Chinese Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo has succumbed to liver cancer. Lionized in the West, his passing was little noted in China. Just a smidgen of reflection would explain the dichotomy.
Liu did not win the Nobel Prize for physics or economics or any of the others administered by the Nobel Committee in Stockholm. He won the Peace Prize administered out of Oslo.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is appointed by the Norwegian parliament and has been responsible for the most politicized honor among the Nobel prizes.
Since there hasn’t been a whole lot of peace around the world, it’s understandable that there were more years when a Peace Prize was not awarded than for any of the other Nobel Prizes. Some of the committee’s award choices were matters for debate.
The Peace Prize has been the most burdened in controversy. For example, some say the committee gave the prize to the Dalai Lama in part to atone for repeatedly passing over Mahatma Gandhi, universally recognized as the most deserving of the honor never to have received it.
The committee also rushed headlong in the opposite direction and couldn’t wait to see what Barrack Obama was going to do as president of the United States. They awarded Obama the Peace Prize shortly after he was elected president just to flaunt Norwegian indignation at the warmongering policies of George W Bush, Obama’s predecessor.
Alas for the prestige and credibility of the Norwegian committee and the Peace Prize, Obama would be hard-pressed to point to any achievements toward peace in his two terms as the US president.
If it’s easy to become a Peace Prize laureate, it’s hardly surprising that it’s a low bar for anyone to become a nominee for the honor. All it takes is possessing credentials with the proper slant.
The late Harry Wu (aka Wu Hongda) is a good example. The aftermath of his death last year has revealed him to be a thief and philanderer. He stole the money set aside for Chinese human-rights activists and he was a serial groper of women.
Wu rose to fame when he was arrested as he tried to enter China under disguise. After his much publicized release, he trotted around the world as a self-proclaimed defender of human rights in China. His anti-China criticism and attendant publicity got him nominated for the Peace Prize.
Wu and his ilk have learned that there is a career in paimapi, a Chinese saying that literally means petting the horse’s rump or, in a cruder version, inducing equine flatulence. It’s a Chinese expression for obsequious flattery.
The profit is in petting the Westerner’s mapi, by expressing admiration for the Western concept for democracy as if only through democracy can one achieve human rights and dignity.
The important difference between Wu and Liu is that while Wu remained in the safety of the protective West, Liu went back to China from a teaching position in the US to advocate the overthrow of the Communist Party of China (CPC).
Liu even expressed the idea that 300 years as a colony of a Western power would have done China wonders and enabled it to catch up to the standards of Western democracy. That was paimapi of the first order. No wonder the West adored him.
Conveniently overlooked by Liu was that in the nearly three decades since Liu went back to China, it has become the second-largest or largest economy in the world, depending on the yardstick used.
According to Pew’s regular polls of the sentiments of people in China, their satisfaction and approval rating of the country’s one-party rule and CPC has hovered around 80% in most recent years.
Thus we have a situation where Western countries that boast of popular approval ratings under 50% hectoring China to reform. They encourage China to change its system of government so that its popularity can be more like the West’s.
May Liu Xiaobo rest in peace. It is difficult to know how long he will be remembered in the West. He is already a forgotten man in China.
Lui Xia Bo was an agent of the CIA and a traitor to his country. He was paid by the CIA and the NED to cause unrests in China. He deserved to be punished more harshly. Good riddance that he is no more.
If not for cancer, Liu Xia Bo could get rich like other dissidents by giving talks on China and fawning the neoliberals and, now the neoFascists.
The same charges (traitor and CIA agent) could have been made against founders of the Communist Party Of China such as Mao and his company because the CPC demanded democracy from the then one-party goverment the KMT. And even the writers of the current Chinese constitution should be CIA agents and Chinese traitors because the constitution they wrote was full of democracy; without democracy there cannot be any Chinese constitution. If we go to one specific article 79, we will find the election of the Chinese president is almost identical to the America’s; it says any Chinese citizen of the age 45 can run for the Chinese president while the American constitution says 35 years.
As Dr. Koo appropriately said if anyone deserve a Nobel Peace Award it should have been Gandhi who called for peaceful means to gain independence from India’s British overlords. But Winston Churchill call him a half naked seditious fakir. And he did not get the award. Briton was the hegemon then. Liu called for the overthrow of the Chinese government. That’s sedition. But he got a Nobel Peace award. Does that make sense? You be the judge.
Like Michael Chan mentioned, a fact self-censored by western media is Liu Xiaobo received nearly 2 million dollars from congressionally mandedated NED to conduct domestic political opposition including advocating for abolishment of China’s consitution, and the Chinese courts decided Liu violated Inciting To Subvert State Power section 105, 106.
The Nobel Committee decimated its credibility by ignoring the fact foreign collusion in domestic politics is universally outlawed including US (FARA 22 US Code 611). NED’s grant publications showing Liu’s patronate is but an open secret. Although NED has since deleted many of its statements on Liu, they are still available thru web archives:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=NED+extends+warmest+congratulation+grantee+Liu+Xiaobo
Praytell, will a US citizen taking Chinese money to criticize the American Empire and advocate abolition of US constitution, receive a Nobel?
"Liu called for the overthrow of the Chinese government" is clearly a misunderstanding. No democratic dissident has done so. They all call for the overthrow of the one-party system, and for the change into a multiparty system. As a matter of fact, the Chinese constitution allows a multiparty system. Check it out in Article 79 of the said constitution.
Wood Wu did you bother the read the part about "a new constitution" in Charter 08, co-authored by Liu and Prof. Perry Link, while under US goverment funding?
http://www.bing.com/search?q=Charter+08+%22a+new+constitution%22
What the chinese emperor should have done is for all new born babies instead of giving polio vaccine he should give "mouth shut vaccine" that will make sure no humans can speak in china…..but then the chinese are quite creative they will start using cartoons….it is a big problem to solve that
Tell that to ur master who put snowden and assange on wanted list
Nothing more than a paid for propagandist. Absolute rubbish.
Charles Liu Hi, Mr. Liu, how are you? Why you asked me to read the 08 Charter? I do not think funding was a problem. Even if the Charter writers had received foreign funding, by the billions, it is still a good Charter. The writers deserved it.
Your logic was, if a Chinese does not criticize the CPC or PRC, he or she has not received foreign funding; only after a Chinese has received foreign funding, he or she will criticize CPC or PRC.
Wood Wu That’s where you are wrong. Domestic politics with foreign funding violates Inciting To Subvert State Power 106. Had LXB being American taking Chinese money to advocate abolition of US constitution, he too would be in jail, in violation of FARA 22 US Code 611.
Wood Wu Not at all. Domestic politic is not illegal, but domestic politics with foreign funding is.
Charles Liu …The Chinese communists did not charge Liu Xiaobo with the violation of crimial law Article 106. This means, your charge is false and not applicable. There were hundreds of similar cases like Liu. None was charged with Article 106.
As far as Article 105 is concerned, it is unconstitutional. It should be thrown out. All the democratic dissidents serving time must be released immediately and compansated. When it is quoted by Article 106, this Article beomes unconstitutional also, and should be thrown out.
Charles Liu …Some claimed that Liu Xiaobo called for the overthrow of the Chinese government. You claimed he called for the abolition of the Chinese constitution. When I checked into Liu’s words, what he had called for was the overthrwo of the one-party system, and the improvement of the constitution. If he called for abolition of the constitution, he must have argued that, China should be rule by a person, not by any law. As far as I know such an argument was given by your great late leader Mr. Mao Zedong.
Wood Wu wow a racist Asian; I’m American and I’m not from mainland China so it matters nothing here. So you agree LXB did call for a new constitution. Matters not what he argued, while it’s not illegal to call for a new constitution, it is illegal to do so with foreign collusion. Read section 105 106 of Incite To Subvert State Power. It is the same as FARA 22 US Code 611 as both assert state’s rights to political independence.
Wood Wu it is the alleged ideology & rules that ones use to govern or administer the country. No pure communism as advocated by Karl Mark or the like…man can never be in equal in the sense of sharing of financial/material & power. It is a myth & similarly there is no pure democracy… as ruling for the by the people & for the people can not be done as ideally as ones hope for…it is the greatest myth to think it is so…look at the democratic nations of the West..are there real democracy? Nope, I don’t think so. Look at the presidential election of USA more than half don’t agree with the election of Trump. In Europe too many splits to mention. Suffice to say there will always be vested interested by those that have (power or wealth) as against those that have less. Base on you narrow view or broad interpretation in relation to demand for freedom equal to democracy…it is laughable to equate such with Moa or the light. Having a constitution itself would mean that it is not a democracy or the fact that freedom is mentioned means otherwise is a flawed argument. What make you think democracy means freedom. It is not such as surmised by you. Neither is communism devoid of freedom. Think…I guess I have said much!
Charles Liu Don’t waste time with Wu Wood. His or her statement will always be generalised & follow a certain narrative. When China will be bullied & treated with contempt as a cake to be shared by the Western powers..it seems ok to them when they corrupt the official then ruling China. They still the many inventions of China & now the West talk about copy right trade mark & all types of IP rights. …Always try to allege that they are better and create unequal playing field… Did China in the height of its power colonised other nations…maybe they fight the Mongol & nearby nations. There is good reason why the Great Wall of China was built…to keep the invader riding freely into China to pillage the country & murder its people!
Talk crop. What a shame. Freedom to criticise does not mean it is absolute freedom. But are you even sure what it us like in China. Do you even understand their histories & cultures. Do you even know that it may be easier to work or start a business there then in Western country with its hidden protectionist policy…the lure of so called freedom is only so good if you are able to excel in their countries. You think the Chinese in China don’t enjoy freedom or right to speak out?! Get a life & visit China & other countries & then comment …by the way no perfect system…only imperfect human!
Wood Wu you did not read 106 did you? 106 is add on punish for 105. go read it, 106 said punishment should be more severe if 103 104 105 is violated with collusion with foreign entity. As to constitutionality of 105, there is no dispute against it. Go ahead and file one.
Ru Meng …Welcome to the discussion. You were right to say there is no real or ideal democracy in the West. Please take a look at Article 79 of the Chinese constitution. Does it mean democracy? According to said Article, people like you could be eligible to be elected as the Chinese president.
Charles Liu …LXB was sent to jail under the criminal law article 105, not 106, it means LXB did not violate article 106, It means further, foreign funding was irrelevant in LXB’s case. It could further mean LXB never got any foreign funding. Besides LXB, hundreds of people were sent to jail for violating article 105, none for violating 106. Nobody ever was found receiving foreign funding by the Chinese government or court, but only you, Charles Liu, had found so. Charles Liu also built a connection between criticism and funding. Without foreign funding, Chinese people will not criticize the Chinese government nor the CPC. In Charles Liu’s eyes, the Chinese people always can be bought by money; the Chinese are very cheap, in Charles’s eyes that is.
Ru Meng …What were you talking about?
Wood Wu Repeating your ignorance doesnt make you right. you did not read 106 did you? 106 is add on punishment for 105. read it, 106 said punishment should be more severe if 103 104 105 is violated with collusion involving foreign entity. As to constitutionality of 105, there is no dispute against itin China, not now not when LXB was rid. Go ahead and file one.
Wood Wu who cares…the issue in your mind is freedom or that Liu was seemingly fighting for freedom or democratic rule in China. It is not whether Article 79 would mean democracy or otherwise. Why so fixate on democracy as though it is a magic formula for freedom. Is there really true freedom in democracy or is democracy rule going to ensure that freedom is allowed? That is in my mind a flawed premises. I live in a allegedly democratic country but I don’t have the freedom to expressed my view publicly in the press which is control by the dominant political party of the day. Tell me is there freedom in Malaysia or other country including Singapore that there is real freedom. Forget about absolute freedom..
Charles Liu …Your were right in saying that, there is no dispute against the constitutionality of criminal law article 105. I was trying to raise a dispute and have not succeeded yet. At present, nobody has come to my point: article 105 is unconstitutional. Why, because it rejects people’s right to fight for state power while the article 79 of the Chinese constitution gives people the right to fight for state power.
Wood Wu your opinion is not a fact. Go make a case if you feel so strongly. Fact when is LXB was convicted 105 was not in dispute.
Charles Liu …You are right again, when and after LXB was convicted, 105 was not in dispute. At present nobody sees 105 as uncontitutional. I am the only one to see so. It is time to say goodbye.
Wood Wu too bad you are not the missiah of Chinese constitutionality. 106 as add on punishment is constitutional, until you go thru the process of challenging it in Chinese court successfuly. As to your opinion, even you agree everyone disagree with you 😛
Ooo, "paid propagandist". Well, let’s see some proof of your empty McCarthyist accusation. Remeber Liu Xiaobo’s NED funding is well documented – straight from NED’s own grant publication.
Charles Liu. Your attempt to label me a McCarthyist is proof enough. Your diatribes are ‘standard operating procedure’ for any propagandist. Your aim is to discredit western democracy, and any individual or organisation that supports western democracy. As such, there is no point debating you. 對牛彈琴，草木皆兵，掩耳盜鈴。
Michael O’Brien do you or do you not have proof Dr Koo was paid? It’s that simple, McCarthyism fails when openly challenged.
Ru Meng absolute freedom gives them right to even rape women freely like how it is done in India
Wood Wu it is about your mindset & narrative…people are now thinking the West claims on democracy is not necessary the only way to go…It comes a time a system like that of China may be necessary. From the way you put your point, it seems that you either an axe to grind against China system & so dead on the western way or democracy is infallible…there is more than one way to govern a country & there are time certain countries may need a system that may not agree with yours or that of western stlye democracy…