The sad facts about repression in China

(image by the Laogai Research Foundation)

European beggars in Beijing are not likely to remind the Chinese communist party leadership of the fact that 2011 was the worst year for human rights in China for a decade. Neither is it likely that Chinese leaders who are wined and dined in the White House will be reminded of the most extensive and repressive existing prison camp system in the world, the Chinese Laogai.

This is what the Hong Kong-based Chinese Human Rights Defenders says in its annual report:

A major crackdown on dissent following protests across the Arab world made 2011 the worst year for human rights in China in a decade, a pressure group said Friday.

Long jail terms, enforced disappearances and torture of dissidents amounted to a “downward spiral” in China’s record, Hong Kong-based Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) said in its annual report.

The study found more than 3,800 cases of arbitrary detention last year, as well as over 100 cases of individuals tortured specifically because of their rights activism.

“(The crackdown) marked yet another low point in the downward spiral of China’s human rights records, making 2011 the most repressive year since the rights defence movement began in the early 2000s,” said Renee Xia, CHRD’s international director, using a term coined by Chinese activists.

The group said it was particularly alarmed by the “widespread use of extralegal detention and enforced disappearance”.

“The crackdown impacted not only the individual activists, but also menacingly conveyed a warning to the ordinary Chinese citizens: anyone who challenges the government will be punished,” it said.

This is what the Laogai Research Foundation says about Communist China´s gruesome prison camp system:

Dictatorships throughout history have relied on fear and control to maintain power. The world has resoundingly condemned the atrocities of the Nazi concentration camps, the Soviet Gulag, and many other systems of repression around the globe, but has remained largely silent on one of the most extensive and repressive prison camp system in the world: the Chinese Laogai. Since the early 1950s, China has used the Laogai to crush dissent and root out potential sources of opposition, whether political, economic, or religious in nature, while simultaneously exploiting prisoners as a source of free labor.

--

Originally modeled on the Soviet Gulag, the Laogai of today is thriving, with millions of people suffering in more than one thousand camps. Although many of the Laogai's prisoners are incarcerated for ordinary crimes, there is little respect for due process, or the rule of law in general, within the Chinese criminal justice system, meaning conviction by a fair trial is, at worst, impossible, and at best, uncertain in China. Many find themselves in the Laogai for crimes that are political in nature, such as "subverting State power" or "revealing State secrets." The definitions of these crimes are so broad that the authorities can use them to justify arresting just about anyone for the most innocuous of activities, leading to a widespread chilling effect on all forms of expression.
Furthermore, the Laogai's role in economic production enables the Chinese government to profit from the imprisonment of its people, creating a perverse incentive to maintain high rates of incarceration. Since its inception in 1949, 40 to 50 million people are estimated to have been imprisoned in the Laogai, and untold numbers have perished under its brutality.
--
The Laogai is more than a place to detain and "reform" convicts and dissidents; it is inextricably linked to the Chinese economy. The Chinese government profits handsomely from the labor camp system by allowing goods made with forced labor to enter both domestic and international markets. The Laogai relies on prisoners to provide free labor in over 1,000 camps. Most Laogai camps operate a commercial enterprise, be it a factory, farm, workshop, or mine. Indeed, many camps have a number of Laogai enterprises producing a wide range of products. Prisons in China generally have two names: a commercial name used for trading and an official administrative name identifying the facility as a prison. Because prisoners are not paid for their work, these Laogai enterprises are able to reap huge profits.

New Study: Climate change models explain just about everything

Climate change models - which of course, as we all know, are extremely accurate  - now also explain the evolution of Homo sapiens - and all animals and plants.

Dr John Stuart of Bournemouth University, the lead author of the paper, entitled “Human Evolution Out-of-Africa: The Role of Refugia and Climate”, explains:

“We have tried to explain much of what we know about humans, including the evolution and extinction of Neanderthals and the Denisovans (a newly discovered group from Siberia), as well as how they interbred with the earliest modern populations who had just left Africa. All these phenomena have been put into the context of how animals and plants react to climate change. We’re thinking about humans from the perspective of what we know about other species.”
--
“One of the models we’ve formulated is that the adoption of a new refugium (an area of refuge from the harsh climatic conditions of the Ice Age) by a subgroup of a species may lead to important evolutionary changes, ultimately leading to the origins of a new species. In fact this could apply to all continental species, whether animals or plants” said Dr Stewart.

We are now eagerly awaiting the "sequel" to the study, showing what kind of new species will replace Homo sapiens as a consequence of human caused global warming. With the help of  a little "human engineering" by professor S. Matthew Liao´s team, the arrival of the new species probably could be speeded up considerably.

Human engineering study co-author: Humanity should be "like a forest of quiet semiconductor trees"

The co-authors of professor S. Matthew Liao´s paper "Human Engineering and Climate Change" think that online critics have misunderstood what they really mean. One of the authors, Dr  Anders Sandberg, James Martin Research Fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, wants people to know that "human engineering on its own is unlikely to fix climate change. The methods we mention are all too weak, indirect and slow."

Sandberg then refers to his "little essay" in order to understand what he really means.

Here are a few highlights of Sandberg´s "essay":


Postbiological and green

My favourite long-term solution is simply to aim for not just a post-industrial civilization but a post-biological one. We can currently roughly foresee how we could go about it. We would fixate our brains (presumably when near biological death), scan them in detail, reconstruct the functional structure and recreate it as software. The successor version would then go on living in virtual reality, with occasional visits to the physical world using a robot, android or just remote controlled human body.
How efficient could a postbiological civilization be? The current IBM roadrunner does 376 million calculations per watts. If we take my mid-range estimates of computing needs, 10^22 to 10^25 FLOPS, then a single emulation would need 10^13 to 10^16 watts. The total insolation of Earth is about 10^17 watts, so this won't do - there would be space for just a few minds on the entire planet. But current research on zettaflops computing suggest we can do much better. A DARPA exascale study suggests we can do 10^12 flops per watt, which means "just" a dozen Hoover dams per mind. Quantum dot cellular automata could give 10^19 flops per watt, putting the energy needs at 200-2000 watts.
That is between 2 and 20 times the current wattage of a current human. However, we bio-humans get our energy through the inefficient method of having plants collect sunshine (at about 3%) efficiency, then we either harvest them and eat a small part of them (expending a lot of agricultural energy) or have animals eat them (at a few percent efficiency) and finally we eat the result, again with a few percent efficiency. A brain emulation of this type would just need a few square meters of solar panels (plus night-time energy storage). In terms of area and energy required, these postbiological humans would have far smaller material requirements than we do. They could also run slower to save energy.
--
Maybe the most sustainable thing we could do would be to aim at a future ensconced in cold datacenters under the subtropical deserts of Earth. Humanity would largely look like a forest of quiet semiconductor trees. We would indeed have become plants.

We should probably congratulate Oxford University for hosting such eminent scholars as Dr. Sandberg. The future of humanity seems to be in safe hands!

"Green" Germany - myth and reality

The myth:

"It's ambitious, but Germany can be running on renewable energy by 2050 if there is the political will," said David Wortmann, Director of Renewable Energy and Resources at Germany Trade and Invest, a government body supporting the country's renewable energy sector.

"Electric powered cars will be racing down the country's Autobahns using batteries charged from renewable energy sources, slashing the need for oil and reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

The reality:

Welcome to the new "green" Germany! A must read article in Der Spiegel:

The energy-saving light bulb ends up as hazardous waste, too much insulation promotes mold and household drains are emitting a putrid odor because everyone is saving water. Many of Germany's efforts to protect the environment are a chronic failure, but that's unlikely to change. 

Germans support protecting the environment, and they have a special relationship with nature. They like animals and plants, blue skies and the ocean. They want their children to grow up in an intact environment, and try to set an example for others. When it's time to save the world, the Germans are there, doing their utmost. They are determined that conservation efforts won't fail because of them.
--
Our newest goal is to minimize our ecological footprint. Thursdays are veggie days, and old-fashioned, hand-cranked washing machines are back in vogue. Websites offer environmental tips for all kinds of situations, from cosmetics based on the phases of the moon to vibrators made of plastic without toxic chemical softeners. There are urns made of cornstarch and coffins made of cardboard, so that we can embark on our final journey in an environmentally correct manner -- a final good deed before everything turns to compost.
When something benefits the environment, the need to justify it suddenly disappears. The green label eliminates all controversy. And political parties are essentially in agreement that society cannot do enough for the environment. No progressive politician wants to expose himself to the career-ending suspicion that he lacks environmental consciousness.

And remember, all this happens in Germany at a time when the country is led by a supposedly conservative chancellor!

Tell me who your friends are ....

William F. Jasper, writing in The New American, looks at the friendship between Vladimir Putin and former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi:


Rather than merely calling Vladimir Putin on the telephone to congratulate him on his March 4 election victory for a new term as president of Russia, Silvio Berlusconi hopped in his jet and headed for Sochi, the Russian resort town that will be the site for the 2014 Winter Olympics. The Italian billionaire and media mogul, who resigned his position as Italy’s prime minister last November, is embroiled in legal battles over charges of bribery, corruption, illegal wiretapping, and sex with an underage prostitute, but those concerns took back burner to his party time with Putin.
--
Whatever his legal troubles may be, it was all smiles as Berlusconi was photographed hugging his longtime pal Putin and current Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at the Krasnaya Polyvana ski resort. London’s Daily Mail featured a photo slide show of the trio on the slopes and dining at a café in Sochi.

Russia Today (RT.tv), the Kremlin-run Putin propaganda channel, also featured a video of the three amigos.

The Berlusconi/Putin relationship has been a source of speculation and gossip for years. Berlusconi has made many trips to Putin-land and the former KGB/FSB chief has reciprocated, visiting Berlusconi’s huge luxury estate in the exclusive Porto Cervo enclave on the island of Sardinia’s Emerald Coast. Putin has even sent his teenage daughters to vacation at Berlusconi’s villa, a move that certainly calls into question Putin’s parental wisdom, considering the 75-year-old Berlusconi’s notoriety for bacchanalian orgies (as widely reported, for instance, here, here, and here) with young women, known as his “Bunga-Bunga Parties.”

And, as we reported last year, the Putin-Berlusconi plot thickened when Putin bought a neighboring luxury villa (albeit much smaller than Berlusconi’s) at Porto Cervo for 10 million euros. Where did Putin acquire the resources to buy a vacation domicile on one of the toniest pieces of real estate on the planet? He surely couldn’t have swung such a deal on his official KGB pay alone, or his salary as president or prime minister. The fact that that question was not even an issue in the Russian elections speaks volumes about the business-as-usual attitude toward institutionalized political corruption in Russia. Putin is, after all, the chief don or godfather in the Mafia State known as Russia, and it is more or less expected that he will partake of the same benefits that he and his Kremlin cronies have showered upon their favored oligarchs.
 
Mr. Berlusconi, of course, already boasted a huge personal fortune before assuming political office. That does not, however, make him immune to temptations to use his political connections to boost his business investments. The French television channel, France 24, reported recently:

Berlusconi was one of Putin's closest European allies before falling from power last year. He frequently came to Russia not just for diplomatic business but to celebrate his friend's birthday and other personal visits and clearly shares Putin's penchant for a macho lifestyle.

Diplomats in the US cables leaked by Wikileaks also described Berlusconi as acting as Putin's "mouthpiece" in Europe as well as "profiting personally and handsomely" in exchange.

One of the main targets of concern has been the Berlusconi/Putin-brokered South Stream gas pipeline, a massive joint project of Italy’s largest energy company, ENI, and Russia’s state-owned Gazprom.

Another close friend of former KGB agent Putin´s is, as we have previously pointed out, former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who has made his fortune thanks to his support of the Russian de facto dictator.

 

Obama´s and Cameron´s silence on global warming says more than a thousand words

 "global warming is not just the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind."

Barack Obama

Climate change is one of the "most pressing threats to [a nation's] prosperity and security". "I have always been clear that in order to tackle it [climate change] effectively, all major economies will need to take robust action to curb their emissions and put their economies on a more sustainable, low-carbon footing"

David Cameron


David Cameron has been wined and dined in the White House by his host Barack Obama. In their dinner speeches both leaders did not spare words when praising each other.

Obama and Cameron of course also had the usual political discussions, followed by a press conference. Considering what they both have said about the seriousness of the global worming/climate change issue, one would have expected that the subject was high on the agenda both in the discussions and the press conference. But a look at the official White House transcript of the press conference reveals the reality:

Not a word on this "most pressing threats to prosperity and security". Not one reporter even bothered to ask a question about this "one of our greatest challenges of any kind".

David Cameron´s and Barack Obama´s complete silence on the (bogus) threat of human caused global warming says more than a thousand words.

Princeton bioethics professor: Heavy people exacerbate global warming

Professors of bioethics seem to be a breed of their own. NYU bioethics professor S. Matthew Liao is suggesting that the human body should be engineered to combat global warming. Now, Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne is demanding that heavy airline passengers, who cause an "environmental cost, as higher greenhouse-gas emissions exacerbate global warming",  should pay more for their flights:


Is a person’s weight his or her own business? Should we simply become more accepting of diverse body shapes? I don’t think so. Obesity is an ethical issue, because an increase in weight by some imposes costs on others.
---
An increase in the use of jet fuel is not just a matter of financial cost; it also implies an environmental cost, as higher greenhouse-gas emissions exacerbate global warming. It is a minor example of how the size of our fellow-citizens affects us all. When people get larger and heavier, fewer of them fit onto a bus or train, which increases the costs of public transport. Hospitals now must order stronger beds and operating tables, build extra-large toilets, and even install extra-large refrigerators in their morgues — all adding to their costs.
---
Many of us are rightly concerned about whether our planet can support a human population that has surpassed seven billion. But we should think of the size of the human population not just in terms of numbers, but also in terms of its mass. If we value both sustainable human well-being and our planet’s natural environment, my weight — and yours — is everyone’s business.

Read the entire article here

Maybe somebody should take a closer look at what professors of bioethics are teaching students these days. One has a feeling that something has gone seriously wrong in the academic ivory towers of this scientific discipline.

PS

This is what the same professor Singer thinks about abortion:

"we should recognise that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being's life".

Singer states that arguments for or against abortion should be based on utilitarian calculation which weighs the preferences of a woman against the preferences of the fetus. In his view a preference is anything sought to be obtained or avoided; all forms of benefit or harm caused to a being correspond directly with the satisfaction or frustration of one or more of its preferences. Since a capacity to experience the sensations of suffering or satisfaction is a prerequisite to having any preferences at all, and a fetus, at least up to around eighteen weeks, says Singer, has no capacity to suffer or feel satisfaction, it is not possible for such a fetus to hold any preferences at all. In a utilitarian calculation, there is nothing to weigh against a woman's preferences to have an abortion; therefore, abortion is morally permissible.
Similar to his argument for abortion, Singer argues that newborns lack the essential characteristics of personhood—"rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness"^[20]—and therefore "killing a newborn baby is never equivalent to killing a person, that is, a being who wants to go on living."^[