[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

You've provided myriad examples of why censorship in China is more hurtful to its population than the censorship that takes place in the United States, but what I haven't yet seen is any explanation as to makes it different.

Your assertion is that China censors every word uttered on its television stations, over its airwaves and written in its print and that because the United States fines for the use of some words, arrests people for the use of others and prohibits us from speaking about some smaller amount of topics makes us different; that it makes us free.

The United States gives implicit support to censorship, both by its domestic actions to curb certain forms of speech and by its inaction in China. Dollars, not democracy, are the guiding principles of our foreign policy there. Wikipedia's actions are therefore meaningless, really, because it remains the act of an organization that makes no revenue. When McDonald's, Nike and The Gap refuse to do business with China because of its policies of oppressing its population, then maybe there'd be something worth talking about.

Well by it's very nature a liberal government (Not democrat. Liberal as in liberty.) can in fact censor certain types of speech depending if harm is inflicted. Usually, in the United States the forms of censorship that you are complaining about is more of a debate about harm coming about to someone (IE. Can't yell fire in a building). Yeah I know it sounds contradictory but that's what I learned in history class. The second part of your argument would probably entail the collapse of the United States economy so that's a bad idea. Idealistically it would work but not with putting a lot of people out of business. Now if you really wanted to annoy China there is always the 2008 Olympics. Of course I wouldn't want to be caught because I have heard of worst things than censorship (Selling the organs of prisoners that have been executed.)