WebLog 7

The United States government should make laws that stop computer companies from selling equipment to China that China will use to block what the citizens in China can and cannot do on the internet involving violations of human rights or freedom of speech. America wants countries such as China to allow freedom to their people. The US does not want countries to have laws that block people from saying what they want to say. The United States does not want to be involved with countries who do not give their citizens freedom to express their feelings. America does not want to be “two-faced” by allowing their citizens the freedom of speech, but then support other governments who do not allow their citizens freedom of speech. The United States likes to help other countries according to Bob from Leominster. Bob said, “I never hear any of our leaders talk about cutting foreign aid.” This statement shows how Americans support their country giving aid to foreign countries who need it. 

In contrast, the Untied States government should not make laws that stop computer companies from selling equipment to China that will allow their government to block what citizens do on the internet that violates human rights or freedom of speech. Companies such as Cisco. According to Sarah Stirland in the www.wired.com article states “that Cisco engineers regarded the Chinese government’s rigid internet censorship program as an opportunity to do more business with the repressive regime.” This statements shows that Cisco is looking into selling product that will repress citizens while online. The company will block out if someone says something bad about their government. The United States government wants to make laws that stop companies from selling this type of equipment to China, but I believe the United States does not have any business in telling companies what they can and cannot do. The point of a business is to make products that will attract certain people. Therefore, companies such as Cisco, Yahoo, and Google should be allowed to modify their products for certain countries according to their laws. Businesses do this to be successful. The point of a business is to make money. If changing a product for a country is what does that then they should be allowed to. The Untied States government should not be interfering with large companies just because they do not believe in their products. Just because the United States have laws that allow freedom of speech does not mean other countries have to follow Americas laws. Each country having their own laws makes them unique and that is why people choose to live in that country. If you do not want to follow the rules then move to a different country. America should not make important countries like China mad by interfering because as a result China may then stop exporting products to America. This would be very bad for the America because the US gets a large amount of products from China and therefore the America’s economy would be hurt. The American citizens would be mad because then they could not get the products they want and would have to start making them or get them from a different country. 

As Chinese people get better at using microblogs and social networking sites they are speaking out which is creating more freedom of speech for the citizens. This is good because currently the Chinese people have sensors on what websites they can go on and what they can say on it. If the Chinese citizens get freedom of speech then they will be able to have social networking sites and blogs that make it so they can speak what they want to and not have to worry about getting in trouble. The Chinese citizens want freedom and believe that using social networking sites and blogs give them that. According to Michael Bristow in his BBC article stated, “Microblogs are widely popular in China. There are tens of millions users. People are expressing themselves like never before, and there is a lot of criticism of the government.” What Bristow meant by this statement is that people believe they can change China’s rules by using microblogs to speak out. People are criticizing the government because they do not have the freedom of speech and the ability to do what they want on the internet. If a lot of people in China are posting about how bad the government is then the government may change the laws. They may change the laws because the government does not want people all around the world knowing how much their citizens hate the Chinese government. As a result, China’s government may change their laws because they do not want a bad reputation all around the world. 

Using microblogs and social networking sites to speak out and criticize the government will not create more freedom of speech for citizens. People blogging about the government and how they want freedom of speech will not change the governments opinion. The government has made up there mind many years ago and has not changed the rules yet so most likely people complaining online about it will not change their opinion.  Michael Bristow in his BBC article mentioned how the recent high-speed train crash in Wenzhou killed 40 people caused a huge response on the web. All these people responding the train crash has not made the government open up more about the train crash. People all around the world want answers to their questions, but China’s government is not giving them many answers. So how can people believe that blogging on the internet will cause a change in the law when a huge train crash is trying to be covered up by the Chinese government by giving little response of how and why and what is going to happen now. If the Chinese government listened to the people and changed the laws then the citizens would get used to it and always expect that if they spoke out and complained a lot then they will expect to get anything that they want.

Works Cited:

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/03/13/curious-about-u-s-aid-to-foreign-countries/

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/05/leaked-cisco-do/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14422581