Support Greece Against EU Tyranny – London Rally – 6pm 29.6.15

IMG_20150629_175107

Thousands of people gathered in London’s Trafalgar Square yesterday evening, in order to demonstrate Solidarity with the country of Greece (and the Greek people) in the face of the blatant Capitalist economic terrorism that they are being subjected to by the European Union (EU) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).  The EU – and all the other self-serving capitalist entities – demand that ANY and ALL Socialist institutions within a country be de-nationalised and dismantled so that the money can be taken away from essential services that serve the people, and paid straight into the hands of the greedy bankers – who only care about their own selfish needs.  The EU has given billions of Euros to the Greek banks – and the ordinary Greek people are expected to repay the loans!  This policy of EU-led economic terrorism has swept across Europe with the backing and support of the USA – which has a vested interest in encouraging naked Capitalism in Europe – as a means to prevent the inevitable transition of Capitalism into Socialism.  It is surely a battle the Capitalists and Imperialist will eventually lose, but in the meantime, whilst they still hold the economic upper-hand, they are unleashing pain and suffering the likes of which has not been seen since the days of the Great Depression in the 1930’s, and the devastation of WWII.  The EU mismanagement of Europe has created a very rich minority middle class (bourgeoisie) whilst inflicting starvation, disease, and death (through medical) neglect upon the ordinary people of the majority working class (proletariat).  Greece can lead the way for other European nations to follow.  Europe can reject US Imperialism and its EU lackey!  Greece can pull-out of the EU – and the UK should follow this example.  The EU is the enemy of the working class and the enemy of Socialism!  Once a nationalised industry is privatised – under EU law it can never be ‘re-nationalised’.  This is an EU charter for the destruction of any working class movement toward Socialism and the dislodging of the middle class from its position of abusive power.

IMG_20150629_180431

IMG_20150629_180209

IMG_20150629_180451

IMG_20150629_181710

IMG_20150629_181736

IMG_20150629_181359

IMG_20150629_182139

IMG_20150629_181819

IMG_20150629_182103

IMG_20150629_180821

IMG_20150629_175551

IMG_20150629_180946

IMG_20150629_182810

IMG_20150629_182805

IMG_20150629_182757

 

Elderly Male Gay Couple Married in China

aGay-old-01

Original Chinese Language Text: By Wu Fang Wang (芜房网)

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

In early 2013 in China, two elderly gentleman announced through their Twitter account to their family and friends, that they were involved in a long-term love affair and that they intended to marry. Not long after this statement – the two were indeed married. This story has fuelled controversy in some sections of conservative Chinese society. One of the couple is a retired teacher – whilst the other was a bottled water supplier. As the latter used to deliver battled water to the home of the former, the two eventually fell in-love. They refer to one another as ‘little treasure’ and ‘big treasure’ and on the 3th of January, 2013, in a ceremony attended by supporters – they were married.

Later, a spokesperson from the Beijing LGBT Centre praised the courage of these two men when he said:

“It is very difficult within the context of Chinese culture for young and old (gay) people to fully express what they think and feel about one another to the wider society.”

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2015.

Original Chinese Language Source Article

http://wh.ahhouse.com/html/130301/V48131331140342_all.html

老年同性恋

(图片来源:芜房网)

近日,两位老人在他们名为“两个老头的爱情”的微博账户上公布他们的恋情并宣布将于近日结婚,一时在中国社会引发强烈争议。其中一人是退休教师,另一人是送水工人。因为经常来家里送水,两人日久生情。他们互相称为“小宝”和“大宝”。1月30日下午,北京平谷,两名老年男同性恋者在支持者的见证下举行“婚礼”。

北京同志中心顾问史蒂文?莱奥内利称赞同性伴侣的“超凡勇气”,“特别是在中国文化背景下,(同性恋)年轻人很难公开表达自己的性取向”。

Taiwan Held its First Lesbian Marriage in 2012

aGay-01

Original Chinese Language Article: By Yi Re Qiu (一日囚)

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Taiwan’s Taoyuan County was the venue for the island’s first marriage of two gay women, which occurred on the 11th of August, 2012, during a traditional Buddhist ceremony. The couple (who were deeply in love) are named ‘Mei Yu’ and ‘Ya Ting’, both of whom were 30 years old at the time of their marriage. Around 200 people attended the Buddhist marriage ceremony, and this number comprised family and friends – as well as Gay Activists. The Buddhist wedding ceremony included monastics reading from the sutras, chanting and granting blessings before the couple exchanged tokens of their love for one another. This gay marriage ceremony went ahead with no interference from the authorities despite the fact that same sex marriages were not, at the time, legal on the island. This did not deter Mei Yu or Ya Ting – who fell in love seven years ago – but did not want to continue to hid their relationship from society. With this marriage, the couple felt that ‘their relationship would be more complete’.

aGay-02

This was the first time that a gay couple had been married in Taiwan, and the fact that their marriage was conducted through a traditional ‘Buddhist’ ceremony marks a clarification of the Buddhist stance on same sex marriage. The presiding Buddhist nun – Dharma Master Zhao Hui – said:

“Buddhism does not prohibit lay-people of the same sex having a relationship, and so there is no reason why gay people cannot get married.”

aGay-05

aGay-06

aGay-04

In the broader community, the idea of a ‘Buddhist Gay Wedding’ did attract some criticism from conservative quarters, and this is exactly why the couple decided to go ahead with their plans. They wanted to draw attention to the existence and plight of gay people living within Chinese culture. In a joint statement, the couple said:

“For us this is a very significant step – not only for our private lives – but also symbolically for the gay community. We want to bring hope to all gay people by emphasising that Buddhism is not opposed to ‘Gayness’ or the principle of ‘Gay Marriage’.”

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2015.

Original Chinese Language Article

http://group.mtime.com/filmsound/discussion/2393126/

8月11日,台湾桃园县,同为佛教徒的台湾女同性恋情侣美瑜和雅婷,依照传统佛教仪式举行婚礼。二人现在都是30岁,约200名亲戚朋友及同性恋权利活动者参加了她们的婚礼婚礼沿循佛教传统仪式,包括讲道、唱经以及僧侣祝福,二人仪式上交换信物。在台湾,同性婚姻尚未合法化。30岁的美瑜和伴侣雅婷相恋7年,她们不想再当社会的隐形人,决定通过结婚“让彼此关系更完整”。

这是台湾佛教界主持的首对同性恋婚礼,标志佛教对同性恋话题的态度转变。主持婚礼的昭慧法师,同时也是台湾玄奘大学的教授,她表示,“佛教并不禁止同性恋,人与人之间维持关系已难矣……不管性倾向是什么,我们为何还要如此吝啬去嫉妒两个想结婚的人。”

在祝福这对新人的同时,“佛化同性婚礼”引起了社会人士的关注,有人反对,也有人赞叹。而当事人表示,她们希望婚礼能让民众更多关注同性婚姻问题及同性情侣所面临的种种困难。“对我们来说意义重大,因为我们的婚礼能给其他同性恋人带去希望,且让异性恋者了解佛教对同性恋的看法。”

Learning Humility and Respect for China

aDoor-01

I switched on BBC Radio 4 this morning and the first thing I heard was John Humphries reading-out the frontpage of the racist Sun Newspaper. I switched to Resonance FM (online) and listened instead to a British-Armenian woman – a singer-song writer who is soon to visit Armenia. She said that she is British first and foremost – because she was born in the UK – but is visiting Armenia because it is the land of her ancestors. Resonance FM depicts the true multicultural Britain that is always here, but which is currently hidden from mainstream media due to an institutional lurch to the right. Real Britain carries-on despite the far-right government that is currently in power. The only way media outlets such as the BBC, Sky, and ITV can give the impression that the UK is a rightwing bastion, is to starve the multicultural reality of publicity, and simultaneously (and artificially) ‘lift-up’ the moronic fringe, to give the false impression that the rightwing runs the UK. Although it is true that the bourgeois institutions control the UK – the vast majority of ‘ordinary’ people have other ideas, and by and large live together. The point is this – when the mainstream media eulogise the racists amongst us – it creates a climate for these mentally damaged people to act and make an impression. Take away this publicity and the low-life disappears back under the rocks they usually hide under. Even in 1919 – when the British government sided with the rightwing British newspaper the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph (who called on their pages for the eradication of the Chinese from British shores) – and sent the British Army to forcibly round-up 20,000 Chinese people back to China for no other reason than racism.  I heard stories of White British people defending local Chinese families against this pogrom. This defiance apparently worked – as in remote areas of the UK – small groups of Chinese people were allowed to stay – but this mass deportation reduced the British Chinese population to around 300. This mass deportation is how the British government rewarded Chinese people for supporting them during WWI. Unbelievably a mass deportation of British Chinese people happened again in 1946 – this time carried-out by the British Labour Party. From what I gather, this ethnic cleansing happened in and around the Eastend of London and is the main reason why Chinatown ceased to exist in the Limehouse area of Tower Hamlets. What happened to the Chinese in modern times in the UK is unique amongst ethnic groups, and can probably only be mirrored in British history by the rounding-up and murder of the British Jewish population in the 12th and 13th centuries. Although Chinese culture keeps the peace through the practice of ‘ignoring’ (with contempt) that which is considered ‘wrong’ or ‘corrupt’, etc., this has been misinterpreted in the West as ‘inaction’ or a weak ‘passivity’, rather than being the product of a sublime Confucian-derived self-control, designed to maintain order and harmony within society. Another issue is that of Eurocentric academics who write tomes apparently ‘correcting’ Chinese people’s distorted interpretations of the world, without the slightest sense of awareness that what they are doing is committing academic inspired racism. This is because they are commenting on and criticising an entirely ‘imagined’ Chinese community that only exists in their minds, and which is the product of the Eurocentric racist narrative derived from decades of imperialist domination and colonialization. Like the ordinary racists at the grassroots level, these supposed ‘thinkers’ do not possess even the most simplest of objective intellectual abilities, but are quite happy to continue to make what they think are authoritative statements about a people and a culture they possess no genuine knowledge about. The rightwing narrative obscures the process of the acquisition of true knowledge. The Chinese people have a culture that is far-older than the European culture that is discriminating against it. The emphasis surely should be upon the representatives of European culture making allowances for this simple fact, and developing a sense of humility and respect at the point of contact with Chinese culture.

Moses Waveman Refused Service in Torbay Because of His Wheelchair!

IMG_20150530_143737

Note: There is a grass-roots support in the Newton Abbot and Torquay area of South Devon for far-right political groupings.  This far-right support is aided and abetted by a local newspaper – the Herald Express – which is owned by the racist Daily Telegraph, a local ‘conservative’ minded Council, and an Member of Parliament who does not wish to ‘offend’ those doing the discriminating.  The Torbay area is riddled with racism, discrimination, and prejudice because of a dominating middle class who keep the majority of the people in a state of psychological and physical oppression.  Therefore those who support UKIP, the EDL, or the BNP – or anyother far-rightwing political group – will be banned from my Facebook page and removed (and banned) from my father’s page. This will include all those who ‘blame the victim’ for the discrimination, prejudice, and unlawful treatment they receive at the hands of local businesses, and the council in Torbay – and who are not protected by an apathetic local police force, or their indifferent MP’s. Tyranny must be lawfully confronted wherever and whenever it raises its unlawful head.  In this way the people can free themselves from tyranny and pursue a social system that truly represents the needs of ordinary people.  ACW 21.6.15

This is my short blog article about Dad’s despicable treatment in the Babbacombe area of Torbay yesterday.  It is interesting to observe how certain others (who have used my father’s presence to boost their various causes in Torbay over the years) now remain ominously ‘silent’ about his treatment.  This is despite the hundreds of concerned well-wishers who have expressed their shock and disgust at his treatment at the hands of two café owners in the area.  As I had just marched with 250,000 concerned UK citizens through the streets of London yesterday – including many Disabled people – against austerity and the hatred and discrimination this has unleashed on the people of Britain, I felt my father’s experience should be made known through social media.  This has been my decision – and mine alone.

My father was taken-out today for lunch with members of the family in the Reddenhill Road area of Babbacombe, Torquay. Unfortunately he was refused service at two cafes in the area because he was in a wheelchair:

Daisy’s Tea Rooms & Café – 114 Reddenhill Road, Torquay TQ1 3NT

Cary Park Café – 96A Reddenhill Rd, Torquay TQ1 3NT

It is illegal to discriminate against people with Disabilities – but this behaviour is quite common in the Torbay area. I would suggest a general boycott of these businesses until they learn to obey UK law – and the local police and Council enforce the

The Disability Discrimination Act which is as follows:

The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 aims to end the discrimination that faces many people with disabilities. This Act has been significantly extended, including by the Disability Discrimination (NI) Order 2006 (DDO). It now gives people with disabilities rights in the areas of:

employment
education
access to goods, facilities and services, including larger private clubs and transport services

buying or renting land or property, including making it easier for people with disabilities to rent property and for tenants to make disability-related adaptations
functions of public bodies, for example issuing of licences

The legislation requires public bodies to promote equality of opportunity for people with disabilities. It also allows the government to set minimum standards so that people with disabilities can use public transport easily.

———————————-

My father’s position is one of unconditional forgiveness for the actions of these hateful few who make life so difficult and fearful for those who already struggle.  However, I am not my father, and I am not as spiritually advanced as he.  My view is that those who hold far-right and intolerant viewpoints, and who simultaneously flout UK law, should pay the economic, political, and judicial cost of holding such destructive viewpoints.

Anti-Austerity March – London – 20.6.15

IMG_20150620_123849

This Saturday saw 250,000 working class people march through London in protest against the continuing Conservative Party’s ruthless and vicious policies of ‘Austerity’ which has included (but is not limited to) the privatisation of the National Health Service (NHS), the dismantling of the Welfare System, the selling-off of Social Housing Stock (i.e. ‘ no more Council Houses’), and the persecution of people with Disabilities.  It is the international bourgeois banking system that has caused all the economic problems the world is currently experiencing, and yet these very same greedy bankers have be rewarded with governmental financial bail-outs, whilst the poor, the vulnerable, and the ordinary have had to pay for it through the cancelling of welfare pay-outs, Social Services facilities, healthcare, free help for the Disabled, and government finance for community projects.  At the same time as the Tories have been slashing and burning the institutes of British Socialism, they have also been giving pointless tax-cuts to the rich in the UK!  It is estimated that around 10,000 Disabled people have died in the last 5 years as a direct result of the withdrawal of their benefit payments and medical treatment.  On top of this, the ordinary people in the UK – by far the majority – are experiencing their quality of life diminishing along with their life expectancy.  The minority rich are getting richer whilst the majority poor and ordinary are being slowly but deliberately deprived of dignity and life – tis is why we marched through London today with 250,000 other people!

IMG_20150620_120609

IMG_20150620_124036

aPian-01

Adud-01

IMG_20150620_125915

IMG_20150620_123719

IMG_20150620_124230

IMG_20150620_125623

IMG_20150620_133428

IMG_20150620_133150

IMG_20150620_125547

IMG_20150620_125514

IMG_20150620_123803

IMG_20150620_135318

IMG_20150620_141717

IMG_20150620_144233

IMG_20150620_144515

IMG_20150620_144825

IMG_20150620_121600

IMG_20150620_125121

IMG_20150620_123510

IMG_20150620_181603

 

Chinese Performance Artist Protests Against Eating Dog Meat

aPian-01

Original Chinese Language Article: By Zhou Ying (周颖)

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

‘At the time of the cold winter solstice, the dog meat is plump.’ The Chinese have always had the custom of eating dog meat at the winter solstice. In recent years the topic of eating dog meat at the winter solstice has become hotly discussed by the general public in China, many of whom are opposed to eating dog meat and have made their voices heard. As the winter solstice approached this year, the ‘Yi’ family of Guiyang killed a dog at the entrance of their shop. As this happened, the performance artist named Pian Shan Kong stripped naked and placed himself in a dog cage, whilst appealing to everybody not to kill dogs and eat their meat! Although some witnesses were critical – asking why it was that he did not protest about the eating of fish, poultry, pigs and sheep – many others showed open support for his actions.

During the evening of the 19.12.2011, the 40 year-old performance artist from Guiyang – Pian Shan Kong – took off his clothes, and whilst wearing only his underwear, he climbed into the metal cage that just 20 minutes before had housed the dog that had been slaughtered. He assumed a posture like that of a dog, together with a frightened attitude, in the hope that he could inspire compassion and loving kindness in the minds of those watching.

As he climbed into the cage – members of the Guiyang Protection Life Association – immediately gathered around and lifted-up placards asking the people not to eat dog meat. The shop staff who saw this demonstration, stopped the slaughter immediately, cleared away the evidence and closed the shop. Witnesses reported that many local people agreed with Pian Shan Kong’s protest and supported his protest, whilst others thought it was hypocritical because of the focusing of the demonstration only upon the killing and eating of dogs.

Pian Shan Kong has been involved in a number of actions designed to apology on behalf of humanity for cruel behaviour against animals, and inspire others to be kind and considerate to animals. He believes that humanity should cherish all animal life. Last year he built a 5m circular wooden food bowl with two cleavers stuck in the wood. He climbed on top of this structure and kowtowed an apology for humanity’s behaviour toward a group of assembled dogs that were tied-up.

Last year – Pian Shan Kong – began a 3 year project of travelling around all the zoos in China, entering cages and bowing his head to the ground in apology to all the animals. He has already travelled over the southwest of China, including Yunnan, and Sichuan. This includes a visit to Changsha Ecological Zoo where he bowed to tigers, leopards, pythons, and chickens, etc.

Some critics of Pian Shan Kong have asked why he took this opportunity to make his point, and why he does not seem to care about the welfare of other animals. This criticism is based upon some people in China thinking that eating dog meat is acceptable, and that the preservation of ‘life’ should not be extended to include animals or animal rights. Pian Shan Kong disagrees and has replied to this criticism by explaining that when he bows to dogs in apology for humanity’s brutal behaviour toward them, he is in fact bowing out of respect to all animal life. He sincerely hopes that through his behaviour, humanity will change its attitudes toward dogs – and all animals.

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2015.

Original Chinese Language Article:

http://www.01ny.cn/article-257330-1.html

行为艺术家钻狗笼呼吁勿吃狗肉

“寒冬至,狗肉肥。”中国人历来有冬至吃狗肉的习俗。近年来,吃不吃狗肉成为每个冬至公众热议的话题,反对吃狗肉的声音也时有所闻。临近冬至,贵阳一家杀狗店门口,行为艺术家片山空赤身钻进狗笼,呼吁大家不要吃狗肉。对他的行为,有人支持,也有人质疑,认为“片山空”等行为艺术家向狗下跪请罪是炒作,他为何不给鸡鸭鱼猪牛羊轮着下跪?

行为艺术家钻狗笼反对吃狗肉

19日下午,40岁的贵阳行为艺术家片山空脱掉身上的衣服,仅剩短裤钻进一只狗笼里,在一家屠宰店门口待了20分钟。他蜷缩在铁笼内摆出各种可怜的姿势,希望能以此唤醒人们的怜悯之心,不再吃狗肉。

活动现场,贵阳保护生命协会成员围着笼子,高举倡议人们别吃狗肉的标语牌。屠宰店工作人员见状立即停止屠杀,收拾东西关了门。据调查,很多现场观众表示支持片山空不吃狗肉的观点。但也有观众表示质疑,认为他是在炒作,想出名,“这样作秀实在没必要”。

曾多次跪拜动物替人类谢罪

据了解,片山空每到冬至来临,总能想到一些特殊的行为,来倡导人类爱护动物。去年,他就制作了一个直径近5米的圆形菜墩,在上面插上了两把大刀。随后站在这块菜墩上,向一群残疾狗磕头谢罪。

去年冬天片山空曾表示,计划在三年内走遍全国各地的动物园,向包括狗在内的所有笼子里的动物下跪,替人类请罪。至今已走遍云南、四川等西南地区,曾在长沙生态动物园跪拜了包括老虎、豹子、蟒蛇、鸡在内的所有动物。

网友质疑:为何不给鸡鸭鱼猪牛羊轮着下跪?

不过,对他这种行为的质疑声音似乎更多。有人认为,片山空等行为艺术家向狗下跪请罪是炒作,他为何不给鸡鸭鱼猪牛羊轮着下跪?

也有人认为,爱狗并没有错,但是打着“生命”的旗号,就有炒作的嫌疑。生命无贵贱,狗不能吃,难道猪、牛、羊就能吃得心安理得?网友“刘柏柏”说,世间万物都有生命,这样说来,人还可以吃什么?

面对质疑,片山空曾说,狗只是所有动物的代表。只要看到菜市场有被困待杀的动物下跪,他也会下跪请罪。他曾坦言,他的行为确实是炒作,他就是想让大家都知道,有一个人在以这样的方式,替人类向动物谢罪。

China: Anti-Eating Dogs & Cats Law – 5000 Yuan Fine & 15 Days Imprisonment

aChinCat-01

Original Chinese Language Text: Chongqing Evening News

(Translated by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Translator’s Note: This is an article from the mainland Chinese internet which appeared in 2010, and which clearly explains the contemporary Chinese legal position on animal welfare. It is illegal to farm cats and dogs for eating in China. However, illegal activity of this kind sometimes occurs, and this has led various Western animal rights movements to initiate racially motivated campaigns against China (and Chinese people around the world), through the propagation of incorrect, distorted, or out of date information. All countries have criminal elements, and to judge China by the behaviour of a small number of people who break the law, would be the same as judging mainstream British culture through the viewpoints of the racist United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), or those languishing in British prisons for cruelty offenses, etc. Many Chinese people are Buddhists who follow strict vegetarian diets and would never hurt an animal. Many others are part of robust animal rights movements that do very good work in China – but these Western critiques treat the Chinese people as if they are inherently ‘evil’, and completely ignore the Chinese animal rights movement – which is premised upon Buddhist morality- and not that of the Judeo-Christian tradition. ACW 16.6.15

China’s first ‘Animal Protection Law’ is in the developmental stage, whereby many members of Chinese ‘Animal Welfare’ community are being asked for their thoughts and opinions on the matter of animal welfare.   Following this valuable input, legal experts have decided to change the references in the draft proposal so as to make a clear and specific reference to a general ‘Anti-Animal Cruelty Law’. In April, these suggested changes were forwarded to the relevant government department.

Today, the Animal Protection Law Project Group leader Professor Chang Jiwen – (who is an expert in draft law) from the Social Science Institute – indicated that the ‘Animal Protection Law (Expert Consultation Paper) has progressed positively over a four month period, which saw him receive over 300 emails and more than 400 telephone calls. The majority of opinions expressed have been supportive and objective of the intended law, but Professor Chang also said that some citizens stated that they were unable to accept the notion of ‘Animal Protection’ or ‘Animal Welfare’, because the need to safeguard humanity’s welfare most take precedence.

In the light of this input, the Project Group decided to change the emphasis of the formulation of the draft from that of a ‘Protective’ law, to that of a law directly aimed at countering ‘Animal Cruelty’. This ‘anti-cruelty’ concept refers to deliberate and intentional brutal treatment of an animal, which inflicts unnecessary pain and injury, or in the case of lawful animal slaughter, is designed to protect the animal from brutal methods. The Project Group stated that ordinary people felt they could accept the concept of ‘anti-cruelty’ being made law, rather than the vague concept of ‘Animal Protection’.

Professor Chang disclosed that the amended ‘Animal Anti-Cruelty Law (Expert Consultation Paper) is divided into nine chapters, and takes its central premise as the prevention of animal cruelty inflicted on wild animals, farming animals, and pets – along with many other specific subgroups and categories. This includes animal medical services, animal transportation, and animal slaughter, and makes clear the law and legal ramifications if the law is broken.

It is important to note that this legislation specifically out-laws the eating of cats and dogs.

Professor Chang stated: ‘Ordinary people in China are now in a far better economic situation than those living in the past who had to eat anything to survive. The consultation proved that generally Chinese people do not agree with, or feel the need to eat cats and dogs in modern China, and that the out-lawing of this minority behaviour is not viewed as an issue.’

Reporter: the ‘Animal Anti-Cruelty Law (Expert Consultation Paper)’ stipulates that it is illegal to eat dogs and cats, or sell cats and dogs for meat. Those caught doing this will be fined 5000 Yuan and be imprisoned for 15 days. Offenders will also be ordered to sign a legal statement of repentance. Fines for businesses found illegally participating in this activity will be fined anything from 10,000 to 500,000 Yuan. The police and security agencies will be empowered to enforce this law, and the general public is encouraged to report anyone seen participating in this illegal behaviour.

The Chinese livestock and agricultural businesses support this anti-cruelty law, as they are of the opinion that in the long term this will assist Chinese import and export industry through the lowering of trade barriers.

However, Professor Chang Jiwen also stated: ‘At this time it has been prudent to introduce an ‘anti-cruelty’ rather than an ‘Animal Protection’ law, but the time will come when an ‘Animal Protection’ law will be needed as a natural progression in the development of animal welfare in China.’

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2015.

Original Chinese Language Source Text:

http://www.cqjj.net/news/show.asp?id=175232

猫狗吃不得了 或遭罚款5000拘留15天

我国首部“动物保护法”在征集意见过程中,有不少市民对“动物福利”提出质疑。对此,法律专家经过讨论,决定改变提法,起草“反虐待动物法”,4月份向相关部门提交专家建议稿。

天,动物保护法项目组负责人、首席起草专家、社科院法研所常纪文教授表示,《动物保护法(专家意见稿)》面向社会征集意见4个多月的时间里,共收到300多封电子邮件和400多个电话,大部分意见比较客观,但也有一些市民表示无法接受“动物保护”以及“动物福利”的提法。“他们觉得目前最重要的是先保障人的福利。”常教授说。

鉴于此,项目组决定改变提法,起草“反虐待动物法”。“虐待”是指故意以残酷的手段或者方式给动物以不必要的痛苦和伤害,或者以残酷的手段或者方式杀害动物。项目组认为,“反虐待”的说法更容易被市民所接受,因此新起草的法律将贯彻反虐待的原则。目前,该法律专家建议稿已基本完成。

常教授透露,《反虐待动物法(专家建议稿)》分为九章,大致包括反虐待动物的主要制度,野生动物、经济动物、宠物等多类动物的反虐待措施,动物医疗、动物运输、动物屠宰的反虐待措施,法律责任以及附则。

值得关注的是,“禁食猫狗肉”写进了《反虐待动物法(专家建议稿)》。

“禁止吃猫肉狗肉并不会给市民带来太大的影响,现在物质生活这么丰富,吃猫肉狗肉的人毕竟是少数。”常教授说。

记者了解到,《反虐待动物法(专家建议稿)》规定,违法食用犬、猫或者销售犬、猫肉,将对个人处5000元以下罚款并处15日以下拘留,并责令具结悔过;对单位和组织处1万元以上50万元以下罚款。在监管职责方面,由公安机关统一监督管理,公安机关必须设立统一的报案电话,其他部门分工负责。

据了解,中国土产畜产进出口总公司等支持“反虐待动物法”立法,此法出台有望消除贸易壁垒,提高我国羊绒、羽绒等产品的进出口量。

常纪文教授表示,暂缓制定“动物保护法”,是根据现实情况所作的决定,从长远来看,“动物保护法”仍然需要。

Free Genetic Development (and not Mistaken Notions of ‘Race’) has Driven Human Evolution

aCompassion-01

Racism certainly makes fools of us all. Colour-coding is a racist absurdity that treats everyone as if their identity should be limited to their apparent bone-structure, and skin-colour tone. Race is a biological absurdity (as genetically all human groupings evolved in Africa), but historical hatred and tension surrounds comparative culture. Broadly speaking, in the last five hundred years, European culture militarily dominated (through religion and economics), the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Polynesia, etc. This has led to a dichotomy of identity between Europeans and non-Europeans that is still being played out through mainstream and peripheral (i.e. ‘extremist’) politics. The notion of ‘race’ and ‘nationalism’ have been described as a bourgeois sham designed to separate distinct human cultural groupings simply on the outer layer of skin-tone and colour. The error in this limited thinking is that even within distinct cultural groupings (such as African), contain extensive physiological differences, and the current thinking is that the biological differences between people within the same ethnicity are greater than those between people of different ethnic groups, and yet the fixation of race-hate has evolved in modern European thinking premised only on skin-colour. This is not to say that racism does not exist within other ethnic groups – it certainly does – but European racial thinking has dominated the world (and most of the non-European cultural groupings) due to its political, religious, and military power expressed through the colonial and imperial era. This explains why many non-European ethnic groups come together to resist this Eurocentric cultural and political domination at the point of contact as an important political issue.

In reality, everyone has in principle, the right to self-determination and live their life as they see fit. Strong cultural identities cannot necessarily (in the modern world) be linked exclusively to ‘skin-colour’ and ‘bone-structure’. Individuals might not look obviously like a member of a specific ethnic grouping, and yet due to cultural association and saturation (which may or may not include a direct genetic heritage), an individual might well live and think within an ethnic cultural identity that does not necessarily correlate with the apparent outer formulation of their physical body. Some people of African-Caribbean descent, for example, when born and brought up in the West, may well express a ‘European’ mode of cultural expression in their everyday lives, whilst simultaneously not necessarily supporting ‘Eurocentricism’, and being politically aware of Black issues. Conversely, some Europeans can be brought up with the influences of African-Caribbean cultural expression, which positively affect their view of the world for the rest of their lives. Cultural identity cannot be limited to the colour and structure of the outer body, even if it is logically acknowledged that distinct ethnic human groupings, more or less evolved historically in isolation from one another, many thousands of years after the original genetic modern human grouping left Africa around 150,000 years ago. In fact, so-called ‘racial’ differences appear to have only developed between human groupings as little as only 10,000 years ago. Taken at face-value, these evolutionary changes in physique have been mistaken for a difference in ‘genetic’ origin, when modern human beings, regardless of distinct culture and physical look, are in fact from exactly the same genetic heritage. There used to be different human and near-human groupings, but even these now ‘extinct’ entities still share a common genetic origin with modern humans, despite the fact that they did not evolve into modern humans. Research suggests that some modern humans carry the distinctive DNA of Neanderthals – a cousin of modern humans – which means that modern human groupings and Neanderthal groupings existed ‘together’ at some point in time, and that these two distinctive ethnic groupings bred together and intermixed, producing diverse off-spring. This happened because this pattern of ‘ethnic-mixing’ in the past, was not subject to the preventive measures of modern race-politics, or racialised thinking. In the past it is scientifically evident that evolution has been driven not by ethnic exclusivity, but on the contrary, by a continued and sustained ‘mixing’ of diversity that would be considered breath-taking in the modern world, the politics of which artificially separates humanity into ruthlessly competing classes, races, nations, and economic camps. Although the modern trend of competing human political culture has been away from diversity and into isolated and easily controllable special interest groups, the history of human genetic development dating back millions of years, has been subject to three-dimensional and completely ‘free’ movement in any direction.

This knowledge does not ‘negate’ the contemporary subject of racial politics, which is after-all of relatively modern import, but it can assist in the process of ‘de-racializing’ the debate so that ethnic groups can evolve away from the mentality of armed camps resisting the enemy. Modern racism can be ‘dissolved’ with a correct scientific knowledge of the past, even if it is acknowledged that it will take time to completely end the illusion of ‘race’. The reality is that the limited human mind has generated ‘race’ and ‘racism’ as a means for one dominant group to oppress and control another. Whilst one group perpetuates racism through a privileged cultural-economic position, and other groups react to this perpetuation, the reality lies beyond and through this dichotomy. Modern racism, with all its hatred, murder, abuse, and pain, is a historical habit that must be broken, so that a new human freedom is realised. This ‘new’ freedom should represent the three-dimensional psychological and physical open space that human ancestry quite naturally experienced in antiquity, but it should be present through the modern and post-modern cultural milieu. This development should be a positive step forward into a bright new future for human conscious awareness, and not perceived as a negative step back into a primitive human past. Modern racism is a product not of ancient humans, but ironically of the deluded thought of modern humans. As the modern human mind has been designed by and through diversity, its mechanisations are set a priori for adaptation and radical change. This being the case, humanity can evolve beyond modern racism by giving-up a limited mentality and embracing a far-greater understanding of the universe and humanity’s place within it.

US Racism Will Not Win a War Against China

AKKK-02

The attitude toward China that is emanating from the USA and Europe is racially motivated. He US administration is using disinformation and ‘false flags’ to whip-up race hatred in the minds of its citizens in preparation for a war with China – but logic and reason surely dictates that this will be a war that the USA will lose. China has a policy of peace at all costs, but the US is pretending that China has ‘hacked’ its computers and offended its values, etc. When viewed in the light of ‘wikileaks’ and other scandals exposing US duplicity even with its own allies, it is clear that in fact it is the CIA that misuses the internet at every turn – against its own loyal citizens – spying on their computer histories and personal correspondence. Outright and extremist racism exists throughout US culture as the following pictures of Ku Klux Klan members demonstrates:

aKKK-03

aKKK-01

Original Chinese language Source Article:

http://roll.sohu.com/20140609/n400623155.shtml

探秘美国极端种族主义者3K党聚会(组图)

%d bloggers like this: