The full text has been translated by China Digital Times:
Yesterday, I saw a news report which said that I am a candidate for the list of the 200 most globally influential people from Time magazine. Sensitive word, sensitive word, and sensitive word from China are also candidates. At the moment [I heard this news] I was digging up bamboo shoots in my village (I was digging in my family’s field), so I did not pay too much attention. Later I saw there were lots of text messages on my cell phone, asking my take on this. I only replied to two friends in the Beijing News and Southern Metropolis Daily; all the other things written in other media are friendly imaginations based on my personality. I did not realize that so many people care about this, so I will just write about it here all together.
First of all, I sighed and felt regret. Why do others have such news media? When Time puts out a list of influential people, it makes waves within other countries. How much I desire that our China can have such media. When this media selects people, it also gets attention from the whole world. We cannot say such media is completely fair, but they do have public credibility. How much I desire that our country has this as well. But regrettably we do not. This is not to say that our journalists are not as good as journalists from other places, it is because ….. those reasons that everyone knows. I will just stop here; if I say more about this I will be dead, and my dead body will be whipped as well.
I often ask myself, what contribution have I made to this society which is full of sensitive words? Maybe in the end, all I contribute is another sensitive word which is my name. That’s all. Everyday I get out of bed around noon, often wasting money on digital gadgets, and I’m very picky about food. Thank goodness that I did not add more load or sin to this society, at least so far. I do not have a grand vision; I only want the relevant departments to treat art, literature and the news media better, and our small readers, listeners, audience, netizens, urban dwellers and citizens can all enjoy this benefit. I may not have the talent and ability to write great things, but some others do. But you [the goverment] should not castrate people or glorify those who have been castrated.
A journalist asked me over the phone: In some places it’s been said that you are colluding with Western anti-China forces. I said this [accusation] is expected. They [the government] has used this method for sixty years. During the earlier several decades they may have genuinely believed this, but in recent decades, this is just a means of slander. I am just a person that often almost did not get my visa when I participated in competitions abroad because my documents were incomplete. What kind of Western forces are they talking about? What age is it now, that they still use the word “colluding”? That’s sounds so pathetic. If there is a comrade who is listening to my phone everyday, you must be very clear about what kind of person I am. What do you say, my friend? In front of a computer screen there must be a friend who smiles as he understands what I am talking about. But I am just curious, that after so many decades [the government] still only has this one position [in screwing people]. He is not tired of it, but the other party is sick of it.
However, I clearly recognize their existence. You always need both sides, positive and negative, camp A and camp B. If in our country, when we cannot agree with each other, we can leave each other alone, instead of censoring those that do not agree with us, then that would be huge progress. We will work hard towards this day.
Later the same journalist sent me another short text message: In other words, your views and expressions fit with Western values. Don’t you think so?
I replied to him: Don’t [my views and expression] fit Chinese values as well?
I believe that there may be different values between earthlings and aliens. But for Westerners and Easterners? Other then different living habits, how much different could the values be? Why do we have to fight over this?
At last, let me return to the point of so-called influence. I often feel very ashamed. I am just a person with a pen. Maybe my writings make people feel like they are releasing some of their anger or resentment. But other than that what’s the real use? The so-called influence is illusory. In China, those who have influence are those who have power. Those who can make rain from clouds, those who can decide if you live or die, or keep you somewhere in between life and death. They are the people who really have influence. However, I am not sure it is just because they are afraid of search engines or they are too fragile to be searched; we often cannot find them by using search engines. We are just a small role on the stage, under the spotlight. But they own the theater. They can at any time bring the curtain down, turn off the lights, close the door and let the dogs out. Later the dogs all disappear and the sky is blue again; there is no trace of what has happened. I just wish those people could really put their influence into good use. And those of us on this stage, even those who built this theater in the past, should make efforts to gradually take down those high walls and light bulbs. Let the sunshine in. That kind of light, no one can extinguish it again.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100ht1x.html
Showing posts with label Han Han's Blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Han Han's Blog. Show all posts
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
Letters from Strangers
The excerpts are translated by China Digital Times
Many people who have suffered injustice treat me as the media. Among the articles and letters the magazine and I have received every day, many are hoping I can get justice for them by writing about their experiences, so the media will pay attention to their stories. I have carefully read every letter, but I am very helpless. These things are a heavy burden on your families, but for the news media, which has lost its news value, I believe that even if I write it for you, it won’t get that much attention from the traditional media.
For one problem to be resolved, it often needs the help of many traditional media. Eventually the leader will show up and pretend to be thinking for the people, taking the people’s urgent matter as his own emergency.
Most of the letters [I have received] are about so-and-so housing project in which the quality of apartments is very poor, or there is a trash station or power station next to it; many of the letters are about forced demolitions. If you experienced a demolition, that’s not news. That’s life. If you did not burn yourself into ashes, if you can still receive and send mail, and all your family members are still alive, that’s the definition of a happy life. You ought to thank the State for it.
The worst story in those letters is from a friend who lives outside of Shanghai. All attached documents were very complete. The content was about the family’s home undergoing a forced demolition, during which some members of his family were injured. Most of his family’s residences were deemed illegal buildings. They went to Beijing to petition, and their petition materials were sent to the province, and the province sent their petition to the city, and the city sent it to the county, and the county sent it back to the village. From then on, whenever there are important national holidays, the whole family lives under in-home surveillance by local security forces, who prevent them from disturbing the harmonious atmosphere. Finally they brought their case to court, and the court even took the case.
Oh My Heaven! The court even took the case. Isn’t the court a service agency for the government? How could it take this case? I could not wait to turn the page [of the letter].
In the next page [of the letter], the court even delivered a verdict right away. The verdict was that the government was supposed to compensate 200,000 RMB to the victim, but in this case, now the government only needs to pay 100,000 RMB compensation.
Another important reason that I cannot publicize all the letters I have received is because I have not checked them. But I personally do not have the capacity to fact-check them. Nevertheless, I believe that most, possibly even all, of those stories are true; at most some of those authors include more stuff in their favor, but that won’t change the story in general, and the assholes are definitely on the other side.
Of course, these people do not really hope that I could bring daylight to them; they are only trying every way they can think of. Of course, those who are in the deepest suffering may not even be able to petition for themselves. For those who are petitioning for their suffering, they have never found a way to do so. Once they were petitioning to the cadres, then they discovered that no one else was abusing them but cadres. Then they petitioned to the organizations, but they discovered that the organization is composed of cadres large and small. Then they went to the Petition Letter Office to get themselves registered, which makes it convenient for police to monitor their activities. Finally they went to court, and paid the legal fee. On this zigzag road, everywhere they go they meet the enemy’s soldiers.
So they look for an alternative, and they found the media. But they found that too many people have suffered and their own suffering is not shocking enough to be news. Then they found the Internet, but discovered that too many unfortunate people are already there, and their own misfortune is not unique enough to be placed on the top of webpages. Now, what can these people do?
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100hrm2.html
Many people who have suffered injustice treat me as the media. Among the articles and letters the magazine and I have received every day, many are hoping I can get justice for them by writing about their experiences, so the media will pay attention to their stories. I have carefully read every letter, but I am very helpless. These things are a heavy burden on your families, but for the news media, which has lost its news value, I believe that even if I write it for you, it won’t get that much attention from the traditional media.
For one problem to be resolved, it often needs the help of many traditional media. Eventually the leader will show up and pretend to be thinking for the people, taking the people’s urgent matter as his own emergency.
Most of the letters [I have received] are about so-and-so housing project in which the quality of apartments is very poor, or there is a trash station or power station next to it; many of the letters are about forced demolitions. If you experienced a demolition, that’s not news. That’s life. If you did not burn yourself into ashes, if you can still receive and send mail, and all your family members are still alive, that’s the definition of a happy life. You ought to thank the State for it.
The worst story in those letters is from a friend who lives outside of Shanghai. All attached documents were very complete. The content was about the family’s home undergoing a forced demolition, during which some members of his family were injured. Most of his family’s residences were deemed illegal buildings. They went to Beijing to petition, and their petition materials were sent to the province, and the province sent their petition to the city, and the city sent it to the county, and the county sent it back to the village. From then on, whenever there are important national holidays, the whole family lives under in-home surveillance by local security forces, who prevent them from disturbing the harmonious atmosphere. Finally they brought their case to court, and the court even took the case.
Oh My Heaven! The court even took the case. Isn’t the court a service agency for the government? How could it take this case? I could not wait to turn the page [of the letter].
In the next page [of the letter], the court even delivered a verdict right away. The verdict was that the government was supposed to compensate 200,000 RMB to the victim, but in this case, now the government only needs to pay 100,000 RMB compensation.
Another important reason that I cannot publicize all the letters I have received is because I have not checked them. But I personally do not have the capacity to fact-check them. Nevertheless, I believe that most, possibly even all, of those stories are true; at most some of those authors include more stuff in their favor, but that won’t change the story in general, and the assholes are definitely on the other side.
Of course, these people do not really hope that I could bring daylight to them; they are only trying every way they can think of. Of course, those who are in the deepest suffering may not even be able to petition for themselves. For those who are petitioning for their suffering, they have never found a way to do so. Once they were petitioning to the cadres, then they discovered that no one else was abusing them but cadres. Then they petitioned to the organizations, but they discovered that the organization is composed of cadres large and small. Then they went to the Petition Letter Office to get themselves registered, which makes it convenient for police to monitor their activities. Finally they went to court, and paid the legal fee. On this zigzag road, everywhere they go they meet the enemy’s soldiers.
So they look for an alternative, and they found the media. But they found that too many people have suffered and their own suffering is not shocking enough to be news. Then they found the Internet, but discovered that too many unfortunate people are already there, and their own misfortune is not unique enough to be placed on the top of webpages. Now, what can these people do?
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100hrm2.html
Tuesday, 26 January 2010
Watching Confucius
Translated by C. Custer, editor of ChinaGeeks
Today I went to see Confucius. Before I went into the theater, I stepped out for a moment to make sure of where my seat was, so as not to disturb others after entering. Once I got in, I regretted it. There weren’t even ten people in the theater and you could practically sit wherever you wanted.
In China’s ancient times, there were many “masters”, and although what they say today contradicts what they said in their own times [i.e., people's interpretations of their meanings have changed over time], their meaning comes not from whether they spoke well enough but from whether they said enough things. In any time period, politicians have taken what they needed, [and gotten] both praise and blame. Confucius is one of the most meaningful of these people.
To tell the truth, I never felt there was much need to make movies on historical topics. From the perspective of film, it seems as though from their very birth, movies have been doing something that is very opposite from [the idea of] film: killing imagination. But it’s not necessarily true that China’s big historical epics lack in imagination, because the people who write them often create scenes that are diametrically opposed to actual history, so it’s really a collaborative thing [lack of imagination working together with imagination].
The reason most major Chinese blockbusters are historical epics or focus on historical figures is that the filmmakers and investors don’t feel safe. After investing such a lot of money, they feel completely trusting the screenwriters and directors to create a story is unwise, and if a director is somehow able to make their own investment and use creative freedom, the product is often even worse. All of this has become the tragic history of Chinese big-budget films. As for what Chow Yun-fat [the star of Confucius] said about “if you don’t cry after watching Confucius you’re not human”, I believe it’s a misunderstanding. It must have been at an internal meeting to watch the film that the filmmakers themselves cried. What they’re crying about is how many middle school classes and government offices they’re going to have to drag into theaters en masse to break even.
Confucius actor Chow Yun-fat showing his respect to a descendant of Confucius.
Forgetting about all the political factors and watching the movie just as a film, it is a losing film. What the film is preaching doesn’t leave any influence at all. When Confucius was on the screen talking about “rites” and “benevolence”, some guy to my side was having a ten-minute-long phone conversation. The war scenes in the film are like child’s play. The country of Lu cannot protect itself, but Confucius’s few disciples can drive back the enemy just by building a road block and firing arrows into the sky? Moreover, in the film, the dialogue between characters is not at all persuasive. It’s just like when you were small and your parents told you, “today’s work must be finished today”, but their words ultimately could not convince you. It is no longer an era where a “master” can say a few more lines and attract/trick people. From the movie, I found it very difficult to understand why Confucius’s team of workers continually followed him. In moments when the film was playing up the personalities of the characters, I had to endure ten minutes of the disciples continually yielding a bowl of horsemeat soup [to each other] to demonstrate their cohesiveness. [I had to endure] because I had already endured the story of Confucius’s disciple [of a later generation] Kong Rong giving up pears to his elders throughout my entire childhood.
Ren Quan’s character unexpectedly dies in the end by freezing to death in icy water, which he’s gone into to save a book. This is not moving, it’s stupid. In a situation where the film hasn’t done enough and there’s nothing good about it, the protagonist being extremely satisfied [with the film] is illogical. In a situation where the implicit ideal [which was, in and of itself, unrealistic] has not even been successfully attained, there’s no hope of the movie being realistic. It’s like this: [imagine some] government leaders have been burned, and their secretary rushes in to a sea of fire and saves a copy of the Selected Works of Mao Zedong, but when he comes out he sees he’s only taken the first of two volumes, so he rushes back in, then saves another one and comes out, but as soon as he looks, fuck, it’s not two volumes but three, and even though he knows the house will collapse and he won’t be kay, he rushes in again [for the last volume], and the house collapses and he dies. As an audience member, do you think you could cry at this [movie]?
Zhou Xun as Nan Zi in the movie, Confucius.
Zhou Xun [the female lead] is only in the movie because the filmmakers felt a female would help diversify the film. She plays the part of Nan Zi [a historical princess of the Song Kingdom] and spends most of her time flirting with Confucius，but he’s all talk and no ‘action’, which made me nervous. In the end, she didn’t know why she was being shot to death.
I will give Confucius two points. First, because of Chow Yun-fat’s exciting performance in All About Ah Long I will give this movie one point for encouragement. I think if Chow had said “those who don’t cry aren’t people” about Ah long he might have been more correct. Also, because the director is female, I will encourage her with a point. But it must be said, that whether it’s this female director’s Confucius or another female director’s I am Liu Yuejin, their grasp of non-emotional films, especially the more complex/intricate ones, is rather weak. I don’t understand why they don’t make films about love or life [instead], which is what female directors are good at. Zhang Aijia’s Heartbeat or Xu Anhua’s Day and Night in Tianshui are good movies by female directors. Why should women embarrass themselves?
Finally, I want to say that the movie Confucius, whether it is from the perspective of cinematographic meaning, business profits, artistic merit, what it explores, its educational qualities, its historical accuracy, its entertainment value, its emotional resonance, etc., is completely unnecessary. It is a film that could be completely done without.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gqf8.html
Today I went to see Confucius. Before I went into the theater, I stepped out for a moment to make sure of where my seat was, so as not to disturb others after entering. Once I got in, I regretted it. There weren’t even ten people in the theater and you could practically sit wherever you wanted.
In China’s ancient times, there were many “masters”, and although what they say today contradicts what they said in their own times [i.e., people's interpretations of their meanings have changed over time], their meaning comes not from whether they spoke well enough but from whether they said enough things. In any time period, politicians have taken what they needed, [and gotten] both praise and blame. Confucius is one of the most meaningful of these people.
To tell the truth, I never felt there was much need to make movies on historical topics. From the perspective of film, it seems as though from their very birth, movies have been doing something that is very opposite from [the idea of] film: killing imagination. But it’s not necessarily true that China’s big historical epics lack in imagination, because the people who write them often create scenes that are diametrically opposed to actual history, so it’s really a collaborative thing [lack of imagination working together with imagination].
The reason most major Chinese blockbusters are historical epics or focus on historical figures is that the filmmakers and investors don’t feel safe. After investing such a lot of money, they feel completely trusting the screenwriters and directors to create a story is unwise, and if a director is somehow able to make their own investment and use creative freedom, the product is often even worse. All of this has become the tragic history of Chinese big-budget films. As for what Chow Yun-fat [the star of Confucius] said about “if you don’t cry after watching Confucius you’re not human”, I believe it’s a misunderstanding. It must have been at an internal meeting to watch the film that the filmmakers themselves cried. What they’re crying about is how many middle school classes and government offices they’re going to have to drag into theaters en masse to break even.
Confucius actor Chow Yun-fat showing his respect to a descendant of Confucius.
Forgetting about all the political factors and watching the movie just as a film, it is a losing film. What the film is preaching doesn’t leave any influence at all. When Confucius was on the screen talking about “rites” and “benevolence”, some guy to my side was having a ten-minute-long phone conversation. The war scenes in the film are like child’s play. The country of Lu cannot protect itself, but Confucius’s few disciples can drive back the enemy just by building a road block and firing arrows into the sky? Moreover, in the film, the dialogue between characters is not at all persuasive. It’s just like when you were small and your parents told you, “today’s work must be finished today”, but their words ultimately could not convince you. It is no longer an era where a “master” can say a few more lines and attract/trick people. From the movie, I found it very difficult to understand why Confucius’s team of workers continually followed him. In moments when the film was playing up the personalities of the characters, I had to endure ten minutes of the disciples continually yielding a bowl of horsemeat soup [to each other] to demonstrate their cohesiveness. [I had to endure] because I had already endured the story of Confucius’s disciple [of a later generation] Kong Rong giving up pears to his elders throughout my entire childhood.
Ren Quan’s character unexpectedly dies in the end by freezing to death in icy water, which he’s gone into to save a book. This is not moving, it’s stupid. In a situation where the film hasn’t done enough and there’s nothing good about it, the protagonist being extremely satisfied [with the film] is illogical. In a situation where the implicit ideal [which was, in and of itself, unrealistic] has not even been successfully attained, there’s no hope of the movie being realistic. It’s like this: [imagine some] government leaders have been burned, and their secretary rushes in to a sea of fire and saves a copy of the Selected Works of Mao Zedong, but when he comes out he sees he’s only taken the first of two volumes, so he rushes back in, then saves another one and comes out, but as soon as he looks, fuck, it’s not two volumes but three, and even though he knows the house will collapse and he won’t be kay, he rushes in again [for the last volume], and the house collapses and he dies. As an audience member, do you think you could cry at this [movie]?
Zhou Xun as Nan Zi in the movie, Confucius.
Zhou Xun [the female lead] is only in the movie because the filmmakers felt a female would help diversify the film. She plays the part of Nan Zi [a historical princess of the Song Kingdom] and spends most of her time flirting with Confucius，but he’s all talk and no ‘action’, which made me nervous. In the end, she didn’t know why she was being shot to death.
I will give Confucius two points. First, because of Chow Yun-fat’s exciting performance in All About Ah Long I will give this movie one point for encouragement. I think if Chow had said “those who don’t cry aren’t people” about Ah long he might have been more correct. Also, because the director is female, I will encourage her with a point. But it must be said, that whether it’s this female director’s Confucius or another female director’s I am Liu Yuejin, their grasp of non-emotional films, especially the more complex/intricate ones, is rather weak. I don’t understand why they don’t make films about love or life [instead], which is what female directors are good at. Zhang Aijia’s Heartbeat or Xu Anhua’s Day and Night in Tianshui are good movies by female directors. Why should women embarrass themselves?
Finally, I want to say that the movie Confucius, whether it is from the perspective of cinematographic meaning, business profits, artistic merit, what it explores, its educational qualities, its historical accuracy, its entertainment value, its emotional resonance, etc., is completely unnecessary. It is a film that could be completely done without.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gqf8.html
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
These dogs are so annoying
From China Hush
Today, Ms. Fan’s house in Minghang district was to be forcefully demolished, Ms. Fan standing on the 3rd floor threw home-made fire bombs (at the demolition squad). However home-made fire bombs were made of glass bottles, naturally had technical bottlenecks, fire power was too weak. They were put out by the fire trucks, then the high-pressured water gun aimed at Ms. Fan, eventually she surrendered.
Upon seeing this news, I am pleased that after two decades of development, society has progressed. Sub-machine guns are replaced by high-pressured water gun. Then why would it lead to such brutal resistance? Because of the large-scaled building project of Hongqiao, Ms. Fan had an area 480 square meter home, but the government is only willing to offer the compensation of 670,000 yuan, which is 761 yuan per square meter of housing subsidies and 1,480 yuan for the compensation of the land.
When the city’s average commercial housing is measured by tens of thousands (per square meter), forced eviction’s price is still calculated with the hundreds, this is the reason why residents threw fire-bombs. That is, they were living in a 480 square meter home, you acquired their land for so called construction, that’s also business, your compensation for the family only is enough to buy a 40 square meters home, and then the demolitions team came. I think anyone who had weapons probably could not help themselves but to take them out in this situation.
Of course, this example illustrates a number of problems. First, it made sense why Chinese government banned guns. And I remember when I was a child my family had an air gun for shooting birds. Then suddenly one day the government ordered that all of the air guns and hunting rifles must be turned over. This showed that our government had foresights, they realized more than a decade later, social conflicts will increase, then if ordinary people are equipped with guns, the government demolition department can only be equipped with rocket launchers.
Second is when Chinese government made public ownership of the land was also foresighted, and even Mao Tse-tung who was not financial minded was aware of the government costs of eating, drinking and playing would be huge, only depending on taxes and monopolizing resources and energy would probably not going to be enough, land would be a big income. Later, leaders were worried that if the land gets sold out in their hands, then there will not be any land left for party’s son and party’s grandson to sell, at that time they will become the guilty ones, therefore they added a rule, the time limit for the land-use rights is 70 years, so that their grandsons can sell them again.
Third is certainly a problem the government regrets very much. If they knew the urbanization process is now so profitable, then they would not allow farmers to have homestead and their own houses. This now leads to a lot of demolition and reconstruction problems. Back then when building prisons, should have built farmer’s villages using the prison blue prints, one village one prison, one family one cell. Then use People’s Daily newspaper to indoctrinate ideas, say this is the new socialist countryside, that they no longer need to spend any money on housing, the government directly give houses to everyone, every home is made of cement and concrete, the doors are made of steel. Of course you still need to give the keys to them. This way, there are some initial costs, but later the government no longer needs to worry about the demolition distresses. The second benefit is in case someone is guilty of a crime, just confiscate the key then you are done.
There are a few highlights of this incident. That is some comments made by the leaders at Minhang district. As we all know, leaders of Minhang always accidentally spill the truth, and I think this is worth encouraging, because they frankly reveal the truth, always speak from their heart, much better than those two faced officials. For example Minhang district law enforcement captain made his speech on the “fishing incident” “If it is not driven by benefit, why should I help you”. These bold words only that Zhangzhou government official can match “Will you speak for the Party? Or will you speak for the people?"
[Key: Two references here, “fishing incident” is a scandal happened this year which law enforcement hires people pretend to be sick to hitchhike a ride. The informant then turns the kind-hearted driver in for using private car to make money by giving rides to strangers. This is illegal because only licensed taxi drivers can do this. 2nd incident was Zhangzhou government official Lu Jun made the above comment when interviewed by China national Radio reporter which triggered public outrage. Bold statement made him “the official who dares the most to speak the truth during 2009”]
This time the Minghang district officials’ truth relay came to Huacao town.
Deputy Mayor of the town Gao Baojing said: You fight against the government, it certainly violated the law, then it must surely have to be dealt with.
In addition, the construction companies of the land was charged by the Government 1.3 million yuan per mu (1 mu = 6.67 acres), the total cost of demolition of the Hongqiao Airport area is up to 14.8 billion yuan. But the government only compensated the farmers 380,000 yuan per mu. So why does the difference in price go to the local government?
Minhang district Shanghai Construction Committee director of transportation, the headquarters of relocation top leader Wu Zhongqiuan had a fresh view. He thinks that Minhang Hongqiao hub of the land‘s value increased after and because of the government reconstruction and extension, so the added value of the land should not be obtained by the people.
Do you think Minhang District is very hateful? Did you wonder why these officials still have such stable positions? If you think this way, you are too tender (naïve) because they are the effective go-getters of the Shanghai Municipal Government. This is like you are a company manager, you want to buy a printer which has a market price of 1,000, so you give your employee 1,000 yuan. In the end your employee only spends 300 and forcefully buys this printer and gives you a receipt for 1,000. He also gives your 400, keeps 300 for himself. Not only that, you do not even have to be responsible for his meals, because when he is hungry he will go fishing on his own. The only problem is that the employee crushes a few dogs to death when driving in a hurry, resulting in your office often have a group of dogs outside barking at you. Say, would you fire that employee? Of course not, you can only think, these dogs are really annoying.
Yes, the unfortunate ones are those dogs, but we are that group of dogs.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100g03k.html
Today, Ms. Fan’s house in Minghang district was to be forcefully demolished, Ms. Fan standing on the 3rd floor threw home-made fire bombs (at the demolition squad). However home-made fire bombs were made of glass bottles, naturally had technical bottlenecks, fire power was too weak. They were put out by the fire trucks, then the high-pressured water gun aimed at Ms. Fan, eventually she surrendered.
Upon seeing this news, I am pleased that after two decades of development, society has progressed. Sub-machine guns are replaced by high-pressured water gun. Then why would it lead to such brutal resistance? Because of the large-scaled building project of Hongqiao, Ms. Fan had an area 480 square meter home, but the government is only willing to offer the compensation of 670,000 yuan, which is 761 yuan per square meter of housing subsidies and 1,480 yuan for the compensation of the land.
When the city’s average commercial housing is measured by tens of thousands (per square meter), forced eviction’s price is still calculated with the hundreds, this is the reason why residents threw fire-bombs. That is, they were living in a 480 square meter home, you acquired their land for so called construction, that’s also business, your compensation for the family only is enough to buy a 40 square meters home, and then the demolitions team came. I think anyone who had weapons probably could not help themselves but to take them out in this situation.
Of course, this example illustrates a number of problems. First, it made sense why Chinese government banned guns. And I remember when I was a child my family had an air gun for shooting birds. Then suddenly one day the government ordered that all of the air guns and hunting rifles must be turned over. This showed that our government had foresights, they realized more than a decade later, social conflicts will increase, then if ordinary people are equipped with guns, the government demolition department can only be equipped with rocket launchers.
Second is when Chinese government made public ownership of the land was also foresighted, and even Mao Tse-tung who was not financial minded was aware of the government costs of eating, drinking and playing would be huge, only depending on taxes and monopolizing resources and energy would probably not going to be enough, land would be a big income. Later, leaders were worried that if the land gets sold out in their hands, then there will not be any land left for party’s son and party’s grandson to sell, at that time they will become the guilty ones, therefore they added a rule, the time limit for the land-use rights is 70 years, so that their grandsons can sell them again.
Third is certainly a problem the government regrets very much. If they knew the urbanization process is now so profitable, then they would not allow farmers to have homestead and their own houses. This now leads to a lot of demolition and reconstruction problems. Back then when building prisons, should have built farmer’s villages using the prison blue prints, one village one prison, one family one cell. Then use People’s Daily newspaper to indoctrinate ideas, say this is the new socialist countryside, that they no longer need to spend any money on housing, the government directly give houses to everyone, every home is made of cement and concrete, the doors are made of steel. Of course you still need to give the keys to them. This way, there are some initial costs, but later the government no longer needs to worry about the demolition distresses. The second benefit is in case someone is guilty of a crime, just confiscate the key then you are done.
There are a few highlights of this incident. That is some comments made by the leaders at Minhang district. As we all know, leaders of Minhang always accidentally spill the truth, and I think this is worth encouraging, because they frankly reveal the truth, always speak from their heart, much better than those two faced officials. For example Minhang district law enforcement captain made his speech on the “fishing incident” “If it is not driven by benefit, why should I help you”. These bold words only that Zhangzhou government official can match “Will you speak for the Party? Or will you speak for the people?"
[Key: Two references here, “fishing incident” is a scandal happened this year which law enforcement hires people pretend to be sick to hitchhike a ride. The informant then turns the kind-hearted driver in for using private car to make money by giving rides to strangers. This is illegal because only licensed taxi drivers can do this. 2nd incident was Zhangzhou government official Lu Jun made the above comment when interviewed by China national Radio reporter which triggered public outrage. Bold statement made him “the official who dares the most to speak the truth during 2009”]
This time the Minghang district officials’ truth relay came to Huacao town.
Deputy Mayor of the town Gao Baojing said: You fight against the government, it certainly violated the law, then it must surely have to be dealt with.
In addition, the construction companies of the land was charged by the Government 1.3 million yuan per mu (1 mu = 6.67 acres), the total cost of demolition of the Hongqiao Airport area is up to 14.8 billion yuan. But the government only compensated the farmers 380,000 yuan per mu. So why does the difference in price go to the local government?
Minhang district Shanghai Construction Committee director of transportation, the headquarters of relocation top leader Wu Zhongqiuan had a fresh view. He thinks that Minhang Hongqiao hub of the land‘s value increased after and because of the government reconstruction and extension, so the added value of the land should not be obtained by the people.
Do you think Minhang District is very hateful? Did you wonder why these officials still have such stable positions? If you think this way, you are too tender (naïve) because they are the effective go-getters of the Shanghai Municipal Government. This is like you are a company manager, you want to buy a printer which has a market price of 1,000, so you give your employee 1,000 yuan. In the end your employee only spends 300 and forcefully buys this printer and gives you a receipt for 1,000. He also gives your 400, keeps 300 for himself. Not only that, you do not even have to be responsible for his meals, because when he is hungry he will go fishing on his own. The only problem is that the employee crushes a few dogs to death when driving in a hurry, resulting in your office often have a group of dogs outside barking at you. Say, would you fire that employee? Of course not, you can only think, these dogs are really annoying.
Yes, the unfortunate ones are those dogs, but we are that group of dogs.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100g03k.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)