Weng’an Riots: How the state media hurts China瓮安騷亂：怎麼狀態傷害了中國媒體
Filed under: 提起下： media 媒體 | Tags: |標籤： censorship 檢查 , ， featured 功能 , ， Guizhou 貴州 , ， media 媒體 , ， riots 暴動 , ， wengan 瓮安
Add comments 新增評論
By anyone’s standard, these should all be considered positive steps in the aftermath of this type of crisis.任何人的標準，這些都應該被視為積極步驟之後，這種類型的危機。 But it didn’t completely work; for many Chinese, online tempers still flared.但它並未完全工作;對許多中國，在線脾氣仍然爆發。 Here’s one key, representative quote behind the public frustration:這裡的一個關鍵，有代表性的報價背後的公眾失望：
Shi Zongyuan pointed out, “6.28″ incident started for a simple reason, but was used by a small number of people with ulterior motives along with the participation of evil, organized criminals.石宗源指出， “ 6.28 ”事件開始的，原因很簡單，但使用了少量的別有用心的人一起參加的邪惡，有組織犯罪分子。
This one little sentence has angered many Chinese.這一個小句已激怒了許多中國。 No one believes that “organized crime” is enough of an explanation for this riot; as many have said, a mob of Chinese don’t form up and stone a government building without some reason.沒有人認為， “有組織犯罪”是足夠的解釋這種防暴;正如許多人說，一群暴徒的中國並不構成和石頭一座政府大樓的一些理由。 In the mind of many, this one sentence is proof that the “cover-up” is on, that officials were now out to protect each other, and that the Communist Party had grown increasingly out of touch with Chinese society.在考慮到許多，這一句話是證明了“掩蓋”是，是，現在的官員，以保護對方，而且共產黨日益脫離中國社會。 Shi Zongyuan has been cursed with every slanderous name known in the Chinese language; many called him the “Shi Tiger” (in reference to the石宗源一直詛咒每誹謗性的名字已知的中國語言;許多打電話給他的“老虎石” （中提到 Zhou Tiger週老虎 ). ） 。
But what’s remarkable, what’s frustrating, is that this is all a crime inflicted by the state media itself.但是，有什麼了不起，有什麼令人沮喪的是，這是所有犯罪造成國家媒體本身。 Here is what a Guizhou reporter, who also attended the meeting on June 30th (between 100 local political leaders) reported on his personal blog (這裡是一個貴州記者，誰也出席了會議於6月30日（ 100至當地的政治領袖）報告了他的個人博客（ 连接連接 ): ） ：
… local political representatives first gave speeches with all of the standard political fluff: economic development had been disrupted, the great unity that had been established had been disrupted, calls for the government to severely punish the criminals, maintain social stability and harmony … ...當地的政治代表首先作了發言與所有標準的政治絨毛：經濟發展已遭到破壞，偉大的團結，建立了已遭到破壞，要求政府嚴懲罪犯，維護社會穩定與和諧...
After listening to the comments of those attending, Shi Zongyuan said: Weng’an county has always had tense relations between cadres and citizens, police and citizens.在聽取了大家的意見的參加者，石宗源說：瓮安縣一直關係緊張的幹部和公民，警察和市民。 Weng’an county has repeatedly had violent incidents of robbery, murder, rape which have gone unsolved.瓮安縣曾多次發生暴力事件的搶劫，謀殺，強姦其中已經解決。 The people who live here lack a sense of security.人們誰住在這裡缺乏安全感。 The failures of the county public security ministry has made everyone in the local community angry.失敗的縣公安部令每個人都在當地社區的憤怒。 He advised that those responsible for county public security should be “dismissed from class”.他建議，負責縣公安應該是“開除”級。 Hearing this, all of the local political leaders (members of the people’s congress, political consultative conference) clapped in approval.聽到這話，所有的地方政治領袖（成員的人民代表大會，政治協商會議）在批准鼓掌。
… ...
Shi Zongyuan also said that earlier this year (during the national party congress in Beijing), CCTV interviewed him for a program called “Peaceful Guizhou”.石宗源還表示，今年早些時候， （在全國黨代表大會在北京） ，中央電視台採訪他的一個名為“和平貴州” 。 At the time, Shi Zongyuan gave Guizhou’s crime situation 60 points, a barely passing grade.當時，石宗源給貴州的犯罪情況60分，勉強及格。 After the incident on 6.28, he can only give Guizhou 50 points.事件發生後的6.28 ，他只能給貴州的50分。
After this incident, all of the relevant departments in Guizhou must fully investigate this situation.經過這次事件中，所有相關部門必須在貴州全面調查這一情況。 If it isn’t handled properly and occurs again, he will voluntarily petition the central politburo and resign. 。如果不妥善處理，並再次出現，他將自願申請中央政治局和辭職。 。
None of the Chinese media carried the story in this passage, very few in China has any idea that Shi Zongyuan said these harsh words.沒有中國媒體進行的故事在此通行，只有極少數在中國有任何想法石宗源說，這些嚴厲的話。 Basically, the state media couldn’t break its bad habits: the reports instead tried to obscure negative criticism, downplayed the scale of the problem, tried to distract attention away from the local government… ultimately providing an extremely one-sided interpretation of the events.基本上，媒體不能打破它的壞習慣：報告而不是試圖掩蓋負面的批評，淡化了問題的嚴重性，試圖分散注意力從當地政府...最終提供了一個極其片面解釋的事件。 The cynical and increasingly informed Chinese can sniff out the lies in a second.在玩世不恭和中國越來越多地告知可以嗅出謊言在第二。 In providing this Disneyland perspective, the state media has only damaged the credibility of Shi Zongyuan and the government as a whole.在提供這項迪斯尼樂園的角度看，國營媒體只損壞的信譽石宗源和政府作為一個整體。
There’s more, from the same blogger:還有更重要的是，從同一個博客：
In my work, I like to discover minor details.在我的工作，我喜歡發現未成年人的細節。 When Shi Zongyuan was about to meet with the local representatives, the local prefecture and county party secretaries met first with the representatives and gave them notice, calling on them to behave properly in front of Shi Zongyuan, etc, etc… In reality, everyone has their own opinions on the issue, why should they have been given notice?當石宗源左右，以滿足與地方代表，當地縣，縣委書記會見了第一次與代表和給他們的通知，要求他們妥善行事前石宗源等，等...在現實中，每個人都有自己的意見在這個問題上，為什麼要他們已發出通知？ Shi Zongyuan has brains, as soon as the meeting started, he started reading out loud from a print-out of Internet comments.石宗源了大腦，一旦會議開始，他開始大聲讀從打印出的互聯網評論。 In these were some very explosive claims; everyone there listened attentively, but a few began to sweat more and more.在這些被一些非常爆炸性的債權;人人有認真地聽取，但有幾個開始出汗更多。
Sadly, that’sa fascinating detail that the vast majority of Chinese netizens are completely unaware of.可悲的是，這是一個迷人的細節，絕大多數中國網民都完全不了解。 This is the sort of government, attentive to the words and demands of the people, that many Chinese demand and expect… and when it actually happens, we don’t even know about it.這是一種政府關注的話，並要求人民，許多中國的需求和期望...當事情確實發生，我們甚至不知道。
The blogger gives us many other details unavailable elsewhere: he talks about clear evidence that rubber bullets were used, a fact he claims was also hidden from Shi Zongyuan by local officials.博客給了我們許多其他細節無法在其他地方：他談到明確的證據表明，橡皮子彈，用一個事實，他的索賠也隱藏石宗源地方官員。 He talked about the county government’s rather weak attempts to control what the media would be reporting; he talked about the inconsistent story being forced on them by the local government; he also interviewed a 7-year old boy in the hospital, one of the “rioters”; he talks about positive impressions of the alert armed police, in stark contrast to the lazy local police in riot gear.他談到，縣政府的相當薄弱企圖控制媒體將報告;他談到不一致的故事被強迫他們由當地政府負責;他還採訪了一名7歲男孩在醫院之一，的“暴徒” ;他談到積極展示了武警戒備，在鮮明對比的是懶惰的當地警察防暴裝備。
I hope all of this is a wake-up call to the right-minded leaders in the Chinese government, like (apparently) Shi Zongyuan.我希望所有這一切都敲響了警鐘，以正確的思想領導人，中國政府一樣， （顯然）石宗源。 Their righteous actions are being corrupted and perverted by others.他們的正義行動正在損壞和扭曲的人。 When the propaganda ministry is in effect hurting the government, you have to conclude the existing propaganda system is truly broken.當中宣部實際上是損害了政府，你必須結束現有的宣傳體系是真正打破。
UPDATE (07/03): The state media is now 更新（ 07/03 ） ：國家現在媒體 reporting報告 Shi Zongyuan’s harsh criticism of the county-level officials.石宗源嚴厲的批評，縣級官員。 Two officials have been sacked, and others are being investigated for violation of Party regulations.兩名官員已被解僱，其他正在調查違反黨的規章。
There are currently no comments highlighted.目前沒有任何評論強調。
July 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 pm 2008年七月2號在下午11時21分
Fascinating.令人著迷。
Honestly, I didn’t expect the events to unfold as they did or as quickly as they did.老實說，我沒有預料到的事件展開因為他們沒有或盡快他們做到了。 I am especially heartened by the reporter’s blog relating to the actions of Shi Zongyuan.我感到特別欣慰的是記者的博客有關的行動石宗源。
July 3rd, 2008 at 1:34 am 2008年7月三日在上午01點34分
The propaganda system is truly broken and doesn’t need fixing.宣傳系統是真正打破，並不需要確定。 It should be disbanded to allow good information and analysis to flow to the benefit of Chinese society.應當解散，讓良好的信息和分析，以流動，有利於中國的社會。 Freeing jailed journalists would be a good first sign that China wishes to do something about its media and information problem.釋放關押的記者將是一個很好的第一個跡象，表明中國要做些什麼了媒體和信息問題。
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:01 am 2008年7月三日在上午02點01
The interesting thing is, the official English media did report on the problems Shi Zongyuan mentioned:有趣的是，官方英文媒體沒有報告的問題石宗源提到： http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-07/02/content_6811162.htm
(see last few paragraphs) （見過去幾年段）
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:05 am 2008年7月三日在上午02時05分
also, did *any* chinese media report on this?此外，沒有任何* *中國媒體報導呢？
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:17 am 2008年7月三日在上午2時17分
Every time I hear or read the Chinese state media like Xinhua or People’s Daily, I just can’t stand them!每當我聽到或讀到的中國國營媒體新華社或像人民日報，只是我不能忍受他們！ Especially how they try to beautify all stories, good or bad.尤其是他們如何試圖美化所有的故事，好還是壞。 It’s so disgustingly superficial!這是如此disgustingly膚淺！ I don’t know why they have to do this!我不知道他們為什麼這樣做！ Sometimes, a lot times, its not necessary to beautify the situation.有時候，很多時候，它沒有必要美化情況。 What do I say?我怎麼說呢？ Habit?!習慣！ It’s an awful one.這是一個可怕的一個。
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:15 am 2008年7月三日在上午03點15分
oprsai, oprsai ，
“Habit?! “習慣！ It’s an awful one.”這是一個可怕的一個。 “
It’s the system.這是該系統。 I believe many journalists within the system are tired of doing what they have to do.我相信很多記者在系統內已厭倦了做他們必須做的。 The watch-dog founction of Internet with millioms of netizens has made things change for the better.該看門狗founction互聯網與網民millioms了事情有所改善。
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 am 2008年7月三日在上午03點28分
Interesting article Jen… But it falls short of revealing that there is an understanding that a trusted media is important to social harmony.有趣的文章仁...但它遠遠低於透露，有一個理解，信任的媒體是重要的社會和諧。 Trusted government, trusted police force, and trusted media are all needed.值得信賴的政府，值得信賴的警察部隊，並相信媒體都是必要的。 A mob is not needed when a calm voice can be heard.一群暴民不需要當一個平靜的聲音可以聽到。
The problem, snow, with the netizen watch dog is also trust.這個問題，雪，與網民看門狗也是信任。 Rumors spread like wildfire across the net.傳聞不脛而走全國網。 Accusations about being paid by this or that special interest are shot about.指責目前正在付出的這樣或那樣的特殊利益被槍殺的。
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:44 am 2008年7月三日在上午3時44
i was certainly not claiming that the report can be trusted….i just found it interesting that the official reports in english and chinese were different.我當然不是，聲稱報告可以信任... 。我只是覺得它很有趣的正式報告中英文和中國是不同的。
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:09 am 2008年7月三日在上午5時09分
The problem with Chinese Media CCTV is that it is state owned.這個問題與中國媒體中央電視台是，它是國有。 The content sucks and news programming is dumb and not believable.內容吸收和新聞節目是愚蠢的，而不是可信。 They should be privatized but strictly regulated by the government.他們應該私有化，但嚴格管制的政府。
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:15 am 2008年7月三日在上午05時15
@ Buxi @ Buxi
Wonderful post!奇妙的職位！ Can it be that Buxi is actually veering towards becoming a centrist?難道是Buxi實際上是轉向，逐步成為一個中間派？
But seriously, Buxi, I would argue that the Weng’an incident is pretty much a mirror of March 14 in Lhasa.但嚴重的是， Buxi ，我會認為，瓮安事件是相當的一面鏡子3月14日在拉薩。 It’s your perception - and, broadly, Chinese perceptions - of the two incidents that are vastly different.這是你的看法-和，廣義地說，中國的看法-這兩個事件有很大的不同。 Allow me to elaborate, in a dispassionate way.請允許我詳細說明，在一個冷靜的方式。 I am open to debating this aspect in civil fashion.我很開放，這方面的爭論在民間流行。
In both cases, an event (or a succession of events) happened at the local level, which inflamed local populace, who gave vent to their pent-up anger.在兩種情況下，一個事件（或繼承的事件）發生在地方一級，這激起當地民眾，誰給了他們發洩壓抑的憤怒。 Sure, a “young general” would argue that the people’s response was in both cases criminal/anti-national, wholly disporportionate to the events that triggered it and so on.當然，一個“年輕的將軍”的論點是，人的反應是在兩種情況下犯罪/反民族，全disporportionate的事件觸發它等等。 In the case of Lhasa, millions of “young generals” did in fact respond in this knee-jerk fashion, without even beginning to understand that there might be a root cause that might explain this explosion of anger.在拉薩，數以百萬計的“年輕的將軍”事實上在這反應下意識地，甚至開始認識到可能存在的根源，有可能解釋這種爆炸的憤怒。
But in the case of Weng’an popular perception (not proof, mind you) of a “cover-up” of an everyday crime has inflamed both the people of Weng’an and the broader constituency of Chinese Netizens, including you, to observe that:但在瓮安普遍的看法（不舉證，到你）一個“掩蓋”的日常犯罪已發炎的瓮安人民和廣大選民的中國網民，包括你，觀察說：
“No one believes that “organized crime” is enough of an explanation for this riot; as many have said, a mob of Chinese don’t form up and stone a government building without some reason. “沒有人認為， ”有組織犯罪“是足夠的解釋這種防暴;正如許多人說，一群暴徒的中國並不構成和石頭一座政府大樓的一些理由。 In the mind of many, this one sentence is proof that the “cover-up” is on, that officials were now out to protect each other, and that the Communist Party had grown increasingly out of touch with Chinese society”.在考慮到許多，這一句話是證明了“掩蓋”是，是，現在的官員，以保護對方，而且共產黨日益脫離中國社會“ 。
I disapprove of violence - whether it’s in Weng’an or Tibet.本人不贊成暴力-無論是在瓮安或西藏。 But, purely as a social observer, I can understand why both incidents happened.但是，純粹作為一種社會觀察員，我可以理解，為什麼這兩起事件發生。
What I find puzzling is that the same Chinese Netizens (”who are on the side of people of Weng’an”, to paraphrase a widely articulated Net sentiment) could not summon up the same empathy towards the people who rioted on Lhasa streets on 14.3, steadfastly refused to address the “root cause” of Tibetan anger, were quick to slam them as traitors and split-tists, and readily embraced the official (and state-media) narrative/propaganda.我找到令人費解的是，同樣的中國網民（ “誰是一方人民的瓮安” ，套用廣泛闡述淨情緒）不能拿出同樣的同情對人民誰對拉薩騷亂的街道上14.3 ，堅決拒絕處理“根源”西藏的憤怒，迅速大滿貫他們視為叛徒和分裂tists ，並隨時接受官方（及國有媒體）的說明/宣傳。
Why could not Chinese Netizens see that in Lhasa, as in Weng’an, “the state media couldn’t break its bad habits: the reports instead tried to obscure negative criticism… and ultimately providing an extremely one-sided interpretation of the events.” Why did they not question the official media narrative, and why did they allow themselves to be shanghai-ed by racial/nationalist chauvinism?為什麼不能中國網民看到，在拉薩，在瓮安， “國家媒體無法打破的壞習慣：報告而不是試圖掩蓋消極的批評...並最終提供了一個極其片面解釋的事件。 “他們為什麼不懷疑官方媒體的敘述，以及它們為什麼讓自己成為上海版的種族/民族沙文主義？
You celebrate the readiness with which Weng’an was opened up to local and international media; why, then, do you find it hard to acknowledge that in a sealed-off Tibet, it is theoretically possible to “cover up” far worse crimes - and the answer therefore lies in greater openness?您準備慶祝與瓮安是開闢了當地和國際媒體;為什麼，那麼，你很難承認，在一個密封的小康西藏，這是理論上可能“掩蓋”更為嚴重的罪行-並因此答案在於更大程度的開放？
Do you think you have reason to reflect on March 14 happenings in the light of Weng’an?你認為你的理由，以反映3月14日發生在瓮安根據？ Do you think that if you did it honestly, it’s possible - just possible - that you will arrive at a different set of responses than you did earlier?你是否認為如果你沒有說實話，有可能-只是可能-你會得出不同的反應也比你早？
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:41 am 2008年7月三日在上午05時41分
@Chinawatcher: Incredibly well said. @ Chinawatcher ：令人難以置信的說得好。 An excellent and balanced comment.一個很好的和均衡的評論。
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:56 am 2008年7月三日在上午05點56
@ChinaWatcher @ ChinaWatcher
You comment,您的評論，
“Why could not Chinese Netizens see that in Lhasa, as in Weng’an, “the state media couldn’t break its bad habits: the reports instead tried to obscure negative criticism… and ultimately providing an extremely one-sided interpretation of the events.” Why did they not question the official media narrative, and why did they allow themselves to be shanghai-ed by racial/nationalist chauvinism?” “為什麼不能中國網民看到，在拉薩，在瓮安， ”國家媒體無法打破的壞習慣：報告而不是試圖掩蓋消極的批評...並最終提供了一個極其片面解釋的事件。 “他們為什麼不懷疑官方媒體的敘述，以及它們為什麼讓自己成為上海版的種族/民族沙文主義？ ”
Answer:答：
Lot of Chinese went to Tibet as tourists or workers or businessman.很多中國去西藏的遊客或工人或商人。 I myself went to Tibet in 1986, the only university in Tibet, Lhasa university, was no bigger than a high school in New York.我去西藏在1986年，僅在西藏大學，拉薩大學，是不超過一所高中在紐約舉行。 There was only on main street in Lhasa; the “highway” from Qinghai to Lhasa took two and half days, I had to help the driver to push the car out of mud.只有在主要街道在拉薩的“高速公路”從青海到拉薩了兩年半的時間，我曾幫助司機把車從泥濘。
I went a temple, there were hundred of tibetans there and I was the only Han Chinese there, and one of them showed me the picture of Dalai Lama without any suspicion.我去一個寺廟，有幾百名藏族那裡，我是唯一的韓中國人，而且其中一人告訴我的圖片達賴喇嘛沒有任何懷疑。 They had absolutely no problem practicing their religions.他們絕對沒有任何問題，實踐他們的宗教。
Just ask yourself :只要問自己：
there are less than 50,000 monks in Tibet, and 2.6 million tibetans in Tibet.有不少於50000僧侶在西藏， 260萬藏人在西藏。 why was there hardly any harsh complains by ordinary tibetans, almost all of the complains were by monks ?為什麼在那裡幾乎沒有任何抱怨惡劣的普通西藏人，幾乎所有的抱怨是由僧人？
Also there are 56 ethnic in China, Han chinese had absolutely no problem with 54 of them, except two ethnic groups in Tibet and XingJiang, and both of them have separatists who are supported by other countries, coincident ?另外有56個民族在中國，漢族中國絕對沒有問題， 54人，除兩個民族在西藏和新疆，和他們兩個有分離主義者是誰支持的其他國家一樣，同步？
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:58 am 2008年7月三日在上午05時58分
@Chinawatcher, @ Chinawatcher ，
Appreciate the compliment, but don’t get too excited yet.感謝讚美，但不要過於興奮還沒有。 I remain as enthusiastic about China’s long-term economic path as I’ve always been, and I remain as guardedly optimistic as I’ve ever been about China’s domestic reforms under the current Hu/Wen administration.我仍然是熱衷於中國的長期經濟的道路，我一直，我仍然是謹慎的樂觀是我所見過的關於中國的國內改革，根據目前的胡錦濤/溫家寶管理。
I’ve always sympathized with the fate of minorities in China; as someone living as a minority overseas, I’ve always recognized how hard it can be for a minority to preserve culture and maintain equal rights.我總是同情的命運，在中國少數民族;有人居住的少數民族海外，我總是很難認識到如何可以為維護少數民族的文化和維護平等的權利。 For years, I’ve worked in various direct ways to help Tibetans in China.多年來，我一直在以各種直接的方式來幫助西藏人民在中國。 I’ve read Wang Lixiong’s writings on the subject since the late ’90s, and I understand much of the logic of what he was writing.我讀過汪哩洶的著作的主題，因為90年代後期，我的理解大部分的邏輯，他是書面的。
I can also accept that the Chinese state media was as one-sided in its handling of Lhasa.我還可以接受，中國官方媒體是一個片面的在處理拉薩。 Many Chinese have been talking about the state media’s “formula” in responding to the story… 1) talk about how things were already stable, 2) get the people immediately involved to call for peace/stability, 3) find a rioter to tearfully explain how they were misled, etc, etc… and that applies as much in Weng’an as it does to Lhasa.許多中國一直在談論國家媒體的“公式”在回應的故事... 1 ）談論如何已經穩定， 2 ）讓人民直接參與呼籲和平/穩定， 3 ）找到一個以喝酒狂鬧含淚解釋它們如何被誤導等，等... ，而且適用於瓮安得多，因為它沒有到拉薩。
Those are the similarities, and here’s the difference: the rioters in Guizhou (rightly or wrongly) were rebelling to defend a China that I want to see, while the rioters in Lhasa were rebelling to destroy the China that I want to see.這些相似之處，這裡的區別：暴徒在貴州（正確或錯誤）是奮起反抗，以維護中國，我希望看到，而暴徒在拉薩被奮起反抗，以摧毀中國，我不願看到的。
We can talk about the failures in the media all day long… and we will do precisely that on this blog, because I personally believe media and law are the two areas within China today that demand immediate reform and improvement… but I’m never going to defend or justify the actions of people who attacked my national flag, who attacked people for being citizens of my nation.我們可以談論失敗的媒體整天...我們將這樣做恰恰是在這個博客，因為我個人認為媒體和法律是兩個領域內中國今天要求立即改革和完善...但我永遠不會辯護或辯解的行為人誰攻擊我的國家的國旗，誰攻擊人民正在我國公民的民族。
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:13 am 2008年7月三日在上午6時13分
@jen, @仁
Wow.哇。 Thanks for catching that.感謝趕上這一點。 That’s remarkable… combined with the stories from the last few days, I can only assume that in Beijing, there’sa new English-language editor that’s ready to take more chances.這是了不起的...再加上故事從過去幾天裡，我只能假設，在北京，有新的英文編輯器，已經做好準備，要採取更多的機會。 Great for him.大他。
As far as Chinese news media covering the story… now, it’s time for all us “little generals” to be grateful that the Southern Metropolis group exists, because only it has the capability of restoring some face to our officials.至於中國的新聞媒體報導的故事...現在，這一切的時候了我們“小將軍”要感謝南方都市報組存在的，因為只有它有能力恢復一些面對我們的官員。 Southern Weekend has come up with an article that repeats many of Shi Zongyuan’s comments:南方周末出台了一篇文章，重複許多石宗源的評論：
http://www.infzm.com/content/14136
Good.良好的。 Let’s turn this around and learn from it.讓我們把這個周圍，並從中吸取教訓。
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:23 am 2008年7月三日在上午06時23分
By the way, the local government’s wall looks to be breaking down… more information from the blogger/reporter on site.順便說一句，地方政府的牆壁看起來是打破了...更多的資料，博客/記者網站。 Reporters (including those from the state media) are trying to get access to everything, and although the local government is trying typical methods to slow them down, I don’t think that’s going to happen.記者（包括國營媒體）正在試圖獲得的一切，儘管當地政府正試圖典型的方法，以緩慢下來，我不認為什麼事情都有可能發生。 The local prefecture party secretary apparently broke down in tears while apologizing “to the people”, while claiming he didn’t even cry when his parents passed away… but I doubt that’s going to save him now.當地的縣黨委書記顯然都泣不成聲，而道歉“人民” ，同時聲稱他甚至沒有哭時，他的父母去世了...但我毫無疑問這將挽救他。
Oh, and the local public security department’s head has already been dismissed.噢，與當地公安部門的頭部已被駁回。
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:37 am 2008年7月三日在上午06點37分
Sure, the state media didn’t break its bad habits in its Lahsa riots reporting.當然，媒體並沒有打破它的壞習慣在其Lahsa騷亂的報告。 But this does not mean that the two events (3.14 and 6.28) are completely same in nature.但是，這並不意味著這兩個事件（ 3.14和6.28 ）是完全一樣的性質。 For one thing, how can anyone ignore the widely publicized information on the complicated international context and factors that had played crucial roles in instigating and fanning the 3.14 riots?對於一件事，誰又能忽視了廣泛的宣傳資料，在複雜的國際背景和因素，發揮了至關重要的作用，煽動和煽動騷亂的3.14 ？ In fact most of those Chinese netizens who condemned 3.14 riots did pay attention to its root causes and were by no means less critical of Chinese state media usual approach to any politically sensitive event.事實上，大多數人誰中國網民譴責3.14騷亂並注意其根源，並沒有意味著更少的批評中國官方媒體通常的做法對任何政治敏感的事件。
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:42 am 2008年7月三日在上午06時42分
@Chinawatcher, @ Chinawatcher ，
Wow!哇！ A beautifully written piece you had - I have a lot to learn from you !精美的書面一塊你-我還有很多事情要學習您！ Your comment made me think too.您的評論使我想到了。
Just when I was getting ready to address your questions, I notice that Buxi basically said all the key points that was circulating in my head.只是當我正準備解決您的問題，我注意到， Buxi基本上說，所有的關鍵點是流傳在我的腦袋。 The main difference is the foreign influence.主要的區別是外國的影響。 Namely, the Tibetan independance angle, the Dalai Lama, and the western media’s bent-out-of-shape reporting.也就是說，西藏獨立的角度看，達賴喇嘛和西方媒體的彎曲了的形狀報告。 Otherwise you made a very compelling case about the similarities.否則，你提出了一個非常令人信服的理由的相似之處。
One thing the Chinese share regardless where they live - we want to see a united nation state, and we want to see our motherland developed towards modernity.有一件事在中國的份額，無論他們住在哪裡-我們希望看到一個統一的民族國家，我們希望看到我們的祖國走向現代化發展。
July 3rd, 2008 at 7:03 am 2008年7月三日在上午07點03
Chinawatcher (and Dave), Chinawatcher （和戴夫）
As an armchair general, Lhasa and Weng’an are two very different events with very different causes.作為一個普通扶手椅，拉薩和瓮安是兩個非常不同的事件非常不同的原因。 Sure, there is a thread linking the events.當然，有一個線程的事件聯繫起來。 Absolutely, I agree with the idea that the traction found in Lhasa was helped by a population that felt alienated.當然，我同意這樣的看法牽引發現在拉薩得益於人口感到疏遠。 But traction only helps get the car going.但是，牽引不僅有助於讓車去。 Something else was pushing it.別的推它。
Weng’an reflects a profound distrust in the people who are suppose to be the protectors.瓮安反映了一種深刻的不信任的人都猜想誰是保護者。 The death of a young girl is a difficult tragedy even in the most optimal environment, but explosive in an environment poisoned by distrust.死亡的一個年輕的姑娘是一個艱難的悲劇即使在最理想的環境，但爆炸的環境中毒害的不信任。 At many points, the story could have been diffused.在許多點，故事本來可以分散。 The simplest would have been complete reporting by Xinhua.最簡單的將是完整報告新華。
3.14 was a political maneuver. 3.14是一個政治軍事演習。 It was calculated to embarrass the government.有人計算，政府難堪。 It was calculated to kill Han and Hui.有人計算殺害漢族和回族。 The Lhasa riot wasn’ta localized event.拉薩騷亂不是本地化的事件。 It spawned anti-China protests internationally.它產生的反中國抗議國際。 It even inspired the assault on a wheelchair athlete.它甚至啟發了攻擊坐在輪椅上的運動員。
In my opinion, the lesson of Weng’an is Trust.在我看來，瓮安的教訓是信託。
The lesson of Lhasa is a bit harder to get to because of the separatists’ agenda.這個教訓拉薩有點難以進入，因為分離主義者的議程。 Let’s strip that away and look at the “traction.” My first thought was讓我們帶的以外，並期待在“牽引力。 ”我首先想到的是 cultural identity文化認同 . 。 For a Canadian, this is a easy path to take.對於加拿大，這是一個簡單的路徑採取。 Any Canadian my age has lived through cultural identity crisis galore.任何加拿大我的年齡經歷了文化認同危機豐富。 After listening to the debate here and elsewhere, I would look more closely at how the government approaches religion, especially where parents want to pass on their religion/culture to their children.在聽取了大家的辯論在這裡和其他地方，我會更仔細地研究政府如何辦法宗教，尤其是在父母希望通過對他們的宗教/文化，自己的孩子。 This isn’ta Tibet issue alone.這不是西藏問題本身。 It is a national issue.這是一個全國性的問題。
But, as pointed out by Buxi and others, the separatists are not looking at solutions as part of China.但是，正如所指出的那樣Buxi和其他分裂主義分子是不會考慮的解決方案作為中國的一部分。 This is another point of departure between the two events.這又是一個出發點之間的兩件大事。 Nobody in Weng’an is calling for independence.瓮安人是要求獨立。
The protesters in Weng’an want answers.示威者在瓮安希望的答案。 But answers are not what the separatists want.但答案是沒有什麼希望的分離主義分子。 The protesters in Weng’an hope for a better China.示威者在瓮安希望有一個更好的中國。 But a better China would counteract the separatist agenda.但是，中國將更好地打擊分裂主義的議程。
I do agree that reporters should have access to Tibet.我不同意，記者應該有機會到西藏。 In the West, denying access to reporters only serves the interests of the separatists.在西方，拒絕向記者只是利益的分裂主義分子。 Nothing perks a reporters interest than the scent of a coverup.沒有任何特權一記者的興趣比氣味的掩蓋。
Curious.好奇。 Where is the death of girl an everyday crime?哪裡是死亡女童的日常生活犯罪？
July 3rd, 2008 at 8:48 am 2008年7月三日在上午8時48分
@ Buxi (and others who critiqued my earlier comments) @ Buxi （和其他人誰critiqued我先前的評論）
Appreciate your sentiments.感謝您的情緒。 To respond to some of your points….為了響應您的一些點... 。
Buxi says: “The rioters in Guizhou (rightly or wrongly) were rebelling to defend a China that I want to see, while the rioters in Lhasa were rebelling to destroy the China that I want to see.” Buxi說： “暴徒在貴州（正確或錯誤）是奮起反抗，以維護中國，我希望看到，而暴徒在拉薩被奮起反抗，以摧毀中國，我不願看到的。 ”
How did you come to the conclusion that the March 14 rioters were “rebelling to destroy the China I want to see”?你是如何得出的結論是， 3月14日的騷亂是“奮起反抗，以摧毀中國我想看看” ？ I assume it was because they “attacked my national flag, attacked people for being citizens of my nation” (your words).我認為這是因為他們“攻擊我國的國旗，攻擊人民正在我國公民的國家” （你的話） 。
The Guizhou rioters burnt down a police station and/or the local government office - apart from several other official vehicles.貴州暴徒燒毀一所警察局和/或當地政府辦公室-除了其他一些公務車輛。 All of these represent the majesty of the state as much as the Chinese flag does.所有這些代表陛下的國家一樣沒有中國國旗。 But it appears to me that you are more ready to accept these as manifestations of genuine grievance merely because it was perpetrated by “one of us”, not by an “other” (namely Tibetan, whose political cause has international supporters).但它似乎我說，你更願意接受這些作為真正的表現不滿只是因為它是犯下的“自己人” ，而不是由一個“其他” （即藏，其政治事業的國際支持者） 。
To put it differently, would your empathetic sentiments towards the Guizhou rioters change if you learnt, for instance, that in the heat of the moment, some of them did in fact burn a Chinese flag?換句話說，將您的同情情緒的貴州暴徒的變化如果你的教訓，例如，在激烈的時候，有些人確實刻錄中國國旗？ Would all their “legitimate grievance” amount to nothing - if they had “burnt my national flag”?將所有的“合法的申訴”為什麼-如果他們已經“燒我國旗” ？
@ MutantJedi @ MutantJedi
) don’t care for their cause. ）不關心他們的事業。 Yet, I’m not so easily convinced that March 14 itself was a carefully choreographed act of political intrigue.然而，我不是那麼容易相信， 3月14日本身就是一個精心編排的行為的政治陰謀。
Sure, there are Tibetan separatists, and I can understand that a whole lot of “young generals” (and armchair generals當然，有西藏分裂主義分子，我可以理解，大量的“年輕的將軍” （和扶手椅將軍
To my mind, the most proximate reason for the March 14 riots were reports (rumours?) that Tibetan monks, who had been demonstrating peacefully (even if they were observing the anniversary of the 1959 uprising, which might technically be considered an act of political dissent/act of high treason), had been beaten up / shot at by police.在我看來，最直接的原因是3月14日騷亂的報告（謠言？ ）西藏僧侶，誰是和平示威（即使他們遵守週年的1959年的起義，這可能在技術上被認為是政治行為持不同政見/行為叛國） ，已毒打/開槍的警察。
That’s similar (in terms of proximate circumstances) to Guizhou, where the local people were inflamed following reports (rumours?) that a 15-year-old girl had been raped and killed, and that two of the alleged killers were related to party leaders.這是類似的（在近似的情況下） ，以貴州，在當地激起人以下的報告（謠言？ ） ，一個15歲的女孩被強姦和殺害，這兩名被指控的兇手有關黨的領導人。
If you look beyond the proximate reasons, in Lhasa it could be, perhaps, a perception of political and cultural subjugation.如果你看看近似以外的原因，在拉薩可以，也許，這種看法的政治和文化的征服。 In Guizhou it was unchecked lawlessness / mining conflicts / migration conflicts / what have you.在貴州這是制止無法無天/採礦衝突/移民衝突/你有什麼。
My bigger point: I’m not arguing that Weng’an and Lhasa are identical, I’m only saying that there’s more in common between them than many of us choose to acknowledge.我國大一點：我不認為，瓮安和拉薩是相同的，我只能說，有更多的共同它們之間的比我們許多人都選擇承認。 It just strikes me as odd that seemingly reasonable people, who see the failings of the state apparatus and instruments of civil society (including the media) and take the “people’s side” in one instance can be so totally un-empathetic in the other case.這只是我認為奇怪，看似合理的人，誰看到失敗的國家機器和工具，民間社會（包括媒體） ，並採取“人民一邊”的一個實例，以便可以完全取消同情的其他情況。
@ Wahaha @娃哈哈
I too have travelled to Tibet (in 2006).我也前往西藏（ 2006年） 。 And I too have met Tibetans who have (surreptitiously) flashed me pictures of the Dalai Lama.我也遇到了西藏人誰（秘密）閃過我的照片，達賴喇嘛。 But I also met other Tibetans who told me they were not allowed to openly display images of the Dalai Lama.但是，我還會見了其他藏族誰告訴我，他們不准公開顯示圖像的達賴喇嘛。
I met ordinary Tibetans who complained bitterly about Chinese “occupation.” But, then again, I also met Tibetans who said they had benefited greatly from the economic boom that Chinese investments had brought.我會見了普通藏族誰抱怨對中國“佔領。 ”但是，那一次，我還會見了誰藏人表示，他們已大大受益於經濟繁榮的中國投資帶來了。 I therefore know that the sweeping generalisations that you make - that “Tibetans had absolutely no problem practicing their religions” or “Only monks are complaining, ordinary Tibetans aren’t” - aren’t true, and Tibetan civil society is much more many-layered than you would have me believe.因此，我知道，全面概括，您-說， “西藏人絕對沒有問題，實踐他們的宗教”或“只有僧侶抱怨，普通西藏人不是” -是不是真的，和藏族民間社會更加多分層比你有我相信。 (If the monks feel particularly persecuted, it’s probably because they are subjected to the “patriotic education campaign” more rigorously than ordinary folks.) （如果僧侶感到特別的迫害，可能是因為他們受到了“愛國主義教育運動”更嚴格地比普通人。 ）
‘Nuff said. ' Nuff說。 This is my last post on this thread - but I’ll be back to follow the debate.這是我最後對這一職位緒-但我會回來遵循的辯論。 Thanks for the space.謝謝您的空間。
July 3rd, 2008 at 9:19 am 2008年7月三日在上午09時19分
@Chinawatcher @ Chinawatcher
You did not mention one major difference between the two riots.您沒有提到一個重要兩者之間的差額騷亂。 Lhasa rioters attacked innocent civilians while Guizhou rioters did not.拉薩暴徒襲擊無辜平民，而貴州暴徒沒有。 Had Guizhou rioter gone on a rampage to loot schools and hospitals, burn down shops, kill migrant workers, Chinese netziens would not have been sympathetic to them.有貴州喝酒狂鬧了一個瘋狂搶劫學校和醫院，燒毀商店，殺死移徙工人，中國netziens也不會同情他們。
July 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm 2008年7月三日在下午1時25分
Yes, as Weng’an demonstrates, the state media is so broken that it should come with a warning label “Spin at Your Own Risk!”是的，瓮安表明，國家媒體是如此破碎，它應該配備一個警告標籤“自旋風險由您自己承擔！ ”
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:00 pm 2008年7月三日下午2:00
Great piece.偉大的作品。
To tell you the truth, I’ma bit confused with the structure of the hierarchy.為了跟你說實話，我有點混淆的結構層次。 Can someone provide a visual aid (like some sort of tree) to show the distinctions/barriers between the local governments and higher ups?是否有人可以提供一個可視化的援助（如某種樹）顯示的區分/之間的壁壘地方政府和較高的起伏？
As for the China Daily thing that Jen brought up, on the one hand, I’m surprised, but on the other hand not so much.至於中國每日的事情仁提出，一方面，我很驚訝，但另一方面，沒有這麼多。 My impression was for some ODD reason, they have more latitude in their stories then their counterparts.我的印象是一些奇怪的原因，他們有更多的緯度他們的故事然後同行。 My GOD, papers like the people’s daily, as Opersai said, are so superficial.我的上帝，論文等人們的日常生活，作為Opersai說，如此膚淺的。 I mean some of the “sensitive” stories take up about a couple of vague sentences, which begs the question why the hell did they bother to write it up in the first place.我的意思是一些“敏感”的故事最多約了幾個含糊不清的句子，這迴避的問題，為什麼地獄，他們都將它寫在首位。
July 3rd, 2008 at 2:33 pm 2008年7月三日在下午2時33分
Chinawater, Chinawater ，
I was talking about the HARSH complains by tibetans, meaning the complains about freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the words that appeared million times on west media, not other complains like in Weng’an.我是在談論抱怨惡劣的西藏，這意味著抱怨言論自由，宗教信仰自由的話，似乎多萬次的西部媒體，而不是像其他抱怨瓮安。
I never, never read on west media a complain by a tibetan farmer about how he/she had trouble to choose the religion or practice the religion.我從來，從來不讀西媒體抱怨的一個藏族農民如何，他/她遇到了麻煩，選擇宗教或宗教的做法。 There are other complains, mostly about that Han chinese hold better positions and are paid better, or some Han chinese take away their traditional business (by bringing goods from inland), but this is not suppression, it is cuz the education level of tibetans are too low to hold the positions.還有其他的抱怨，主要是對韓進行更好的中國的立場和支付更好的，或者一些漢族中國拿走他們的傳統業務（把貨物從內陸） ，但這不是制止，這是cuz教育水平的藏族人太低舉行的立場。 I mentioned the Lhasa university was no bigger than a high school in New York, there are very few “good” jobs that Tibetans are capable of NOW, but hopefully in the future, it will change.我提到了拉薩大學不超過一所高中在紐約，很少有“良好”的工作，西藏有能力，但希望在未來，它將改變。
About that Tibetans are not allowed to show DL picture publiclly, I dont see anything wrong.這個藏族不允許圖片顯示消旋publiclly ，我不要看到任何錯誤。 Who dare to publicly show Bin Laden’s picture in US ?誰膽敢公開表明本拉丹的圖片在美國？ If DL picture was allowed to be shown publicly, you bet that there will be riots two or three times every week by those monks in Tibet.如果消旋圖片被允許公開顯示，你打賭將有暴亂兩次或三次，每週由西藏僧侶。
About “patriotic education campaign”, I think this is not clever idea by chinese government.關於“愛國主義教育運動” ，我認為這是不聰明的想法，中國政府。 If they think it is necessary, they should hide it in histroy textbooks, in movie theaters, in TV, like attacks on Chinese government by west media, not so explicitly.如果他們認為有必要，他們應該把它隱藏在歷史教科書中，在電影院，電視一樣，攻擊中國政府的西方媒體，沒有那麼明確。
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:36 pm 2008年7月三日在下午3點36分
The latest news today: Xinhua is now giving us the fully harsh version of the story in Chinese.最新消息：新華社現在是使我們有充分嚴酷的版本的故事在中國。 The two senior heads of the county public security ministry are being dismissed on advice of Shi Zongyuan.這兩個高級首長的縣公安部正在駁回意見石宗源。 All of the senior officials in the county will be investigated for violations of Party regulations, which are more strict than criminal law if fully enforced.所有的高級官員在縣將受到調查，對違反黨的規章，這是更嚴格的刑事法比如果得到充分實施。
http://news.qq.com/a/20080703/003398.htm
Cheers to the Hu/Wen administration for the right move.乾杯向胡錦濤/溫家寶政府的正確的舉措。 Glad to see that the “point” of this blog post is made meaningless by the new harsh, candid discussions in the press.我們高興地看到， “點”這一博客帖子是毫無意義的新的嚴厲的，坦率的討論在報刊上。 There’s no good reason for anyone to protect the incompetents and corrupt officials that made this confrontation possible.
Like Mao said, trust the people, rely on the people, motivate the people.
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
@Chinawatcher,
First of all, let me clarify and say that even if I sympathize with the people of Guizhou, and am excited to see government officials punished for their roles in allowing this to happen… I believe any rioter, any where, should face full legal consequences for what they did. Those behind the riots must be prosecuted.
There have always been two different issues in Lhasa: 1) what I would call “legitimate grievances”, and 2) the specific political cause of a “Free Tibet”. (And you can’t ignore the obvious causal link between the political cause of a Free Tibet, and the government’s oppression leading to these legitimate grievances.)
So, “legitimate grievances” absolutely should be addressed… like concerns about being marginalized economically, or even dislike for a Communist Party secretary who talks about the Communist Party being the Tibetan people’s “Buddha”. You’ll have to dig into another blog (PKD) to see my comments on 3/14; I was very critical of the government for having failed to address some of these grievances in previous years.
But the other issue behind Lhasa is “Free Tibet”. I think it was Nimrod that said it well; if it was “Freedom in Tibet”, I’d have been more sympathetic… but we’re not children, and we know exactly what the “Free Tibet” campaign itself signifies.
The Chinese national flag is both a symbol of the government and of the country, which are absolutely not the same thing. In Lhasa and Tibetan regions, as rioters chanted “Chinese out of Tibet” and “Tibet for Tibetans”, they were assaulting the country. In Guizhou, they were assaulting the government. Governments will always come and go depending on how well they do their jobs, but I have no intention of supporting those looking to destroy the country.
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Even I can top Mao’s wisdom. How about: trust the people, rely on the people, and let them vote for good government so they don’t have to burn police stations to seek justice for rapists and murderers.
July 3rd, 2008 at 3:55 pm
@JD,
Right, because in countries where the people can vote, they never need to burn government buildings . 。
For more discussions on the relative merits of democracy, I’d suggest you stay focused on one of the other numerous threads on that topic.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
ChinaWatcher,
In regards to your “bigger point” in #19.
You make an interesting point. But as you said, you make the assumption that the Lhasa riots weren’t planned which is the pretext of your point. However, I do not believe that many people who are “sympathetic to china” in this blog absolved blame from the local tar government, but they can speak for themselves. My opinion is close to what MutantJedi said (#18) but slightly different. Looking at the evidence, I believe there was planning and political motivations behind the riots and other protests.
However, I would say there were ALSO aspects that were from people trying to vent out some rage because of some personal grievances(eg burning of a Mosque, what does Islam have to do with the government).
Now, IMO, that aspect is lost because of the political maneuvering and actions from factions within Dharmsala and that is where the difference is from Wengan for me. I said this earlier in another post and I’ll say it again, I really disagree with the actions of Dharmsala when every issue/problem in the TAR is framed with their own political purposes(”I don’t like the way my Han barber cuts my hair, we need independence!”). I feel such myopic views are counterproductive because in fact, social ills and flaws in the TAR happen everywhere in China.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:54 pm
I think people shouldn’t try to mix everything together, I think that most people don’t even know anything from that area and try to make sense of all of these stuff. Maybe it is best people not involve or not from these be patient and let everything these surface before just jump toward all of these things about what is right and wrong.
July 3rd, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Can you actually believe these blog that can hold key information, that is not true, there is no way you can varify anything right now, let along form a conclusion!
July 3rd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Wow, is that Mao, is he just misquoting Sun Yat-sen’s “Three Principles of the People (民族主义，民权主义，民生主义— ‘Government by the people, gove