China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year

Half an hour into the ceremony (Or should I say: "Zee Cezi-mone-y") there has been nothing but criticism of the Chinese regime under the guise of awarding a reformer who when we weigh it out; hasn't reformed anything. He has been sentenced to 11 yrs in jail for crimes that when committed by U.S citizens have at times led to execution or life imprisonment (punishment differs from state to state) under the Patriot Act and other equivalents. So, when the American government puts national security and sovereignty above human (ew-muhn) rights; it is acceptable(And don't Anne Hathaway's promptly timed tears remind us of that) because it is the most powerful Military and Economic power in the(zee) world(whirls). Let us bring our attention back to Assange and his trial as well as his possible extradition to the U.S(where he might face a death sentence for espionage); for aiding people to anonymously exercise their rights to free speech.

I think (sink) this is a power-play at bullying China for her increasing economic success. And India and other such countries; that are notorious for their own human rights' abuses and rivalry with China; sit smugly straight and stand tall against a great economic power in the making.

All the No points:

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.
You can also add to the debate by leaving your comment at the end of the page.
(0%) (0%)

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
Yes because...

So, what happens under the Smith act; still in place in the U.S of A?

"Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

So, 11 years is within the 5-20 year bracket exercisable in the U.S?

Counterargument, bottom-line: "The statute itself, however, had not been removed from the books as of early-middle April 2008."

No because...

"The Act is best known for its use against political organizations and figures, mostly on the left. From 1941 to 1957, hundreds of socialists were prosecuted under the Smith Act. The first trial, in 1941, focused on Trotskyists, the second trial in 1944 prosecuted alleged fascists and, beginning in 1949, leaders and members of the Communist Party USA were targeted. Prosecutions continued until a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1957 threw out numerous convictions under the Smith Act as unconstitutional."

It has been revised and China's laws against free speech should also be revised.

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
Yes because...

Which 46 countries attended the event?

Firstly the notorious U.S drum roll,please: home rights violations at home and abroad. [[]] [[]]
[[]] [[]]

"India and Bangladesh should take immediate steps to end the killing of hundreds of their citizens at the West Bengal-Bangladesh border by India’s Border Security Force (BSF), Human Rights Watch said in a report released today"- [[]]

Guess what Pakistan isn't even in the list? but the US and India both made it. [[]]
Sure China's there too. Point is, attending and not attending the peace prize ceremony has squat to do with respecting human rights.

No because...

The countries that did not attend concur with China's view that keeping political prisoners and thus stifling(not stiff-ling) freedom of expression; is okay.

Agreed this argument appears weak when you consider that none of the attendees have any real respect for free speech either; just ask Julian Assange or Noam Chomsky or even Obama who vehemently spoke against policies of the Bush era that he still maintains in his constitution or the list is endless...

But these nations do represent strong political and economic ties with China that they are not willing to risk. India's enmity with both China and Pakistan; makes it clear why the Country's reps attended. [[]]

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
Yes because...

The other countries not given special mention for attending the ceremony

Counterargument to erroneous assertion on the right. [[]]
The U.S takes many, many political prisoners.

"The Espionage Act of 1917 imposed a maximum sentence of twenty years for anyone who caused or attempted to cause "insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the United States." Over two thousand were convicted under the Act. One filmmaker was sentenced to ten years imprisonment because his portrayal of British soldiers in a movie about the American Revolution impugned the good faith of an American ally, the United Kingdom.[6] The Sedition Act of 1918 went even further, criminalizing "disloyal," "scurrilous" or "abusive" language against the government."
The French. [[]]

Original point:
So Israel attended... "Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories: A year after the 22-day conflict in Gaza and Southern Israel ended, accountability remained wanting. Both the Israeli and Palestinian sides, however, did submit information to the UN shortly in advance of an early February 2010 deadline for reporting on their own investigations into alleged war crimes and possible crimes against humanity identified in the September 2009 the report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (the Goldstone report). The Israeli submission reported that investigations had been or were being conducted, but they failed to satisfy the UN’s requirements that they be “independent, credible and in conformity with international standards”. The submission by Hamas indicated that the organization had conducted no serious investigations. The UN Human Rights Council agreed to allow more time for the parties to show that they were willing and able to conduct investigations, while keeping open the possibility that the matter could be referred to the ICC Prosecutor. Meanwhile, Israel’s continuing blockade of Gaza continued to cruelly exacerbate the devastation of the conflict and its aftermath" "Thus, the USA and European states used their position in the UN Security Council to shield Israel from strong measures of accountability for alleged war crimes and possible crimes against humanity in Gaza."

Italy attended; who represented the Roma again? "Italy: The “Nomad Plan” has resulted in the forced eviction of hundreds of Roma and paves the way for thousands more over the coming months. The measures envisage the destruction of over 100 Roma settlements across Rome and an estimated 6,000 Roma are to be resettled into just 13 new or expanded camps on the outskirts of the city. In the last few months, hundreds of Roma families have already been evicted from at least five different camps"

More dirt on India "India: A government-appointed expert panel published a report on the activities of international mining company Vedanta Resources, confirming the human rights abuses committed by the company that Amnesty International had highlighted in February 2010. The panel’s report followed persistent protests from Indigenous communities in Orissa, eastern India, and intense campaigning by Amnesty International and other INGOs. The Indian government is believed to have sought an official explanation from the authorities in Orissa, stalling the construction of the proposed bauxite mine." [[]]

No because...

These countries have not silenced political threats by imprisonment or otherwise; have they?

[[]] Free speech is an American value augured and proliferated by American governments from time immemorial. America is the greatest nation in the world and therefore is never guilty of hypocrisy or human rights violations. All the yes-points are anti-American anti-patriotic leftist, foreign and terrorist propaganda just like Global warming. Just ask Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter or the anchors at Foxnews?

Ann Coulter

The free world, which is rapidly boiling down to us and Israel, is under savage attack. Treason is rampant in the country. True, Democrats hate Bush, but they would hate anybody who fights the war on terrorism. It is a hostile world, and there is now a real question about the will of the American people to survive." - Ann Coulter, full transcript here -->

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
No because...

China gets away with a lot of human rights violations and so what if other countries do too; at least China should be brought to justice.

China is a cruel country. If we keep playing the but S/he did it first game; no country will be accountable for her war-crimes and human rights abuses.

China's execution of a British man despite being warned that British citizens can not and should face the death penalty under any condition; reveals their blatant disrespect for the people of other countries. [[]] China's war against Tibetan monks and Uighurs is also notorious. [[]] [[]]

"Imprisonment of political opponents and journalists critical of the government has been common. The press is tightly regulated as is religion. Suppression of independence/secessionist movements is often heavy-handed, to say the least.

For example, months of campaigning by students and others for more democratic rights and freedom of speech culminated in the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, a violent crackdown by the Chinese military with 15 days of martial law. The after-effects also resulted in government crackdown of sympathizers. For example, foreign media were banned for a while, local media were strictly monitored and controlled, and Communist Party members who sympathized with the protesters were placed under house arrest."

Yes because...

But not by countries that unabashedly practice the same violations. Where is the morality in punishing a country for what your country does freely?

The motivation behind putting China "to justice" is simply to take power away from a nation that is second only to the U.S in terms of Gross National product.

Initially it was the Bush administration boycotting cheap Chinese toys; on the false pretext of opposing child labor. I say false because child labor is illegal in China and illegal child labor is prevalent in the U.S as well.

"The employment of child laborers is illegal in China," Foreign Ministry spokesman Wu Jianmin said in Washington. [[]]
Plus the U.S has no qualms about India legally employing Child laborers; out in the open for their many many industries. [[]]

"In June 2010, the U.S. Dept. of Labor issued new regulations stiffening penalties against U.S. employers who illegally employ children. U.S. child labor laws are established and enforced under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which also governs the U.S. federal minimum wage." and yet?

Ma Zhaoxu, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman

"The Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded to people who contribute to national harmony, country-to-country friendship, advancing disarmament, and convening and propagandizing peace conferences. Liu was a criminal sentenced by the Chinese judicial authorities for violating Chinese law... The Nobel committee's decision to award such a person the peace prize runs contrary to and desecrates the prize."


China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
No because...

'The U.S did it; so can we' just doesn't cut it anymore.


China does not have even half the support the U.S has; the U.S has many more trading partners and they're fighting a losing battle. Wikileaks; amnesty international, the U.N and the American left; have all raise their voice against America''s policies and actions; but who cares?

In the end; America has veto power where it counts and China does not.

Yes because...

Why not?
China walked out of COP15 didn't it? If the U.S complied to policies for the environment and against Climate change then China would have no excuse to walk out of talks; but the U.S did not promise anything and so China didn't have to. [[]]

China has gotten away with human rights violations before; this isn't something new. Unless N.A.T.O troops invade China (Only if there's a unanimous European member vote) this is a non-issue and makes no difference.

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
No because...

Why the U.S has been hush hush about the human rights abuses in Pakistan

"We too rarely hear their stories. They give a human face to the suffering of millions of Pakistanis in the northwest tribal areas.
The consequence of this ignorance is that today many of the residents in northwest Pakistan live in a human rights free zone where they have no legal protection by the government and are subject to horrific abuses by the Taleban. Unfortunately, many areas of northwest Pakistan now resemble the Taleban-ruled Afghanistan in the late 1990s. The world should be alarmed by the way living conditions have deteriorated under the increasingly brutal control of the Pakistani Taleban and its allied insurgent groups; instead, the suffering of the people of this area has been largely ignored, sacrificed in the name of geopolitical interests. Most disturbing is the fact that civilians are increasingly hit on three different fronts: by the Taleban, by the Pakistani army and by U.S. Drone strikes"


Yes because...

These articles date back a year; currently(as in, in 2010) Pakistan is not in the limelight for human right's abuses.

The rights abuses mentioned in the Huffington post are all related to casualties in the coalition led Pak-Afghan war and oddly makes no mention of the other armies from other nations causing collateral damage in the region. And we shouldn't forget that these crimes were instigated by the U.S. [[]]

Pakistan is not one of the five to ten countries whose human rights' abuses are most prominent in the Asia-pacific region. [[]]

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year
No because...

Truth Justice and the American way!

"Oh, say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro' the perilous fight'
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming.
And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore dimly seen, thro' the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream;
'Tis the star-spangled banner: oh, long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash'd out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Oh, thus be it ever when free men shall stand,
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation;
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Power that has made and preserved us as a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust";
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave."- [[]]

Lord; save America and nobody else. Who does China think she is; anyway? China is the perfect example of a member of the insecure classless noveau riche; China is a nation of atheist (Buddhists are atheists too by most counts) Commis; why would a nation as great as America tolerate that? [[]]

Yes because...


National sovereignty should not be trampled upon because A) A Country's citizens and government care more about that country than any foreigner ever could. Currently it's U.N members spreading Cholera in Haiti earlier there was the U.N food for oil scheme. There have been many other instances of abuse by relief camps.

B) An intervention by international human rights organisations impinges upon national security. Any spy can pretend to be an aid worker and wreak havoc.

C) It is easier to kill a foreigner and call it collateral damage.

China is a country just like the U.S. The Chinese people and the American people are both human beings and thus deserve justice and human rights.

The Chinese government is a government just like the american government and as such has the right to run China as it sees fit; as best it can.

America's double standards are neither about truth nor justice but about maintaining the upper-hand in the financial sphere.
But look out; here comes Japan.

China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year

What do you think?
(0%) (0%)

Continue the Debate - Leave a Comment

1 Comment on "China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year"


We would love to hear what you think – please leave a comment!

Debates > China was right to boycott the Nobel peace prize ceremony this year