My last column commented on some people's arguments for safeguarding passengers' privacy in their opposition to surveillance cameras being installed in taxis. After its publication in China Daily's web edition, quite a number of readers wrote online comments.
Interestingly, the numbers of those for and against were nearly equal. While the comments in favor included a couple by Chinese nationals, those opposing the cameras appeared to be exclusively made by expats, judging by their IDs and language style.
I seldom respond to online comments, especially critical ones, attached to my column. But I would like to say a few words this time, because I feel the mindsets behind these comments show the stark differences between Chinese and Western thinking.
Most of the foreign commentators expressed the concern that installing surveillance cameras inside taxis would herald more government intrusion into people's private lives. This worry is understandable, because Westerners treasure personal privacy and freedom of expression as the most essential part of human rights.
"Is the use of video cameras inside taxis to monitor morals or conversations?" commented one.
"How can we be sure the technology will be used for crime-prevention and not for some other nefarious purpose? The answer is - we can't," wrote another.
I believe, and appreciate, the sincerity of these commentators in their concern for Chinese people's human rights. I fully respect these friends for their concern. But I have to point out that this typically reflects a prejudiced understanding of China, which stems from a stereotyped Cold War image of the country.
My study of history has been too limited for me to conclude whether a ubiquitous monitoring of citizens' conversations and behavior ever existed, or to what extent it was practiced in China in the times before I became an adult in the early 1960s. However, during the period from my early adulthood till the end of the 1970s when China embarked on the reform drive, I have memories of being required to report my thoughts to "organizations" and of my schoolmates or work unit colleagues having their "wrong-doings" exposed by their pals.
In those days, people were cautious indeed if they wanted to voice opinions contradicting the dominant ideology. There were definitely restrictions on "freedom of speech". But even then, I never saw or knew of any technological means being used to monitor people's private lives.
Things have changed dramatically during the past three decades and the practice of "reporting to the organizations" has been abandoned forever. Citizens now enjoy considerably more freedom in saying what they want.
Log on to any Chinese website and you will see all sorts of remarks posted in chat rooms, forums and blogs, ranging from criticism of the government to discussions of sexual experiences. Even printed media frequently carry articles criticizing government decisions. Though, it should be said, such freedom of speech is still different with that defined in the West.
Ordinary Chinese citizens do harbor a number of grievances against the government at different levels on certain issues. But if somebody told them that the government is taking technological measures to peep into their private lives, they would not believe it.
So, let's return to the taxi camera controversy; our foreign friends, such as those mentioned above, may find it hard to believe that most Chinese readers supported the decision to install surveillance cameras in taxis. No doubt they are puzzled as to why so many Chinese people would willingly surrender their privacy in such a situation.
But such is the case.
There are two reasons that account for this:
First, sacrificing individual interests for the sake of the public, or communal, interests is still inherent in Chinese culture. People do not find it particularly irksome to be exposed before a gazing lens during a relatively short ride, when doing so is part of one's duty to society. Second, the current social conditions are not orderly and safe enough for people to disregard what has proven to be an effective means of protection from possible dangers or crimes.
The right to privacy is certainly valuable, but in China there are things that need to be more urgently protected, for instance, the right to enjoy a safe life.
这个否定句是用something还是anything
still在否定句中的位置
副词置于句首的感叹句
强调句型考点简介
不要误用which替代强调结构中的that
常见的肯定形式表示否定意义
典型强调句易错题分析
强调结构的陈述式与疑问式
程度副词much通常只用于否定句或疑问句
否定省略短句not in the least的用法
学习强调结构的8个易错点
有关强调结构的两点语法说明
这道题是考查强调句吗
英语强调句型详说
谈谈“there be+名词+非谓语动词”
复杂结构的强调句式
some可用于否定句吗
这不是考查强调句吗
no修饰形容词或副词的用法
英语句子的否定转移
强调句还是定语从句
there be结构的分析与理解
有关强调结构的几类重要考点
hurry up可用于否定句吗
否定省略句why not…的用法
涉及强调句的四个重要考点
否定口语not exactly与not really的用法
如何对not… until…句式进行强调
either用于否定句的两点说明
这道题中的did表强调
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |