Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Stuck In Traffic Issue 21
=================================================================
Stuck In Traffic
"Current Events, Cultural Phenomena, True Stories"
Issue #21 - December, 1996
Contents:
Trading For China's Human Rights
The 2 billion person Chinese market is an attractive, lucrative
market for U.S. businesses. But can we trade with a country that
oppresses its citizens so badly? Yes, we can. And we must.
Here's how to do it without compromising our principles.
Blasphemous Christmas Cards
How to ruin a perfectly good holiday tradition.
A Modern Barn Raising
People haven't forgotten how to help each other. They just
forgot how to do square dances.
====================================
Current Events
Trading For China's Human Rights
With the reelection of President Clinton, the United States is now
rushing to open up trade relations with The People's Republic of China
as much as possible. China and the Pacific Rim countries represent a
booming region of the world, home to over 2 billion people, and, by
some estimates, account for more than 40% of all global trade. If
nothing else, China represents, a huge untapped market for American
trade. Therefore there is tremendous pressure on President Clinton to
open up trade relations with China. And the Clinton administration has
succumbed to that pressure, despite advocating exactly the opposite
position in his 1992 Presidential campaign against George Bush.
But What About Human Rights?
But Americans are as sensitive to human rights issues as they are
sensitive to opportunities to make a buck. The United States was born
from the notion that "all men are created equal" and this notion has
defined the character of the United States more than any other.
Equality under the eyes of the law, the absences of class
stratification, the sovereignty of the individual have been the key
driving forces of both our national character and our economic
strength. The United States has a less than perfect record with these
principles. Starting with the "3/5's Compromise" in the Constitution
that counted slaves as only 3/5 of a person with regard to representation
in government, continuing on through the United States Civil War in the
1860's and continuing through the United States Civil Rights movement
today, the United States has constantly had to struggle with resolving
the difference between it's pro-individualist ideals and it's less than
perfect implementation of those ideals. But looking back over the past
200 years, the progress is obvious and this struggle toward our ideals
has made United States citizens among the strongest opponents of
government oppression in the world.
The People's Republic of China, on the other hand, has one of the
worst human rights records in the world. Even as high ranking U.S.
officials were traveling to Asia and meeting with Chinese officials in
November to start a new era in Sino-American relations, the Chinese
government was continuing the oppression of its citizens.
On November 11th, UPI reported on a Chinese government crackdown on
activists at college campuses:
"[Bejing police] also uncovered 72 crime hotspots on campus and
conducted surveillance on 214 nearby sales stalls, 136 businesses,
37 food vendors and eight dance and entertainment parlors.
Guangdong police conducted 85 anticrime sweeps during the period,
discovering illegal migrants living in 162 rooms, dismantling 767
makeshift dwellings and demolishing 290 unlicensed commercial stalls
and 10 dance halls.
In Nanning, the capital of southwest Guangxi province, police shut
down 102 illegal cultural and recreational facilities and seized
4,000 books and magazines."
The People's Republic of China is still a country where the government
can conduct secret surveillance on its citizens at will, remove
people from where they live, destroy their homes, and businesses, and
confiscate their books.
In Hong Kong, the Chinese government has disbanded the democratically
elected legislature and is in the process of replacing it with a
government appointed by the Chinese government. The Chinese appointed a
"Select Committee" of hand picked, pro-China members who, unsurprisingly
appointed a pro-China Chief Executive and are in the process of forming
a legislative body of which over half will be composed of
"representatives" appointed by the Select Committee. Furthermore, the
New York Times reports that "Chinese officials have warned that they
will not allow "rumors or lies" in the press about China, suggesting
that Bejing will have little tolerance for the press freedoms Hong Kong
has enjoyed. For all intents and purposes, China is killing
representative democracy in Hong Kong.
The President's Advisory Committee on Religious Freedoms Abroad cited
Chinese oppression of Tibetan culture and religious practices as a
key example of religious persecution abroad. Assistant Secretary of
State John Shattuck, head of committee, said in a recent trip to Asia:
"One of the great focus points of our human rights concerns in China
and Tibet has been problems of religious freedom and discrimination
against those who are engaged in trying to exercise religious freedom,''
Just one day after President Clinton announced the United States'
change in policy with regard to China, the Chinese government announced
that it would try three people in the Anhui province on charges of
"counterrevolution and conspiracy" for a series of articles they wrote
in and published in 1991. China is still a country where you can be
arrested and put in jail for speaking your mind in public.
And all this is just from November. One month of one year.
And we in the United States have been unable to forget the 1989
Tianemen Square Massacre. We're haunted by it. Thousands of students
and activists held pro-democracy demonstrations, calling for reforms
in the Chinese government with the same spirit and dedication that
would make even the most strident American activist proud. These
demonstrators looked to the United States for inspiration. The held
up banners written in English so that we could hear their message, so
that we could hear their appeals for help. The constructed their own
Statue of Liberty in Tianemen Square. The Chinese government killed them
by the thousands. Many were literally run over with tanks.
So it is difficult for us in the United States to accept the idea of
"opening up trade with China." Would conducting business in China lend
legitimacy to a government that is diametrically opposed to our most
cherished and fundamental ideals? This is the dilemma of Sino-American
relations as many see it.
Fixing the Dilemma
But it's a false dilemma. We in the United States can, and must, trade
with the Chinese if we ever hope to reform the Chinese government.
If there's one lesson that people in the United States have never
quite learned from their short history, it's that economic freedom and
personal freedom are inextricably intertwined. It's no mistake that the
United States has both the strongest economy and the freest people. When
people are allowed to conduct their own business, when people respect
each other's right to property, when they have a civilized and consistent
means of resolving disputes between themselves, when they have the
freedom to trade and conduct business with whomever they choose, they
develop a sense of self-sufficiency, independence, and freedom. Freedom
is nothing if not the ability to support yourself as you see fit. Free
trade, along with freedom of the press, and freedom of religion, is one of
the fundamental necessities for ensuring basic human rights.
Unfortunately, much of the United States' foreign policy has ignored
this basic tenet and often our foreign policy has been based on exactly
the opposite assumption, that human rights efforts in a country can be
served by denying free and open trade to that country.
Somehow, as the conventional wisdom goes, if we economically isolate
a country by prohibiting U.S. based businesses from trading with it,
the country will become so starved for our goods and services that it
will reform its ways in order to gain favor with us. Somehow, the poor
economic conditions are supposed to create a groundswell of grassroots
support to reform the abusive government. This approach to human rights
policy has not succeeded even once. It has been put into practice to
its fullest extent in Cuba. The United States, thanks to it's
geographical closeness to Cuba, has been able to enforce near total
economic isolation of Cuba for nearly 30 years. It only survived so
long due to the heavy support from the Soviet Union. But as soon as the
Soviet Union withered away, Cuba's economy crumbled and it has become
among the poorest nations in this hemisphere. We routinely hear horror
stories about how desperately poor people are in Cuba and how they have
to struggle just to feed themselves. But 30 years of economic isolation
has not generated any grassroots revolution for change in Cuba. 30
years of economic isolation has not improved the human rights situation
in Cuba.
Iraq is the other country that's currently the target of economic
isolation policies from the United States and the rest of the world.
And while the Iraqi economy is in shambles, the Iraqi government shows
no signs of reforming itself or it's human rights practices.
Damaging a country economically rarely, if ever, translates into
political reform. Starving citizens make poor revolutionaries.
In fact it actually helps the abusive government control its people.
So instead of trying to improve human rights policies of other
governments by denying trade with them, we need to find ways to use
economic relationships to improve the human rights situations in these
countries and leverage those economic relationships to the maximum extent
possible.
How We Can Help The Chinese
The first step in properly conducting relations with China is stop
trying to downplay China's dismal human rights record. This is where
much of the United States' past China policy has gone horribly wrong,
and where the Clinton Administration in particular has erred the most.
After meeting with Chinese officials on November 18th, Treasury
Secretary Robert Rubin said, "We are fundamentally different in many
respects, with different approaches to economic development, macroeconomic
management and business regulation ... The key is not to let individual
disagreements affect the overall relationship, and to work constructively
to resolve disagreements whenever possible." By portraying the Chinese
government as simply taking a "different approach" to the economy, Rubin
legitimizes the Chinese government's strangle hold on the Chinese economy
and legitimizes China's human rights abuses. We believe in freedom and
human rights. China doesn't. That's far more than a "different approach"
to governing.
Rubin could have served the cause of human rights in a much more
fundamental way. After the meeting between him and his Chinese
counterparts, he should have made statements along the lines of, "The
United States is attempting to open up trade relations with the Chinese
people so that we can help them rebuild their faltering economy and ensure
the human rights of every Chinese citizen. We recognize that building a
thriving economy and a healthy middle class is the first step to securing
the basic human rights of every citizen." This would have caused an
international scandal, but it would put the Chinese government in a
difficult position. Remember, "trade," whether on a large or small scale,
is by definition a win-win situation. "Trade" happens when both parties
in the transaction perceive a benefit. The Chinese are not doing us any
favors by opening up their markets to foreign countries. They benefit from
the relationship as well. But continuing to open up their markets after a
statement like that would be a tacit acknowledgement that the People's
Republic of China has not served its citizens interests.
The second step that The United States could take in order to
demonstrate a commitment to the cause of human rights and to
demonstrate the interconnection between economic freedom and personal
freedom is to explicitly and decidedly support those countries in the
area that have freer political systems. At a minimum, we need to bear
witness to the China's destruction of democracy in Hong Kong. And more
importantly, the United States needs to formally recognize the government
in Taiwan and the United States needs to clearly indicate that the reason
we are recognizing Taiwan is because it has better served its people,
both in terms of human rights and economic freedom, far better than
China has with its own people.
The likely result of these actions is that China would cut off official
efforts to improve trade relations with the United States. They would
have to do that to save face if for no other reason. But by doing so,
the Chinese government also take on the responsibility of trying to
economically isolate themselves from the rest of the world. The third
and final step in an appropriate strategy for improving human rights in
China is to bypass the Chinese government as much as possible and
appeal directly to the Chinese people. The United States' trade policy
should be the U.S. companies are welcome, and encouraged to trade
with anyone in China they want, without fear of reprisals from the
United States government. It is then the Chinese government's job to
try to prevent it, if they can. And the Chinese government would
certainly try, and probably succeed to a large extent at first.
But at least the United States would be practicing what it preaches.
And the Chinese government would be forced to practice what it preaches.
And when choices are clear, between authoritarian rule and freedom, people
invariably choose freedom. They may not start a revolution to reform
the Chinese government, but they will find a way to do business with
the rest of the free world. They will either develop a black market
economy or the authoritarian restrictions will be eroded away little by
little as a matter of "practicality." Either way, the Chinese will
discover, just as the we did 200 years ago, that building an economy
based on free trade is the first step to freedom from authoritarian rule.
====================================
Cultural Phenomena
Blasphemous Christmas Cards
Dan Quayle sent me a Christmas card. No, really. I'm not making this up.
_The_ Dan Quayle sent me a Christmas card. All the way from Carmel,
Indiana.
It's a really nice card. On the front there's a summertime picture of
the whole Quayle family, Dan, Marilyn, Tucker, Ben, and Corinne, plus
two dogs, sitting together on the family trampoline in the middle of a
gorgeously green back yard. Everyone looks relaxed and comfortable. Even
Marilyn looks unusually relaxed considering her normal demeanor and the
fact that she's sitting in the middle of a way, way overloaded trampoline.
On the inside it has what looks like a handwritten message, in friendly
green ink, that says, "May the Lord bless this nation and cause His grace
to fill each of our hearts. May His wisdom be manifest in the decisions
of our nation's leaders. In this season of joy, all of the Quayle's pray
for your contentment."
How nice. I looked back into the envelope that the card came in. I felt
certain that there _had_ to be a fund raising letter in there somewhere.
But there wasn't. Just the Christmas card. Just Dan, Marilyn, and the
Kids sending me their Holiday wishes. I mulled over this Christmas card
for a couple of hours. Well, actually there were no references to
Christmas. But you could tell that's what it was supposed to be.
Perfectly nice. How kind. And yet, well, something about this card began
to bother me. I couldn't quite put my finger on it for the longest time.
After all, there wasn't anything the least bit objectionable about
the card. How can anyone get upset about receiving a simple Chirstmas card?
For a while I thought maybe it was because I didn't like the Quayles.
But no, that wasn't it. While I'm not particularly fond of Dan Quayle's
brand of conservatism, I don't have any bone to pick with him personally.
Indeed, among conservative Republicans, he's probably one of the more
tolerable ones. No, I wasn't bothered by this card because of anything
in particular about Dan Quayle. How could I? I never met the man.
Bingo. I never met him. That's why I was bothered by this card. Why in
the world was this guy sending me a Chirstmas card when I never met
him before? It was totally inappropriate. Chirstmas cards are something
that close friends and family send to each other during the Chirstmas
holidays to reaffirm friendships. They are _personal_. They aren't used
for establishing new relationships. They are for reaffirming existing
ones. And yet here was Dan Quayle trying to get all chummy with me when
I've never even seen him person, much less shook his hand or talked to
him.
Isn't it just like a politician to use a time-honored tradition like
the exchange of Chirstmas cards to wheedle himself into your life?
Does Dan Quayle really expect me to think I have some sort of personal
rapport with him now?
And it's not just Dan Quayle. The more I began to think about this, the
more I thought of other instances of this abuse. Last year, I got
"Season's Greetings" from my insurance agent too. Just for the record.
I have never, ever, met my State Farm insurance agent. He stays walled
off behind an army of secretaries, who have always handled taking my
money and updating my account information, etc. I expect I'll get
another card from him this year. And just like last year there will be
a chummy, smiling picture of him and a sentimental message from him on
the inside like we were long-lost soul mates or something. Bah! Humbug!
I have also received Chirstmas Greetings from real estate agents whom
I've never met, churches of which I've never darkened the doorstep, and
many businesses which I've never patronized. To all of whom I just want
to say, "Bug Off!"
Just for the record. if I've never met you before, if I don't already
know your name, if we haven't had conversations before, preferably in
person, if you don't know me well enough to know that I'm not offended
by Christian symbols (or Jewish ones, or whatever religion you happen
to celebrate), then please please please do not, under any
circumstances, send me a Chirstmas card.
It's people who have no respect for the sacred Chirstmas traditions
and try to abuse them for their own purposes that make Chirstmas seem
cheap and sleazy. You would expect a Republican conservative, of all
people, to understand the sacredness of such social institutions. But
Dan Quayle sure didn't. And as far as I'm concerned, it's blasphemy.
==================================
True Story
A Modern Barn Raising
Remeber on "Little House On The Prarie" when new folk moved into the
area to settle, all the neighbors would show up one day and help the
new family build their barn? It seemed so wholesomely good that it
almost hurt to watch. It seemed like something out of an ancient era.
On TV it didn't seem like real life.
But it was, I think. And it still is. The only thing that's changed is
the fact that not too many people have the need to build a barn these days.
But even today, with all the modern conveniences that we have at our
finger-tips, despite the combustion engine, despite electricity, we
still occasionally have jobs to do that we can't do ourselves.
For example, when we move from one place to another, there is far too
much stuff to move all at once for people to do it alone. It takes a
bunch of people to pack up all the trappings of a home neatly into
boxes and haul them someplace to the new home.
Folks of means can hire professional movers to do the job for them. But
for many, many folks, the cost is way to high. So what are they to do?
Should they just ditch most of their stuff. There's a certain appeal to
that I suppose. But our Modern Lifestyles require that we own a bunch
of stuff, that requires being moved from place to pkace on occasion.
So we rely on our friends to help us move. A couple of weeks ago I
helped a friend of mine move out of her apartment and into a new one
down the street. And in some ways I felt like Charles Ingalls helping a
new neighbor build their barn.
The first step was to go rent the truck. For various reasons, my friend
didn't want to drive the truck herself, so I was the lucky one! At first
I was a little scared. She said that the only truck available from the
rental place that weekend was a 26 foot truck. That's big! Way bigger than
she needed, but that's all that was available. And it was sure bigger
than anything I had ever driven before. As it turned out, there was a
smaller truck available. And I was surpridingly disappointed. I had
worked up my gumption to drive that huge thing. But the truck we rented
was still a pretty darn big truck. And driving it was great fun! You sit
way up high in the truck looking down on all the puny cars around you.
And you have to make huge big sweeping turns and you have to constantly
watch all four corners of the truck to make sure you don't hit anything.
And the steering wheel is huge and you have to make big turns. You really
feel like you're steering!
So we drove the truck back to her apartment and parked it just outside
the entrance. As fate would have it, there was another moving truck
parked near the entrance because someone else was moving into that
building the same day.
The people in the other truck were professionals. Everything was neatly
and securely packed. Every single peice of furniture had been carefully
wrapped with blankets and bubble wrap. They were using professional
equipment to roll the stuff around. The hired hands were wearing back
supports. These folks were serious. These folks knew what they were
doing. These folks were pros.
We on the other hand, looked more like a scene from a bizarre "Bad News
Bears" movie. My friend had assembled a rag tag collection of boxes
and had spent the previous week dumping stuff into them. So they were
all sorts of shapes and sizes and weights. I had brought a hand cart
with me so we started out by loading up the cart with various boxes and
carting them out to the truck. The only problem was that stuff kept
falling off. And the first three trips out to the van I accidently
tipped the handcart over while navigating it down the sidewalk,
spilling the contents of my friends personal life all over the street.
(She swears that nothing got broken execpt a single coffee mug, but I
don't know if I believe her.)
Anyway, by the fourth load, I began to get the hang of it and we
managed to get all her "boxed" belongings into the truck. Now, instead
of packing for maximum safety and efficiency, we were packing for
maximum convenience. In other words, we were just throwing stuff in
anywhere. Her new apartment was just a few blocks away, so we figured
we'd just move the boxes first and then come back for the furniture.
Hey, there's no sense in getting all stressed out about it, was there?
So off we went, bumping and rattling stuff all the way.
By the time we got the stuff unloaded at the new apartment and got back
to the old apartment for round two, some other friends began to show up.
A good thing too because now it was time to move the big stuff like the
cabinets, and the sofas. I couldn't tell you how we got all that stuff
out of her old apartment, down the elevator, into the truck, and then in
through the narrow doors of her new place, but we did. Ever watched a
swarm of ants attacking a big piece of bread? The just swarm all over
it and the next thing you know, it's gone. Well, we were sort of like
that. Everybody did some little something. Everybody heaved together on
the really heavy stuff. No one leading anyone else. No one in charge.
No one had a plan. We just did it and then it was done.
When we were done, my friend bought everyone pizza and beer and we
sat around and visited and sort of christened the new place. There was
no square dancing.
But it was the most fun I've had in weeks.
==================================
Stuck In Traffic
Stuck In Traffic is a monthly magazine dedicated to evaluating
current events, examining cultural phenomena, and relating
true stories.
Why "Stuck In Traffic"?
Because getting stuck in traffic is good for you. It's an
opportunity to think, ponder, and reflect on all things, from the
personal to the global. As Robert Pirsig wrote in _Zen and the
Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_, "Let's consider a reevaluation of
the situation in which we assume that the stuckness now occurring,
the zero of consciousness, isn't the worst of all possible
situations, but the best possible situation you could be in. After
all, it's exactly this stuckness that Zen Buddhists go to so much
trouble to induce...."
Submissions
Submissions to Stuck In Traffic are always welcome. If you have
something on your mind or a personal story you'd like to share,
please do. You don't have to be a great writer to be published here,
just sincere.
Contact Information
All queries, submissions, subscription requests, comments, and hate-mail
about Stuck In Traffic should be sent to Calvin Stacy Powers preferably
via E-mail (powers@interpath.com) or by mail (2012 Talloway Drive,
Cary, NC USA 27511).
Copyright Notice
Stuck In Traffic is published and copyrighted by Calvin Stacy Powers
who reserves all rights. Individual articles are copyrighted by their
respective authors. Unsigned articles are authored by Calvin Stacy Powers.
Permission is granted to redistribute and republish Stuck In Traffic
for noncommercial purposes as long as it is redistributed as a whole,
in its entirety, including this copyright notice. For permission to
republish an individual article, contact the author.
E-mail Subscriptions
E-mail subscriptions to the ASCII text edition of Stuck In Traffic are
free. Send your subscription request to either address listed above.
Print Subscriptions
Subscriptions to the printed edition of Stuck In Traffic are available
for $10/year. Make checks payable to Calvin Stacy Powers and send to
the address listed above. Individual issues are available for $2.
Archives
The ASCII text editions of Stuck In Traffic is archived on the internet
by etext.org at the following URL:
gopher://gopher.etext.org/11/Zines/StuckInTraffic
Trades
If you publish a `zine and would like to trade issues or ad-space,
send your zine or ad to either address above.
Alliances
Stuck in Traffic supports the Blue Ribbon Campaign for free speech online.
See <URL:http://www.eff.org /blueribbon.html> for more information.
Stuck In Traffic also supports the Golden Key Campaign for electronic privacy
and security. See <URL:http://www.eff.org/goldkey.html>
=================================================================
