China - o noua putere mondiala - Page 42

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 16:13

Wow !!!!

In other words, you support the death penalty not because there is data showing it helps reduce murder, but because there is no data showing that it does not reduce it !!! I guess this says something about the Chinese approach on law and human rights.....

Let me tell you what, let's introduce public burnings at the stake again, because there is no data showing that it does not help reduce crime !!!

P.S. before embarrassing yourself on a public forum again, you would do well to carry a little research about "the burden of proof".

ablium · 13-10-2007, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erethorn

Wow !!!!

In other words, you support the death penalty not because there is data showing it helps reduce murder, but because there is no data showing that it does not reduce it !!! I guess this says something about the Chinese approach on law and human rights.....

Let me tell you what, let's introduce public burnings at the stake again, because there is no data showing that it does not help reduce crime !!!

P.S. before embarrassing yourself on a public forum again, you would do well to carry a little research about "the burden of proof".

Bring your argument to law makers and judges of supreme court of United States, a country that respects human right most, or at least is most ardent advocate of human right. I am not a law maker or court judge and I assume that I am entitled to have my personal opinion.

By the way, before embarrassing yourself on a public forum, you should know that "the burden of proof" is not used to make law, but used to determine whether one violates law.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 16:53

Would you please stop using the US example to extricate yourself from a dead end ? I thought we were discussing China here. I also never said I approved of death penalty in the US. It's barbaric in US and China alike. You are acting like a spoilded child who yells "You too ! You too !" If you're so keen in bringing other countries as an example, why don't you use the countries of the EU, where the death penalty is abolished ?!

Regarding the burden of proof, you should have brought an argument that proves the death penalty helps enforce the law; instead, you used a double negation. That only works in mathemathics, you know.

So, to sum it up:

You failed to bring any argument supporting the death penalty, besides "it's my personal opinion" and "others do it, too". Meanwhile, your government injects people with poison on an almost daily basis. Good going.

ablium · 13-10-2007, 17:08

That is why I said before that debate on death penalty is futile. I once carefully listened to the arguments from both sides of pro and anti capital punishment in US. I can certainly appreciate EU's humanitarian stand on death penalty. But sometimes, a state machine has to do what it deems appropriate. No body likes killing. Policemen are often disliked, but a society won't work without policemen.

It is not about "I have the right to do bad things because others do too". It is about reason that people think why a country should have a death penalty law. There was strong debate about this issue in US. Every time that capital punishment is executed in US, there is a strong protest.

I can tell you that I don't like Ceausescu at all, but I felt a kind of sad when I saw Ceausescu couple were excuted on TV. It was a tragedy in human society. If Ceausecu willingly stepped down, the situation would be much better.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 17:15

Quote:

But sometimes, a state machine has to do what it deems appropriate.

That sounds an awful lot like dictatorship to me.

Quote:

Policemen are often disliked, but a society won't work without policemen.

So you feel free to extrapolate from the necesity of police to the necesity of injecting people with poison ? "Hey, disciplining your children is often disliked by them, but you can't educate them without discipline !" - can you see where this is going ?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-chinese or anything, I truly appreciate the chinese people and culture and civilization, but I fail to understand why you don't see the diference between "China" and "the communist government". Human rights violations by the communists are hard fact, not a matter of debate.

ablium · 13-10-2007, 17:49

I basically don't have any ideology orientation. I was often criticized by the teachers in my elementary school because I had excellent academic performance but was not enthusiastic about communist teachings when I was a child.

I was an ardent supporter of student demonstration in Tian An Men, but my thinking has changed a lot as I grow older. I view things more from sociologic or economic perspective now, much less from ideological or abstract notions.

In the communist countries, people blame capitalism for every social and economic problem in previous society. In the newly democratized countries, people blame communism for every social and economic problems. I think that both are irrational and too ideological. In Romania, as you have seen, politicians often accuse the opposition as communist.

The basic difference between Romania and China is that Romania took abrupt change in its social economic system, but China took gradual transformation toward the same goal. In my view, China's way is suitable to its situation considering how poor and backward it was. Preventing to fall into chaos is number one priority for China, compared to human right and democracy.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 18:13

Oh yeah, human rights and democracy have been known to bring about "chaos"

ablium · 13-10-2007, 18:29

Not necessarily. But quick democratization and economic system change is likely to cause chaos. That is my view of why Mineriada happened in Romania. Tell me if you have other explanation.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 19:01

Mineriada happened because of a few communist leaders who refused to give up their rule and allow democracy and freedom of speech. To use it as an argument against the implementation of democracy is sick and twisted and a disgrace to the memories of those killed during it's days.

ablium · 13-10-2007, 19:07

I met the president of University of Bucharest in US in 1991, he told me that Romania had several hundreds of newpapers then. I assume that it should have enough freedom of speech then.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 19:35

http://www.answers.com/mineriad

If you are not familiar enough with the subject matter, google and wiki are your friends. Mineriada was aimed specifically against those papers, political leaders and generally people who dared voice their opinions against the FSN and Iliescu.

ablium · 13-10-2007, 20:29

I made some comments on Minerida before. I believe that it was struggle between different interest groups. People were very zealous about politics then because of the strong concern and dissatifaction of their social-economic status in the rapidly changing society during the transition period. Each interest group claims to be democracy defender. I guess the term "democracy" is very easily abused.

Demostration is often intended to be non-violent initially , but once it breaks out, it becomes violent and uncontrollable, especially, when people have strong anger and high enthusiasm.

I believe that Romanian people are no longer so enthusiastic about politics now because every thing has basically settled down.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 20:56

Are you by any chance a relative of Ion Iliescu ?

Because that speech you just gave sounded SOOOO much like him....

ablium · 13-10-2007, 21:11

I dislike Ceausescu, but I don't have any particular feeling about Ion Iliescu since I had left Romania then. He was elected by 85% Romanian voters and 61% Romanian voters second time. I think that people have to respect the voting results no matter you like him or not and no matter he was a communist member and studied in Moscow. That is called democracy. Getting 61% votes is more than "landslide" win in US.

Again I don't have ideology orientation. You may call me a cynical person.

Erethorn · 13-10-2007, 22:27

Quote:

I don't have any particular feeling about Ion Iliescu

Did you read the link I posted earlier, about him bringing the miners to Bucharest to beat up civilians, an event that resulted in at least 7 dead and thousands injured (official estimates) ?!

Quote:

You may call me a cynical person.

Based on the above, I certainly do. No wonder you defend a regime that executes his own citizens.

**ninanina** · 13-10-2007, 23:44

Erethorn, nu cred ca e cazul sa o acuzi de asa ceva e, pur si simplu, o persoana care nu are destule date pentru a judeca clar evenimentele.Nu stiu unde erai tu in 1990, dar eu eram tot in orasul din profil si situatia, bine manipulata de TVR si de fosta Scanteie(Adevarul), se vedea altfel decat in realitate.Abia in toamna lui 1990, cand am ajuns in Bucuresti la facultate, am inceput sa vad lucrurile asa cum erau de fapt.O colega de-a mea de grupa fusese bine scuturata de mineri pentru ca purta ochelari si trecea, din nefericire, prin zona.

ablium · 13-10-2007, 23:45

I read it.
I guess that, in the first Mineriada, the opposition demostration occupied the parliament first. Iliescu could not call police or military to expell demostrators from parliament, so he had to call his supporters, who were mostly blue collar workers. When miners were involved in such a demostration, the results should be expected.

That was the problem in the transitional period. There was no clearly written laws and no body had the authority. Everybody thought that he was right and he could be a big guy. That was how chaos started. Only after such a illusion ended, the society would turn to normal.

The president of University of Bucharest told me that Romania had more than 400 newspapers if I remenber correctly. He was even proud to compare to the number of newspapers in New York State. That was how enthusiastic people were about politics.

**ninanina** · 13-10-2007, 23:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by ablium

I read it.
I guess that the opposition demostration occupied the parliament first. Iliescu could not call police or military to expell demostrators from parliament, so he had to call his supporters, who were mostly blue collars.

Gresit.Demonstrantii erau pasnici si nu erau la parlament .A fost o mare greseala a lui Iliescu, ce visa pentru Romania un fel de perestroika a la Gorbaciov, fara pluripartidism si fara economie reala de piata.Din pacate, nu si-a dat seama ca lupta pentru o cauza pierduta si timpurile i-o luasera inainte.

ablium · 14-10-2007, 00:12

From Wiki

"Even if the anti-Communist demonstration started out, and was intended to be, non-violent, the protesters charged on the Parliament building and demanded their resignation.."

What does "charged on" mean?

evilgheorghe · 14-10-2007, 00:59

Ce inseamna ca nu ai orientare ideologica? La ce ideologii te referi? La comunism versus capitalism? Dupa toate ororile provocate de comunism crezi ca mai poate fi vorba de o comparatie?

Eu cred ca Erethorn are tot dreptul sa o judece aspru. Pentru ca are impresia ca avantul economic justifica crimele conducatorilor. Nu i-a condamnat niciodata. Poate nici nu are posibilitatea.

Prefer haosul unei conduceri criminale. Nu a existat haos in timpul mineriadelor. Totul a fost bine pus la punct. E vorba, in principal de mineriada din iunie 1990. Cum iti explici ca tot un fost comunist, Ion Iliescu, a fost la originea masacrului?

"Haosul" de care vorbesti nu a existat in tarile care au adoptat terapia de soc. El a fost posibil doar in tari in care tranzitia s-a efectuat lent, sub conducerea fostilor comunisti.