Monthly Archives: April 2023

Mom imprisoned for Practicing Falun Gong, Kids Call Help Online

Posted on by

From Steven Wang                      April 29, 2023

 

 

Hi, we are Steven Wang and Shanshan Wang, two U.S. citizens living in New York. Our mother, Aihua Liu, was sentenced to four years in China on March 10 for her faith Falun Gong.

 

We are highly concerned that she may be mistreated or tortured in custody. Our family in China have been barred from visiting her since July 2022, and the lawyer they hired was pressured to not take her case. No one has been able to confirm her condition for nearly a year.

 

 

Her spiritual practice Falun Gong, also known as Falun Dafa, is a traditional Chinese meditation practice, that follows the universal principles of Truth, Compassion and Forbearance. Falun Gong has been severely persecuted by the Chinese communist regime since 1999.

 

She is currently detained at No. 4 Detention Center of Changsha City, and has since appealed her sentence following the trial as of late March.

 

This is the 11th time that our mother has been detained by Chinese authorities since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) launched its campaign to eradicate Falun Gong in 1999. Starting in 2001, our parents have been consecutively arrested and tortured. Our family’s peace and happiness was never restored again. In 2009, our father passed away due to severe health deterioration following all these tortures during his detentions.

 

It is unclear how the trial proceeded or what our mom was sentenced for. We suspect it may have been due to her passing out information about the Chinese regime’s persecution of Falun Gong. We think she may also have been targeted due to Steven’s career as a dancer with the New York-based Shen Yun Performing Arts company.

 

The CCP has attempted to sabotage this performing arts troupe since 2006 to control the narrative reaching the international community about traditional Chinese culture and because dance pieces depicted in the show have highlighted the persecution of Falun Gong. We know that since at least 2011, local police and the Ministry of State Security branch in Changsha have been aware that her son is a principal dancer with Shen Yun.

 

In 2017, our mother tried to attend Steven’s wedding in New York, but Chinese authorities arrested her before she could even leave China. It has been 10 years since we have seen our mother. We really worry about her state and appeal to everyone for their support to free our mother from this detention and unite her with the family.

 

Please help our family rescue her. Her children and three grandchildren (ages 1, 10 and 12) await her safe release. For more information, read about our mom’s previous detentions here: faluninfo.net/mother-of-steven-wang

 

 

Change.org link:

https://www.change.org/p/please-help-rescue-the-mom-of-ny-siblings-imprisoned-in-china-for-her-faith-falun-gong?utm_content=cl_sharecopy_35909391_en-US%3A4&recruiter=2977699&recruited_by_id=53e65ea0-e76a-012f-16ec-4040b91ba155&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_message&utm_term=psf_combo_share_initial&share_bandit_exp=message-35909391-en-US

 

 

Why China’s Shrinking Population Is a Problem for Everyone

Posted on by

New York Times                    04-19-2023

 

 

Despite the rollback of China’s one-child policy, and even after more recent incentives urging families to have more children, China’s population is steadily shrinking — a momentous shift that will soon leave India as the world’s most populous nation and have broad rippling effects both domestically and globally.

 

The change puts China on the same course of both aging and shrinking as many of its neighbors in Asia, but its path will have outsize effects not just on the regional economy, but on the world at large as well.

 

Here’s why economists and others are alarmed by the developments.

 

China’s shrinking work force could hobble the global economy.

 

For years, China’s massive working-age population powered the global economic engine, supplying the factory workers whose cheap labor produced goods that were exported around the world.

 

Wang Liqin (L), who was accused by the Chinese authorities of Subverting state power and sentenced to 2.5 years in prison, and her four children. She and her husband have struggled with their children’s birth certificates. (WRIC Photo 02-28-2023)

 

 

In the long run, a shortage of factory workers in China — driven by a better-educated work force and a shrinking population of young people — could raise costs for consumers outside China, potentially exacerbating inflation in countries like the United States that rely heavily on imported Chinese products. Facing rising labor costs in China, many companies have already begun shifting their manufacturing operations to lower-paying countries like Vietnam and Mexico.

 

A shrinking population could also mean a decline in spending by Chinese consumers, threatening global brands dependent on sales of products to China, from Apple smartphones to Nike sneakers.

 

The data is bad news for China’s crucial housing market.

 

In the short term, a plunging birthrate poses a major threat to China’s real estate sector, which accounts for roughly a quarter of the country’s economic output. Population growth is a key driver of housing demand, and homeownership is the most important asset for many Chinese people. During widespread pandemic lockdowns that dampened consumer spending and export growth, China’s economy became even more dependent on the ailing housing sector.

 

The government recently intervened to help distressed real estate developers, in an attempt to stem the fallout from its housing crisis.

 

China’s shrinking work force may not be able to support its growing, aging population.

 

With fewer working-age people in the long run, the government could struggle to sustain an enormous population that is growing older and living longer. A 2019 report by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences predicted that the country’s main pension fund would run out of money by 2035, in part because of the shrinking work force.

 

Economists have compared China’s demographic crisis to the one that stalled Japan’s economic boom in the 1990s.

 

But China does not have the same resources as a country like Japan to provide a safety net for its aging population. Its households live on much lower incomes on average than in the U.S. and elsewhere. Many older Chinese residents rely on state pension payments as a key source of income during retirement.

 

China also has some of the lowest retirement ages in the world, with most workers retiring by 60. The situation has put a tremendous strain not only on state pension funds, but also on the country’s hospital system.

 

The crisis has been decades in the making.

 

China introduced the one-child policy in the late 1970s, arguing that it was necessary to keep population growth from reaching unsustainable levels. The government imposed onerous fines on most couples who had more than one child, and compelled hundreds of millions of Chinese women to have abortions. Many families favored boys over girls, often aborting baby girls or abandoning them at birth, resulting in a huge surplus of single men in the Chinese population.

 

China announced the relaxing of the family size restrictions in 2013, but many demographic experts said the change had come too late to change the country’s population trajectory.

 

There are no easy fixes.

 

The government’s efforts to start a baby boom to solve the demographic crisis — including offering cash handouts and easing the one-child policy to allow for three — have failed to stabilize falling birthrates. Educated Chinese women are increasingly delaying marriage and choosing not to have children, deterred by the high costs of housing and education.

 

China has also been unwilling to loosen immigration rules to boost the population, and has historically issued relatively few green cards to replenish its shrinking work force.

 

To address the labor shortage, China has been outsourcing low-skilled production to other countries in Asia, and adding more automation to its factories, hoping to rely more on artificial intelligence and technology sectors for future growth.

 

Who is the Victimhood in Marriage?

Posted on by

Baosheng Guo                           04-13-23

 

 

As Fay Weldon, a well-known British feminist and writer, said that it is time women stopped seeing themselves as victims, “This was right and proper 20 or 30 years ago when they couldn’t earn, they couldn’t work, they couldn’t join the professions. Well all that has changed” (Hastings). The woman’s marital status has improved in recent decades from traditional to modern status. In 1972, Judy Syfers Brady wrote a famous essay named Why I Want a Wife, which states the traditional status of women. In 1988, Kurt Fernsler wrote Why I Want a Husband, which reflects the requirements for a husband from a modern woman’s perspective. Reviewing these two essays, the woman’s marital status significantly changed during the period the two essays were published, which happened to be the second wave of the feminist movement. Especially, women’s independence, freedom, and higher social status made a remarkable change.

 

First, women’s independence despite the domain of husbands improved dramatically during this period. Regardless of Western or Eastern, Bible or Quran, and Confucius or Palato, all traditional societies obeyed the rules that women were subject to men and wives subordinate to husbands.  Like Bible wrote, “For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything” (New Testament. Ephesians 5:22-24). Chinese Confucianism insist on three fundament principle in society: the officer is subject to the king, the son is subject to the father, and the wife is subject to the husband. In Why I Want a Wife, the author Judy states, “I want my wife to quit working and remain at home so that my wife can more fully and completely take care of a wife’s duties… I want a wife who will have the house clean, will prepare a special meal, serve it to me and my friends, and not interrupt when I talk about things that interest me and my friends” (Brady Syfers). Judy illustrates the traditional marriage role of woman and asserts that woman was victimhood in marriage, so women have to launch the feminist movement.

 

At that time, the second wave of the feminist movement just began, and that promoted women’s working outside instead of being housewives and advocating equality in marriage and letting wife not be servant to husband. Feminists also gained women can apply for mortgages in their own name and outlawed marital rape.  And they received more legal achievements such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (1974), the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, the outlawing of marital rape, the legalization of no-fault divorce, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979).

 

Therefore, when Fernsler wrote Why I Want a Husband, women’s roles in marriage have already changed. Fernsler wrote, “I want my husband to be completely receptive to my sexual needs…He will be sensitive to my problems and respect my private life… He will be ready to accept the possibility that I may need to “find myself” and my walk out at any time. He will understand, of course, that I will take half of everything we own. He would keep the kids, however, because I would need to start a brand-new life for myself” (Fernsler). Obviously, through the efforts of feminists, the independence of women has already essentially improved.

 

In addition, during this period, along with the second feminism movement wave, women’s freedom from their body’s bondage greatly expanded. The woman is the machine of infant productive and the slave of men’s sex and fertility in traditional marriage, and women have to spend most of their time pregnant, productive, and rise the infant. Thus, they can’t engage in education and working outside. The landmark Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade of 1973 and the approving the birth control pill by the FDA essentially liberate women and gave the woman the right to choose to have an abortion. As a result, the woman was liberated and went to work like man and no longer acted as the victim of marriage.

 

Finally, during this period, the woman’s social status including education and career significantly improved.  In 1970, San Diego State University was the first university in the United States to offer a selection of women’s studies courses. In 1974, the Women’s Educational Equity Act was passed. In 1975, a law required the U.S. Military Academies to admit women. In 1968, Shirley Chisholm, a New York Democrat, became the first Black woman to serve in Congress. In 1983, Dr. Sally K. Ride became the first American woman astronaut to go into space.

 

Education and careers changed women’s social status and let women have a great influence on society and history. Because women have independent careers like men, a seismic shift in the role of women has happened in contemporary society.

 

Like the first lady Dr. Jill Biden, she should give up her job and turn into a professional President’s wife by traditional standards, but she did not abandon her career teaching at the community college. Dr.Jill Biden illustrates the value of herself through her job as President Biden said to her, “Teaching is not what Jill does. It’s who she is.” (Grenell)

 

Who is the victimhood in Marriage? Although both authors of the two articles (Why I Want a Wife and Why I Want a Husband) think of themselves as victimhood, we should pursue equality and harmony in marriage. The wife no longer is a victim in the traditional society, and the husband also is not a victim because feminist movements only advocate equality right with men, not the right to dictate and dominate the man. In summary, a seismic shift has already happened in human marriage, and this shit will continue in the foreseen future.

 

 

Works Cited:

Brady Syfers. Judy. “I Want a Wife.” Literature for Composition. 3rd edition. New York: HarperCollins Custom Books, 1993. 775-776. Print.

Fernsler, Kurt. “Why I Want a Husband.” Essays24.com. 04 2011. Web. 04 2011.

https://www.essays24.com/essay/Why-I-Want-A-Husband/46620.html.

Grenell, Alexis. “First Ladyology: The Role Has Long Been a Lose-Lose Proposition.” The Nation, 22 Jan. 2021, www.thenation.com/article/politics/biden-first-lady-feminism/.

Hastings, Chris. “Feminism Was BAD for Two-thirds of Woman, Says FAY WELDON.” Mail Online, 26 Mar. 2017, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4349910/Feminism-BAD-two-thirds-woman-says-FAY-WELDON.html

 

 

 

Abortion Rights Should Be Respected

Posted on by

Author: Baosheng Guo        04-12-2023

 

(Baosheng Guo is a well-known Chinese dissident and commentator)

 

 

On June 24, 2022, in a historic and shocking decision, the U.S. Supreme Court officially overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade, which leads to mass protests and a fierce dispute between the pro-life and pro-choice people. The issue is whether women’s abortion rights should be protected and respected or not. Conservative and pro-life people think that abortion ought to be prohibited or restricted because the life right of the fetus should be protected and abortion is the crime of depriving life. However, the progressive and pro-choice people think that abortion rights are women’s legal right that benefits woman’s life and health, and the governments cannot deprive or restrict abortion rights. Although pro-life people disagree with abortion rights, women’s abortion rights should be protected by the Constitution because restricting access to abortion would deprive women’s rights to dominion over their own bodies and any level of government should not restrict abortion rights.

First, abortion rights should be protected because women have the right to dominate their bodies including fetuses and abortion rights are helpful for women’s life. After women obtained the constitutional right to vote in 1920 through Suffrage Movement, the woman’s rights movement focused on abortion rights. The Progressive Americans and feminists state abortion rights are the fundamental right of women rights that defend a woman has the right to sovereignty over her own body (Tillman 13). Because the fetus is part of a woman’s body, women themselves have the right to have an abortion or give a fetus birth. In addition, since Roe v. Wade ruled, the lives of generations of women across the U.S. have received high levels of freedom, autonomy, and control over their lives. According to research, by 1980, the average age of marriage had increased to 22. Thirty percent of American women ages 18 to 24 who had graduated from high school were enrolled in college, and 13.6% had completed a four-year college degree. Forty-five percent of married mothers with young children were in the labor force (Shehan 9). Abortion right obviously helps women participate the education and the workplace and reduce woman’s burdens such as giving birth to a fetus after rape or giving birth over the budget and career plan. Therefore, in order to protect women’s human rights such as education, work, and sovereignty over their bodies, abortion rights should be protected.

 

Also, the government should not interfere with the individual privacy and no level of government should restrict abortion. In 1973, citing the constitutional privacy right, the U.S. Supreme Court set up abortion right through Roe v. Wade. The privacy right meant the police could not invade marital bedrooms to ensure that birth control practices as enforced by state law, and the logical culmination of the privacy-right rationale is protecting abortion rights (Freeman 4). As a result, once Roe v. Wade was overturned, the governments in any state have the authority to invade the privacy right of citizens. For example, many conservative states may start to surveillance, statistics, and control the women who want abortions or travel to other states for abortions. That obviously invades the privacy of Americans and that is a shame for the called democratic beacon country and that let the government authority power becomes not limited. In fact, the purpose of establishing a government that has been written in the U.S. Constitution is to protect, not the invasion the rights of individuals. Restricting abortion as the action of invading privacy violates the original purpose of government. Therefore, the Federal and state government should not restrict abortion because the democratic government should limit the power of the government and defend civil rights.

 

However, most conservatives are opposed to abortion rights because they want to protect the life right of fetuses according to the principle of the Bible, and most Christians believe that anyone except God has no power to deprive the life of other persons including fetuses. In fact, the separation of church and state is the fundamental principle of the U.S. Constitution, and the church’s law cannot apply to the whole society just like Christians cannot force atheists and other religious believers to obey the principle of the Bible. According to the description of pregnant and fetuses in Matthew Gospel in the Bible, fetuses have a spirit, so Christians believe that fetuses have life and abortion is the murder of life. Consequently, many conservatives think that the fetus is not really a part of the mother that the fetus has independent life and that the laws on homicide must apply to the fetus, and that the government must protect the life of the fetus in the womb (Arkes 11). Actually, these opinions of conservatives reflected the principle of Christianity cannot be implemented in the whole society because society is full of any kind of religion and values. If applying this principle by force, obviously violated the separation of church and state, and that could lead to chaos or violent conflict. For instance, American Muslims who must not eat pork according to their religion cannot prohibit all people to eat pork in the U.S, if Muslims force other people not to eat pork, chaos or war will happen in the U.S.   Thus, American Christians also cannot force all people to obey the rule of the Bible and protecting rather than restricting abortion is the correct choice for a pluralistic society.

 

In conclusion, in order to practice the principles of the U.S. Constitution, such as the separation of church and state, limiting the power of government, and protecting human rights including privacy rights, education rights, and work rights, the U.S. federal and state governments should protect abortion rights. With the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the U.S. is divided, and woman’s right is being invaded. However, if people speak up and take various forms of protest, we sincerely believe, women will retake back their abortion rights.

 

Works Cited:

Arkes, Hadley. “Abortion Is a Violation of Natural Rights.” Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2022. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints,
link.gale.com/apps/doc/HJZAGV153324831/OVIC?u=viva2_nvcc&sid=bookmark-
OVIC&xid=f8f0ef3d. Accessed 19 July 2022. Originally published as “Abortion as Anti-law,”
National Review, 11 Nov. 2021.

Freeman, Alan, and Elizabeth Mensch. “Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade.” Commonweal, vol. 121, no. 18, 21 Oct. 1994, pp. 19+. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A15863066/OVIC?u=viva2_nvcc&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=7f2e3a71. Accessed 27 July 2022.

Shehan, Constance. “Roe v. Wade gave American women a choice about having children – here’s how that changed their lives.” Gale Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection, Gale, 2022. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/LVEPBM257772802/OVIC? u=viva2_nvcc&sid=bookmark-OVIC&xid=53e447de. Accessed 19 July 2022. Originally published as “Roe v. Wade gave American women a choice about having children – here’s how that changed their lives,” The Conversation, 19 May 2021.

Tillman, Jodie. “‘We have had abortions’: 1972 petition changed abortion rights movement.”Washington Post, 16 May 2022, p. NA. Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A703931552/OVIC?u=viva2_nvcc&sid=bookmark-
OVIC&xid=5dbdb683. Accessed 28 July 2022.