2

(cont'd from yesterday's post)

This woman "and the opposition movement she has created are the only things standing between the people and Nicolás Maduro and his thugs." 

She's not the kind of leader you'd expect to win the hearts of Venezuelans because "she's too white and too rich." But she stands for principles the people love, like personal dignity, the freedom to start a business, reuniting families torn up by migration. "Grandparents die alone because their children decided to walk thousands of miles and cross jungles to reach societies where they can thrive."

Electricity may be turned off by the government when she plans a rally, so the people "turn on the flashlights on their cell phones and silence themselves to listen." If they block the roads, fishermen bring her by boat. If they block tv and radio, social media carries her message.

When her candidacy was barred, she asked the people to vote for her stand-in. With record numbers voting, polls indicated a landslide for her representative. But Maduro claimed the victory.

from The Free Press

(cont'd tomorrow)

Resisting

Inflation climbed 9,000% from 2012 to 2022, and that is just the tip of the misery iceberg in Venezuela where socialist dictators Chavez and Maduro have held control since 1998. Chavez changed the constitution to take the country by revolution when his term as president was to end in 2003.

A third of the country's citizens (eight million) have left it, and the people are desperate. Take a look at the "man-made hell" they've been dealing with here.

Opposing the government of Maduro (successor to Chavez) is dangerous. This author was convicted of creating a movie "portraying the authorities in a negative light," and sentenced to 6-10 years in prison for it. He moved to the U.S. two hours later.

Maduro claimed victory in last Sunday's national election--after opposition figures were arrested and the leader barred from running (that should sound familiar). That leader is still the focus of whatever hope is left. Her name is Maria Corina Machado.

from The Free Press

(cont'd tomorrow)