I read the white paper on democracy that China released on Oct. 19 called the Building of Political Democracy in China, and was moved to assist those unfamiliar with the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP's) use of language by offering these translations.
Using its new "Communist Dictionary of Commonly Misunderstood Words," China has once again stepped out onto the world stage and announced with a straight face that it operates under a "democratic" form of government (a lie it floated first in Hong Kong a number of years ago), that it provides religious freedom, freedom of speech and association, and human rights, and that the Chinese government provides a "fundamental guarantee for the Chinese people to be masters in managing the affairs of their own country."
In order to truly understand the white paper, it is first necessary to learn the meaning of commonly misunderstood words in the new Chinese communist dictionary.
For example, the word "democracy" means "no universal suffrage, no freedom of choice, can only vote for the CCP." The word "peace" has been redefined to mean "complete unconditional surrender." All references to "peace" in Tibet, or Taiwan, in reality mean "complete unconditional surrender."
It is interesting to note that this is the definition of "peace" also adopted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in Taiwan, for instance in the title of the "cross-strait peace committee" -- the true purpose of which is to arrange a complete and unconditional surrender by Taiwan to China.
There is also the definition of "freedom," which loosely defined means "freedom with Chinese characteristics," but more precisely, means "slavery" or "no freedom." It is important to understand this because the white paper uses the term "freedom" liberally to describe many of the communist government's purported benefits, including "freedom of speech," "freedom of religion" and "freedom of association."
Thus the white paper touts China's "freedom of religion," while the reality for the country's Catholics and other Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, the Falun Gong, or in fact any religion, is that there is "no freedom of religion."
For those who doubt this, just ask the real Panchen Lama, if you can find him. I suppose that another of the CCP's definitions of "freedom" is "10 years of house arrest in an undisclosed location."
As for "freedom of speech," the white paper touts China's numerous newspapers, its Internet, media (TV and radio) and its Constitution.
But to truly understand how "freedom of speech" is used in the white paper, the definition from the "Communist Dictionary of Commonly Misunderstood Words" must be at hand. <>
The new definition of "freedom of speech" is "freedom of speech to say only good things about the CCP, and otherwise, no freedom of speech."
The white paper fails to explain the continuing ruthless censorship and filtering of all news and Internet information in China, or the imprisonment of anyone anywhere in the country who dares to criticize the Chinese communist government -- or any of its leaders, actions, policies, rules, laws or principles. In fact the white paper utterly fails to even mention it.
This adds to the understanding of the new definition of "white paper," which is "whitewash."
The white paper also speaks of the purported guarantee in the Constitution for "human rights," but to truly understand this, one must refer to the new dictionary definition of "human rights."
The new definition says "human rights" is "the requirement to live as a CCP adherent, and to praise and follow the CCP, and otherwise, no human rights."
When using this definition, the white paper's meaning becomes crystal clear.
For example, when the following portion of the white paper on human rights is modified to reflect the true meaning, it is more easily understood: "The Chinese Constitution comprehensively stipulates the citizens' [requirement to live as a CCP adherent and to praise and follow the CCP, and other than that, no human rights] and [no freedom]. Based on the Constitution, China has enacted a series of laws on the protection of [the requirement to live as a CCP adherent, and to praise and follow the CCP, and otherwise, no human rights], and set up a relatively comprehensive legal system for the protection of [the requirement to live as a CCP adherent, and to praise and follow the CCP, and otherwise, no human rights]. On the basis of achievements made over the 50-plus years of economic and social development, the Chinese people are now enjoying [the requirement to live as a CCP adherent, and to praise and follow the CCP, and otherwise, no human rights] more comprehensive and fuller than they have ever enjoyed in the past."
Article VII is entitled "Respecting and Safeguarding Human Rights" -- or "respecting and safeguarding the requirement to live as a CCP adherent, and to praise and follow the CCP, and otherwise, no human rights" if read using the new communist dictionary definition.
The white paper states at the beginning of Article VII that "In March 2004, an amendment to the Constitution was adopted by the Second Session of the 10th National People's Congress, which included the statement `the state respects and safeguards human rights' in the Constitution, thus ushering in a new chapter in the progress of China's human rights undertakings."
Well, what they meant to write in the Constitution was that "the State does not respect and safeguard human rights" and, somehow, the word "not" got left out. It is from this source that the new definition of "human rights" springs forth. It is also proof that the white paper (whitewash), is in fact nothing more than the usual "CCP pack of lies" -- defined in the new dictionary as "absolute truth."
How ironic is it that the Constitution was amended to add a provision on human rights without a vote by the people? A government that can do that, can just as easily adopt a provision that takes the right away.
In truth, the white paper is merely a typical justification offered by the CCP for its ruthless dictatorship, using the same paternal arguments about "social stability" that all dictators throughout the ages have used to justify oppression, tyranny, detention, slavery and murder.
One of the most poignant lines in the white paper states that the CCP is the "fundamental guarantee for the Chinese people to be masters in managing the affairs of their own country."
In other words, so long as the CCP remains the dictator of China, no outside nation will interfere. But, the new dictionary is necessary to fully understand this passage. In the CCP's new dictionary the definition of "master" is "slave," and the definition of "managing [their own] affairs" is "doing what the party says, on pain of death."
There are as many as 80 million casualties and billions oppressed by ruthless communist rule who could testify to this reality.
In his novel 1984, George Orwell described the motto that was emblazoned on the government's Ministry of Truth: "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength."
In Orwell's fictional world, the government behaved in a way that is eerily similar to the actions of Beijing's communist government, and characters in the book suffered similar indignities, and lacked similar rights and freedoms.
In the book, "truth" was only what the government said it was.
In this regard, communist China is no different. "No freedom, no free speech, no freedom of religion, no human rights, no information, no truth, no right to vote, no democracy, plenty of unbridled censorship and lots of overwhelming oppression," has been redefined in the "Communist Dictionary of Commonly Misunderstood Words" as "the good life."
To all whom Beijing subjugates it says, "Believe it, and you will be `free.'"
Welcome to 1984 in Beijing.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS