from MITBBS http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t1/WorldNews/31425995_0_1.html
我一个已经毕业的德国同学发表了一句关于达赖的话，我发表了评论，说西方媒体在西
藏问题上不公
平造成他们的错误印象，然后他的一个朋友看了不爽，我们开始辩论。我觉得最终她说
不下去了，选
择放弃。如果各位能够忍着看完这段裹脚布，欢迎评论和指点。
以下是记录：
A(德国同学): wishes the Dalai Lama could return to Tibet and put an end to
the cultural genocide of his country.
我：i have to say you are entirely wrong on this. in short, dalai lama
was one of the worst human rights violators in recent history before
1950, which is not entirely his fault since he was born into a bad
system.
china's ethnic policies are not nearly perfect by any means, but this
dude has been full of lies for years. if you want a theocracy combined
with brutal slavery, dalai is for you. if you call better living
standards and everyone being given equal status and opportunities a
cultural genocide, then...
he is a tool of the china-hating west, and you are buying it. western
propaganda has done a very good job over the years. too bad, press
freedom oftentimes serve political agendas and don't convey the truth.
A：Lets agree to disagree!
B(与我辩论的美国女): It must feel nice to finally have freedom of speech.
If you're so frustrated with "western propaganda" then I highly suggest
considering that the very ideology that you seem comfortable railing
against, allows you to do so without restrictions placed by the
government on say, what internet site you visit, for example.
I'm a considerably liberal person and try to look at things objectively.
I don't agree with a lot of the United States dispositions and politics.
I enjoy Chinese culture and appreciate it's history, but I'm firmly
against people from any nationality, who seem to be ok with taking
advantage of the Western culture, educational system and use our
resources only to blame "western propoganda" for people's opinions. In a
system of informational freedom, intelligent people can develop their
own opinions.
我：you are absolutely right, freedom of speech is great, and i regret
that china does not have as much of it as the west, although it's
gradually making progress. and in what ways am i railing against freedom
of speech in my comments? i am all for free speech, and i take advantage
of it and express my mind.
i guess the word propaganda irks you because... Read More you think it
cannot possibly exist in a so-called free society? have you not not paid
attention to what happened in the last several years? my point is that
informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas.
going back to the tibet issue, i assume that you did not know dalai's
tie with the nazi's, which is conveniently never mentioned in any news
coverage, but if al quaeda were related to the nazi's. you think any
american would not be reminded of that time and again? look, press
freedom or not, every country speaks in its own interest, sometimes it
results in bias, and that's natural.
B: <
I interpret the above statement as you saying that FREE PRESS results in
untruths and political agenda. And it happens "often." That's an attack
on free speech (press = speech). You're implying that this idea of
"press freedom" is not in actuality free. Yes, I was a politically
conscious person, even during the Bush administration as you implied. I
didn't support him and didn't exactly trust a lot of what he/his
administration was saying. Why do you suppose that was? I think it was
because I was able to access (and contribute to) various news outlets. I
recommend that before alleging that ALL news outlets propagate some
Western agenda, you consider the various independent news outlets that
are affiliated with the United States and are not (eg BBC, Indian news
papers), also to which we have access.
Sure, Fox News is propaganda. Rachel Maddow, arguably propaganda too,
although she actually fact checks... But there are stark differences
between the two news sources. How, then do you reconcile this and say
"informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas" when there isn't a uniform political agenda,
or more specifically, people are free to propagate whatever they want?
So to answer your question: no I don't think propaganda can exist in a
free society (it's not "so called."), because there is always room for
an opposing view or information to counter it and for the very reasons I
just presented.
Did you know that Coca Cola was affiliated with the Nazis? That doesn't
mean anything. I really hope you're not insinuating that the US is only
fighting Al Quaeda because of it's affiliation with the Nazis. I'm
personally, more pissed about mass genocide and people who deny that the
free press I receive from which I make informed opinions, is not
possible. That's just me. I donno. I digress.
我："Sure, Fox News is propaganda."
"no I don't think propaganda can exist in a free society."
those two sentences which appear in the same paragraph seem
contradictory to each other. unless my english is bad, or maybe foxnews
is in china?
free does not necessarily mean truthful. i blame those who lie under the
name of free speech, but that does not mean i hate free speech itself. i
can say that obama is a racist/communist because i want people to
believe he is a bad president, but i am also exercising my freedom at
the same time.
it's really not that hard. attacking people who abuse freedom of speech
does not equal attacking freedom of speech.
when i say there is propaganda, i refer mostly to the media's coverage
of the "perceived enemies" of the US, such as russia and china. i can
say this because i know there are blatant lies and selective reporting
all the time on china. just ask any individual from china you may know
what they think about western media's coverage of china, especially on
sensitive issues such as tibet. this may be news to you, but their
agendas on china is highly uniform to the point that they not only lie
but also make up the same lies.
why can't foxnews and msnbc be propaganda? they have different agendas
sure, but they can be pushing them nonetheless, one to the right and one
to the left:)
i do believe most coverage on american news is fair and balanced, or at
least factual. i read a lot of them and find them informative and
engaging. and i truly hope someday china could reach such a tolerance of
different opinions.
i am not suggesting anything bad about dalai because of his ties with
nazi. it could very well be that he received no bad influence from
them.and when did i suggest there is ties between al quaeda and nazi?
the tone was purely hypothetical. i am just using it as an example of
selective reporting of your media.
i am not denying freedom of speech, on the contrary, i treasure my
freedom and take it seriously.
and while i welcome more comments on the main issue, may i ask which
genocide you are referring to?
B：I'm not wasting my time reading what you wrote for these reasons:
1) You've completely missed the point I was trying to make about free
press, and just took quotes randomly out of context. They aren't even
successive. Is that something you learned from Chinese "journalism"?
2) You used emoticons in trying to make a point I'm supposed to take
seriously.
This isn't a concession, I'm just acknowledging how much you might be
indoctrinated with "Eastern propaganda," and frankly I have better
things to do. Enjoy your time in the US where your views will likely
piss off the wrong person. Don't worry, we "westerners" believe in fair
trials.
我：all i have been trying to do is reason. i just make my points, never
tried to prove you wrong or anything, and my tone has been by my
standard friendly.
no need to get personal. i thought freedom of speech works better with
civility. and cracking some fun here and there does not hurt, does it?
my impression of your arguing is: i am right and above you, and that is
the state of the world. if you question me or what i believe, that just
make you more wrong and no reason is needed, and i will attack you
personally. sorry but that sounds to me not like the spirit of free
speech, does it? i thought freedom of speech is about trying to embrace
those with different ideas, not taking them down. your words sounds like
how a north korean dictator would act.
and how am i indoctrinated? you just assumed that because i am chinese
and disagree with you? i did acknowledge that china does not have the
freedom of speech as US, you think china brainwashed me into thinking
that?
don't be afraid, the truth may be ugly, but it will set you free.
我估计她不会继续回复了。上次国庆时候说服一个希望中国是60年民主的美国人，因为
他还讲理，愿
意理论，这个女的不太行。
藏问题上不公
平造成他们的错误印象，然后他的一个朋友看了不爽，我们开始辩论。我觉得最终她说
不下去了，选
择放弃。如果各位能够忍着看完这段裹脚布，欢迎评论和指点。
以下是记录：
A(德国同学): wishes the Dalai Lama could return to Tibet and put an end to
the cultural genocide of his country.
我：i have to say you are entirely wrong on this. in short, dalai lama
was one of the worst human rights violators in recent history before
1950, which is not entirely his fault since he was born into a bad
system.
china's ethnic policies are not nearly perfect by any means, but this
dude has been full of lies for years. if you want a theocracy combined
with brutal slavery, dalai is for you. if you call better living
standards and everyone being given equal status and opportunities a
cultural genocide, then...
he is a tool of the china-hating west, and you are buying it. western
propaganda has done a very good job over the years. too bad, press
freedom oftentimes serve political agendas and don't convey the truth.
A：Lets agree to disagree!
B(与我辩论的美国女): It must feel nice to finally have freedom of speech.
If you're so frustrated with "western propaganda" then I highly suggest
considering that the very ideology that you seem comfortable railing
against, allows you to do so without restrictions placed by the
government on say, what internet site you visit, for example.
I'm a considerably liberal person and try to look at things objectively.
I don't agree with a lot of the United States dispositions and politics.
I enjoy Chinese culture and appreciate it's history, but I'm firmly
against people from any nationality, who seem to be ok with taking
advantage of the Western culture, educational system and use our
resources only to blame "western propoganda" for people's opinions. In a
system of informational freedom, intelligent people can develop their
own opinions.
我：you are absolutely right, freedom of speech is great, and i regret
that china does not have as much of it as the west, although it's
gradually making progress. and in what ways am i railing against freedom
of speech in my comments? i am all for free speech, and i take advantage
of it and express my mind.
i guess the word propaganda irks you because... Read More you think it
cannot possibly exist in a so-called free society? have you not not paid
attention to what happened in the last several years? my point is that
informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas.
going back to the tibet issue, i assume that you did not know dalai's
tie with the nazi's, which is conveniently never mentioned in any news
coverage, but if al quaeda were related to the nazi's. you think any
american would not be reminded of that time and again? look, press
freedom or not, every country speaks in its own interest, sometimes it
results in bias, and that's natural.
B: <
I interpret the above statement as you saying that FREE PRESS results in
untruths and political agenda. And it happens "often." That's an attack
on free speech (press = speech). You're implying that this idea of
"press freedom" is not in actuality free. Yes, I was a politically
conscious person, even during the Bush administration as you implied. I
didn't support him and didn't exactly trust a lot of what he/his
administration was saying. Why do you suppose that was? I think it was
because I was able to access (and contribute to) various news outlets. I
recommend that before alleging that ALL news outlets propagate some
Western agenda, you consider the various independent news outlets that
are affiliated with the United States and are not (eg BBC, Indian news
papers), also to which we have access.
Sure, Fox News is propaganda. Rachel Maddow, arguably propaganda too,
although she actually fact checks... But there are stark differences
between the two news sources. How, then do you reconcile this and say
"informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas" when there isn't a uniform political agenda,
or more specifically, people are free to propagate whatever they want?
So to answer your question: no I don't think propaganda can exist in a
free society (it's not "so called."), because there is always room for
an opposing view or information to counter it and for the very reasons I
just presented.
Did you know that Coca Cola was affiliated with the Nazis? That doesn't
mean anything. I really hope you're not insinuating that the US is only
fighting Al Quaeda because of it's affiliation with the Nazis. I'm
personally, more pissed about mass genocide and people who deny that the
free press I receive from which I make informed opinions, is not
possible. That's just me. I donno. I digress.
我："Sure, Fox News is propaganda."
"no I don't think propaganda can exist in a free society."
those two sentences which appear in the same paragraph seem
contradictory to each other. unless my english is bad, or maybe foxnews
is in china?
free does not necessarily mean truthful. i blame those who lie under the
name of free speech, but that does not mean i hate free speech itself. i
can say that obama is a racist/communist because i want people to
believe he is a bad president, but i am also exercising my freedom at
the same time.
it's really not that hard. attacking people who abuse freedom of speech
does not equal attacking freedom of speech.
when i say there is propaganda, i refer mostly to the media's coverage
of the "perceived enemies" of the US, such as russia and china. i can
say this because i know there are blatant lies and selective reporting
all the time on china. just ask any individual from china you may know
what they think about western media's coverage of china, especially on
sensitive issues such as tibet. this may be news to you, but their
agendas on china is highly uniform to the point that they not only lie
but also make up the same lies.
why can't foxnews and msnbc be propaganda? they have different agendas
sure, but they can be pushing them nonetheless, one to the right and one
to the left:)
i do believe most coverage on american news is fair and balanced, or at
least factual. i read a lot of them and find them informative and
engaging. and i truly hope someday china could reach such a tolerance of
different opinions.
i am not suggesting anything bad about dalai because of his ties with
nazi. it could very well be that he received no bad influence from
them.and when did i suggest there is ties between al quaeda and nazi?
the tone was purely hypothetical. i am just using it as an example of
selective reporting of your media.
i am not denying freedom of speech, on the contrary, i treasure my
freedom and take it seriously.
and while i welcome more comments on the main issue, may i ask which
genocide you are referring to?
B：I'm not wasting my time reading what you wrote for these reasons:
1) You've completely missed the point I was trying to make about free
press, and just took quotes randomly out of context. They aren't even
successive. Is that something you learned from Chinese "journalism"?
2) You used emoticons in trying to make a point I'm supposed to take
seriously.
This isn't a concession, I'm just acknowledging how much you might be
indoctrinated with "Eastern propaganda," and frankly I have better
things to do. Enjoy your time in the US where your views will likely
piss off the wrong person. Don't worry, we "westerners" believe in fair
trials.
我：all i have been trying to do is reason. i just make my points, never
tried to prove you wrong or anything, and my tone has been by my
standard friendly.
no need to get personal. i thought freedom of speech works better with
civility. and cracking some fun here and there does not hurt, does it?
my impression of your arguing is: i am right and above you, and that is
the state of the world. if you question me or what i believe, that just
make you more wrong and no reason is needed, and i will attack you
personally. sorry but that sounds to me not like the spirit of free
speech, does it? i thought freedom of speech is about trying to embrace
those with different ideas, not taking them down. your words sounds like
how a north korean dictator would act.
and how am i indoctrinated? you just assumed that because i am chinese
and disagree with you? i did acknowledge that china does not have the
freedom of speech as US, you think china brainwashed me into thinking
that?
don't be afraid, the truth may be ugly, but it will set you free.
我估计她不会继续回复了。上次国庆时候说服一个希望中国是60年民主的美国人，因为
他还讲理，愿
意理论，这个女的不太行。
这个回帖也不错。
/statements. Or they won't be easily convinced.
when I elaborate such topics, on top of using examples, I like to:
1. establish western fears towards communism in general，fear is coming from
something unknown or unfamiliar.
2. what does fear generates? Hostility.
3. what does a national machine/news press typically/natually do when
touching a topic that they have hostility towards? negativity, bias.
4. on top of all that, west has feeling of being superior. that will only
fuel the negativity with arrogance.
没有评论:
发表评论