Comments by "神州 Shenzhou" (@Shenzhou.) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. 3
  2. 3
  3. 3
  4. 3
  5. 3
  6. 3
  7. 3
  8. 3
  9. 3
  10. 3
  11. 3
  12. 3
  13. 3
  14.  @meeveebee  Here I found this forum about "Is Forced/compulsory Military Conscription Morally Right?" and Singapore forced conscription is being talked about and compared to "slavery" Source: "Is Forced/compulsory Military Conscription Morally Right?" depressionforums.org/forums/topic/98638-is-forcedcompulsory-military-conscription-morally-right/ One person wrote: My country Singapore currently has 2 year military conscription compulsory for all males aged 18. Failing to comply to the law will face 3 year imprisonment and fined SGD 10 000. I actually find it pressurizing and pointless. I was so stressed up that I started self harming myself when the enlistment letter came. 3 months basic military training of that 2 year, recruits can't go home. Worse of all, our government is paying the soldiers quite lowly, at least 2 - 3 times lower than the normal monthly incomes of city jobs. I feel it is slavery than I have anything to gain from it. I've more to lose than I've anything to gain. It hurts my self esteem quite a lot thinking about it. Shaving bald and slaved inside as a recruit. I think it is cruelty. Don't get me wrong, my personal stance is that forced military conscription is essential in order for Singapore to survive as a country. Who's going to serve in the Singapore army if not Singapore people? Just like in Xinjiang, re-education of these potential Uighur extremists is essential for China to reform their ways, provide free education for them and train these Uighurs in job skills to prepare them for the workforce in China. Through this, I hope the Uighurs emerge as productive members of society
    3
  15. 3
  16. 3
  17. 3
  18.  @akif5638  By reciting your pledge, you are literally showing that you have been brainwashed by Singapore nationalistic propaganda. Forced conscription is a great way to make young men more patriotic to the country, so why can't China teach Uighurs to be more patriotic to China through re-education? China's Islamic education is the same as Singapore's Islamic education, we remove all the extremist elements from the student's thoughts. In Singapore, you can practice Islam and only condition is that you are respectful to people with other beliefs than yours. Likewise, China allows Muslims do any Islam things except things against the nation or the party and the Government respects Muslim tradition and custom as long as they obey the law and order. As for Singapore building a" democratic society" your country has been literally ruled by authoritarian single party PAP for its entire life already. How is that democratic? Did you know that in Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the population also gets to vote for Kim Jong Um to lead them? You think Singapore does not have dark history of its own? There are so many examples of Singapore dissidents being arrested, and Singapore news will of course paint them as "the enemies" in your country. The part about Amos Lee offending Christians was just a "cover" by Singapore media to punish him for his political views, and you just believe it like that? Even US Asylum court made the following assertion for his asylum: “The evidence presented at the hearing demonstrates that Singapore’s prosecution of Yee was a pretext to silence his political opinions critical of the Singapore government. His prosecution, detention and general maltreatment at the hands of the Singapore authorities demonstrates persecution on account of Yee’s political opinions. Yee is a young political dissident and his application for asylum is granted.” – The Honourable Samuel Cole, immigration judge. Source: A Singapore opposition politician’s experience of dissident Amos Yee’s US asylum hearing hongkongfp.com/2017/03/27/singapore-opposition-politicians-experience-dissident-amos-yees-us-asylum-hearing/ So are you really from Singapore when you don't even know how your country deals with political dissidents? And while you personally enjoyed forced conscription in your country, I have earlier cited a source about Singapore males who compare forced conscription to slavery. And Singapore is of course not China (just like China is not Singapore) but clearly, our countries share similar views with regard to authoritarian single-party rule, as well as crushing political dissidents. But you are the one pretending like Singapore is somehow better, when your political system is similar to ours.
    3
  19. 3
  20.  @JohnBobb  "It was hoped (and i did too) that you would find your way into a democracy (like HK and Taiwan)" Explain, why should China adopt Western democracy? Hong Kong had been ruled by authoritarian British colonial rule and it was successful, right up to democracy was introduced after Hong Kong handover to mainland China, then Hong Kong started suffering all the protests and its economy stagnated. And Taiwan had been under authoritarian single-party Kuomintang rule for more than half its life! The KMT ruled Taiwan with iron fist, and KMT leader Chiang kai-shek jailed and executed many dissidents and political rivals (whether real or perceived) in a period known as White Terror 白色恐怖 and imposed martial law on Taiwan for more than 38 years, which was qualified as "the longest imposition of martial law by a regime anywhere in the world" at that time. But under authoritarian KMT rule, Taiwan flourished and rapidly modernized and this was known as Taiwan Miracle. Between 1952 and 1982, Taiwan's economic growth was on average 8.7%, and between 1983 and 1986 at 6.9%. Taiwan GDP grew by 360% between 1965 and 1986 and the percentage of global exports was over 2% in 1986, over other recently industrialized countries, and the global industrial production output grew a further 680% between 1965 and 1986. And it was all achieved under authoritarian KMT rule. Only when democracy was introduced to Taiwan (because USA threatened to halt weapons sale to Taiwan if KMT did not introduce political reforms) did Taiwan's economic growth became more modest in 1990s and today, Taiwan's economy is in a slump, wages are stagnant, cost of living is high, and Taiwan graduates can't find job so they seek employment opportunities abroad, such as in the mainland or Singapore. So why should China introduce democracy then? Because Westerners say so?
    3
  21. 3
  22. +AM Life Why do you say largest part China population still live in poverty? According to World Bank, China’s poverty rate fell from 88% in 1981 to mere 6.5% in 2012, so why still claim largest part of Chinese population are still living in poverty? Sure, its not 0%, but remember that China is world's largest population, so reducing poverty from 88% to 6.5% is astonishing feat. If every Chinese person somehow attained living standards as that of USA, then it could be possible that Earths resources would be depleted to sustain such large population at such high living standards. If you claim "free environment" needed to grow, then why not look at India, world's largest democracy. It has world's 2nd largest population and Republic of India was democratic since 1947, whereas People's Republic of China founded 2 years later (1949) than India. Yet China mostly overtaken India in virtually every aspect, so what makes you think that China would somehow be better under democratic system? As for Singapore, Hong-Kong, Macau, Japan, South Korea, most of them were ruled by authoritarianism at one point in their history which led to their growth. Singapore was ruled by authoritarian Lee Kuan Yew, and South Korea by Park Chung Hee. Even ROC (Taiwan) while claiming be "democratic" was ruled by Jiang Jieshi for many decades before free elections were held in ROC. The common thing shared by all these countries during their authoritarian rule, was that the country experienced tremendous economic growth during this period. Even today, China's economy is largest than all of them, and economies in Japan and Hong-Kong are said to be declining. I don't understand why you think a radical change in leadership, will somehow solve the economic issues of the country. You think American citizens angry at USA economy are doing the right thing, when they radically vote Trump into power to "Make America Great Again"? True, the whole US system isn't changed, but the leader can always revoke policies made by previous political party. For example, President Obama spent 8 years planning and developing the Trans Pacific Partnership, only for Trump to take over and cancel the TPP, simply because Trump disliked Obama (Obama humiliated Trump with his birth certificate) Because of his actions, 8 years of taxpayers money suddenly went down the drain just like that, because of one man's actions. So how exactly does changing the leader result in better policies? As for China's system, the government always present united front, and any good policies reflect well while bad policies reflect badly. For example, the communist party has to live with the consequences of Mao's policies and because of this, new measures such as age-limits are introduced to prevent people from attaining too much power. Also, the party supports long term policies, like the Belt and Road Iniaitive, which will take decades, even centuries to fully manifest, but China can achieve this, because our government is still expected to remain in power even after decades later. But US government changes every 4-8 years, so it is impossible for USA to have any long-term policies for the country spanning more than 8 years, without another person coming into power to sabotage it. China has many problems of our own like pollution, corruption and so on, but what makes you think giving people more liberties will somehow make them happier? Once you grant someone liberty, it is extremely difficult to retract it. For example, in America, there are loose gun laws, and every citizen has a right to bear firearms. Because of this, it is easier to commit crime like robbing banks, due to availability of guns to the public, than in other countries with stricter gun laws. American Policemen also encounter more danger in their work, due to higher possibility of suspects being armed. The American government is having difficulty in introducing stricter gun laws, because doing so will be seen as taking away people's freedoms in the American citizen's eyes. Therefore, from the American gun law example, I would say China is in no hurry to introduce such liberties to the common Chinese people, if it can be avoided. For example, China is slowly shifting from fossil fuels by stopping any more of such plants being built. But in America, the fossil fuel and petroleum industry are so big, that banning fossil fuels is going to be quite impossible to achieve in such short time. China poised to ban new coal-fired power stations afr.com/news/china-poised-to-ban-new-coalfired-power-stations-20160711-gq3izc
    3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3