I came across this reader's comment on an article of NYT's Lede blog. Although the language could be more polished, it nicely summarizes what I was thinking and wanted to write about.
53. July 7, 2009 3:15 pm
To Saad Khan:
Amazing, “Civil liberties and equal opportunities are unheard thing in
China”. I came from Urimuqi, and actually I grew up at the street that is in
this center of the riot, and I have been living in the US for the past 15 years.
Let me straight[en] out some facts about China:
1.)Everybody knows that China has one Child per Family policy. Well, that
only applies to Han Chinese. For Uighur, Tibetan, and ALL other minority group,
this policy does not apply. Obviously, there is NO equal opportunities for the
majority Han Chinese. I hope this is what you intended to say.
2.) For ALL graduating high school students coming from ALL minority group,
that includes the Uighur, it’s the government’s policy that these students would
get bonus scores in their national entrance exam for colleges. In 1989, the year
I graduated from high school, each minority student get 80 points in their
overall test score. The full score in that year was 650. This put huge advantage
on the students from minority groups, such as Uighur. Obviously, there is no
equal opportunity for the majority Han Chinese students. I hope this is what you
mean in your message.
3.) In Xinjiang area, it’s government policy to promote people from
minority groups such as Uighur for various government leadership positions in
China. Take Xinjiang. It’s government’s official policy to promote people from
Uighur and other minority group to deputy leader position in all government
offices. So no matter how remotely they qualify for these position, they are
promoted to deputy chairman, deputy secretary of the communist party, and so on.
Obviously, there is NO EQUAL opportunities for the majority Han Chinese, who, as
an ethical group, generally put more value on education, and are generally
better educated. I hope this what you intended to say about equal opportunities
situation in China.
This message is not only targeted to your comment here, but also targeted
to all other people holding the same opinion. When you make a affirmative
comments regards something, it requires you to have a basic understanding and
knowledge about it. If you do not, please go back and do some
homework.
— John
Just in case you are interested--I also participated in this discussion from the pubic computer at the New York Supreme Court. Check out comments #59, #73, and #111, under the name "Hubris". These are not my best writings but you get the gist. You'll notice the change of tone as you read through the three posts. Here's #111:
Despite my posts in #59 and #73, I want to add that this particular piece of report is not explicitly biased; and from all the responses I can tell Mr. Mackey himself is a fair-minded reporter.
The bias I point to is larger than this particular post and this particular reporter. The only way to overcome such bias, and indeed the only way to achieve better understanding between China and the West, is for everybody to be more reasonable and objective.
It might take a hundred years, and everybody should be patient.
For that reason, I denounce those posts that viciously attack Mr. Mackey’s character.
from a Chinese citizen in the United States
— Hubris
Posts
