2.) I would like to reiterate a fact that you have mentioned in some context: Marx was also a Westerner. And though Chairman Mao’s strategy for revolution was highly influenced by Marx’s life works (Engels, Lenin,etc included), his writings are part of a longer universal (not merely Western) body of thought and action, including Jefferson and Rousseau. This tradition of human rights is carried forth in modern times through the influence of Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Lech Walesa, and many others, including perhaps Liu Xiaobo and his brave comrades.

3.) We once hosted a few young Chinese students in our home. These guys were born in the 80′s. One of them told me “Deng Xiaoping was a great man.” At that time, he began a serious effort to understand the paradox of Chinese struggle for political expression. Your assessment of Deng’s role as enactor of the “peaceful consensus” strategy sums up well what I have learned of the man so far. Having read an account of the Tianenmen incidents of 1989, I can understand why he advocated, for the sake of “order,” the use of force. I’m not saying his response was correct. Perhaps those events will be judged in future years as historically similar to our Lexington and Concord in US history. And hey, we’ve become pretty good friends with the Brits since then.

4.) Re: point #2 above, I am interested, and I am willing to help lines of communication to open up. I am not a member of that exclusive club known as journalists. (My two daughters qualify for that role, although they are presently still knocking at the door of that profession, hoping to gain admittance. Perhaps the dynamics of elitism, or hierarchy, are similar anywhere in the world.)
Nevertheless, as an author and teacher, I am willing to help in any way I can. Currently, I am preparing (intellectually; my wife is overseeing the travel and visa preparations) to visit China for 2 weeks this summer.

5.) And so I am wondering if my interest in this blog, or my response to it, jeopardizes our status as candidates to receive visas when we apply for them in a few weeks. In that connection, I will follow your honest, pragmatic example and conclude this post with a note

6.) To the Censor, whoever you may be: Please offer your endorsement to the appropriate authorities, so that I, my wife and two daughters can visit Shanghai, Beijing and other places in China, this summer. We only want to be tourists. And perhaps you could also speak to another appropriate official about unblocking my website. Thank you.

Carey Rowland, author of Glass half-Full

I really can’t understand how they could have such a bad coordination, and why the American counterpart didn’t correct it. As I said above, the real value of this Charter is in the Chinese people that signed it, and the document they signed is not the same one that most Westerners have seen.

As for the NED funded Chinese PEN, yeah, this is public information. Liu’s association with PEN is indeed prominent since he is the president. It is an interesting discussion whether it is legitimate for a “independent” movement to receive money from the American Congress.

But this is a different discussion, and I don’t think it makes this Chrter 08 any less powerful. For one thing, because the value of the Charter IMO lies not so much on who drafted it, but on the thousands of Chinese writers/bloggers/journalists etc. who dared to give their names for it.

There exists a night-and-day semantics – while the latter merely is for changes within the current political framework, the former advocates abolition of China’s constitution, or revolution.

Since this charter was tauted as purely Chinese, I’m suprised to hear Liu working with outside voices. This might be a little OT. bit has there been any discussion regarding Liu Xiaobo’s prominent association with CIPC and Mingzhu Zhonguo – both funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)?

So perhaps some last minute changes were introduced in the Chinese version (presumably and understandably to avoid further consequences for the PRC authors that were already under arrest before the 10th Dec)

Whatever the reason, Professor Link’s “massacre” text comes across more agressive than the original. Somebody should correct the article on Wikipedia and elsewhere. As it stands it’s an inaccurate translation.