Okay, so here is the second post. Preface: It seems a lot of people are confused (and rightly so) about whether "Tom Johnson" is or isn't who I thought he was after checking his identity. This may be in part because my alarmed and shocked post on Wednesday was less than perfectly clear. However, at the same time, there has been much leaping to conclusions about what happened here, and much assuming of the worst. Well, much--although not all--will be revealed....
* * * * * * "Tom Johnson." Back in October, "Tom Johnson" posted a personal story on this blog as a comment. And then I did something that, if I'd known one tenth of what I know now, I would not have done: I gave it some added attention. More specifically, I elevated the comment into an individual post and later thanked "Tom" for sharing it. I had no problem doing this at the time. It was just a blog post, and I had no reason to think there was anything fishy going on. And I did note that the story was "one individual’s experience and point of view, and nothing more." Granted, "Johnson" was on my side of the so-called New Atheist/accommodationist issue. However, after some questioned his ...

It appears Google and China have reached a détente.

The world’s largest search engine and the world’s most populous country traded barbs and threats this spring when Google said it might leave the country over the Chinese government’s Internet censorship. That fight cooled to a simmer over the last few months. Today, Google announced on its official blog that China has renewed its content provider license, further defusing the tension between the two.

Google has been waiting to hear back from Chinese authorities about its ICP license since the company filed for its renewal last week. The company’s license must be reviewed annually. Its renewal will allow the search giant to continue operating its China-based site, Google.cn. If Google had been unable to renew its license, it could have meant the end of the company’s operations in China [PC World].

To reach this uneasy truce with China, Google had to back down from the principled anti-censorship stand it took in March, when it began automatically redirecting Google.cn users to the company’s unfiltered Hong Kong-based site. Now, if you visit Google.cn, you should see a link to the Hong Kong site, but visitors won’t be automatically redirected.

“Basically, this was a smart move on the part of the Chinese government to kind of defuse the situation so that the Google search engine will still be available in China,” said Paul Denlinger, an Internet consultant for startups. He said that the friction between Google and China won’t disappear but will temporarily dissipate [AP].

Google is presently the second most popular search engine in the country, behind Chinese competitor Baidu.

Related Content:
80beats: Google Defies China’s Censorship Rules; China Quickly Strikes Back
80beats: Iran Blocks Gmail; Will Offer Surveillance-Friendly National Email Instead
80beats: Google to China: No More Internet Censorship, or We Leave
DISCOVER: Big Picture: 5 Reasons Science [Hearts] Google

Image: Flickr/ pamhule

Any time I post my political thoughts on this blog, inevitably someone in the comments or on Twitter will accuse me of being a far-left nut. I typically ignore people like that, because it’s clear to me that they are not capable of understanding what I’ve actually written, and in their mind, and in these hyperpartisan times, anyone who isn’t a far-right neocon must perforce be some sort of commie or socialist.

In reality, my own thinking on political and social issues is more subtle. I am in many ways an individual libertarian (I think people should have far more personal freedom than they do in this country), a social liberal (I think one of the many roles of government is to help those who cannot help themselves, and to do what individuals and corporations cannot do or cannot be trusted to do), and a governmental conservative (in the actual sense of the old party; I want a government that is big enough to do what it needs to do and no bigger).

I also understand that ideas sometimes have boundaries in practice.

Freedoms are tricky things. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. The old adage saying "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose" is wrong and dumb; in fact the act of swinging your fist at all is a threat.

I want a government that’ll help when it’s needed, but won’t when it’s not, because I know that a lot of people will take advantage of a government that is set up to help them.

I know our economy should have the freedom it needs to grow. But I also know it needs to be regulated because people are greedy, and people with nearly unlimited power and resources will sometimes spectacularly abuse them to the detriment of the country and the planet.

I loathe the idea of killing, but I know that there are bad guys out there, and we need a strong military to keep them at bay.

I hate paying taxes. But I love our highway system, clean water, and space exploration.

I think that people have the right to defend themselves, their family, their property… and that’s why they have the right to bear arms. But I also know that many people aren’t wise enough and emotionally stable enough to own a gun, and that’s why I don’t think everyone has the right to bear every arm.

I think that everyone has the right to speak their mind. But I think many loud voices right now belong to hateful, mean, bigoted, small-minded hypocrites who will say anything to get themselves noticed or to push their agenda. I also know they all have the right, the freedom to say the terrible things they do. But I have the right, and we have the duty, to counter their speech with my own voice.

So what do we do?

We need to teach people to think. To understand that there are balances in life, nuances, corollaries to decisions.

When I watch TV news, read political opinions online, and listen to our politicians, what I hear are low resolution ideas, chunky things that this way or that way, no in-between, with big thick impenetrable borders around each part.

But when I look around I see things being rich, diverse, subtle, poetic, minuscule, vast. I don’t subscribe to any particular ism, but look over the issues as they come, dig into my personal values and unholster my critical thinking, and come to each conclusion one at a time — though based on previous experience. Conclusions are not independent of one another.

The world I see is gloriously complex. It’s layered, with subtleties interacting with other subtleties, forcing decisions to be more difficult for me to make but more important once made, making the path more treacherous for me to walk but more satisfying to me once the journey is underway, making the view more of a struggle for me to understand but more awe-inspiring and world-changing once I do understand it.

The world I see is not black and white. No amount of shouting, no amount of name-calling, no amount of insults, no amount of spin, lies, distortion, sniping, negativity, or propaganda will change that.

Here’s how they see things:

Here’s how things really are:

The decision is yours. Which world do you want to live in?

Image credit: T.A. Rector/University of Alaska Anchorage, H. Schweiker/WIYN and NOAO/AURA/NSF