asiapundit was loaded with items yesterday on internet censorship in China -- here, here, here, and here -- which prompted me to reflect on the juxtaposition of two seemingly unrelated events during my own recently completed trip.
The first "event" was my own face-to-face with the limitations on internet access imposed by the Chinese government. There appears to be some confusion about what is, and what is not, blocked in China these days. Apparently Typead was blocked before, was unblocked, and then blocked once more. Blogspot supposedly lit up again, but maybe not everywhere. The commentary at asiapundit posts suggests that the situation is, well, confused.
Here is my story, which I have relayed before, in bits and pieces. During a visit last January, I discovered that I was unable to locate any weblogs hosted by the Blogspot service. Subsequent to that visit, news arrived that Typepad -- my host -- had joined the list of blocked blog services. It was a pleasant surprise, then, when I found that, upon arriving in China this month, I was having no problem reading all of my favorite weblogs, or posting on my own site. Then a minor disaster befell me, my trusty laptop decided it had had enough of my abuse, and it would henceforth decline to operate. As a consequence, I was driven to the public computer in my hotel's business center.
Uh-oh. Once again, no Typepad, no Blogspot. I tried to access these sites in many other public or quasi-public places -- a university, airports and airport lounges, other hotel business centers. All to no avail. I was led to conclude that, at least where I was -- Guangzhou mostly -- I had relatively unfettered access in the privacy of my own hotel room, but nowhere else. One conclusion is that travelers -- particularly non-Chinese travelers, who are probably the majority in the hotels I stayed at -- are simply less likely to create trouble than are Chinese citizens. But that can only be half the answer. The other part must be that the government finds that it is not useful to put restrictions on foreigners used to a less heavy hand, either because it repels them or because it does not project the desired image of a thoroughly modern China.
Which brings me to the second event during my visit, the all-too familiar protests surrounding the World Trade Organization talks in Hong Kong. This time around the demonstrations were concentrated among the South Korean farmers. There appeared to me not much, if any, of the hodge-podge of anti-capitalism, anti-globalization groups that have plagued past meetings. That is probably due more to the particular venue than some newly found enlightenment among the groups to which I allude. In any event, we now have yet another moment in the ongoing attempt to tear down the barriers to global trade marred by considerable noise from those who want no part of it.
The connection between this and my personal internet trials? The irony, of course. I believe that, if China continues on its current course, the on-again, off-again relaxation of personal freedoms for the Chinese people will soon or later be on-again for good. That will in main part be due to the dynamics of the relationship between the government and a citizenry growing ever wealthier. But it will also in part be due to the imperatives of trade, the increasing role of foreigners that trade-driven development requires, and the presumptions of basic freedoms (and economic necessities) that outsiders bring with them. Foreign business concerns are increasingly moving out of the hotel rooms and into the population, and that itself provides an impulse to change.
I understand that there will always be some interest group that stands to lose from free trade. And I am not unsympathetic to their plight. But I take it as an absolute article of faith that those losses are swamped by the returns to humanity as a whole. And those returns are not just measured in dollars and cents.
UPDATE: myrick stays on the case.