1. WindScribe.com: 10GB/mo Data Cap, 11 Locations

What is WindScribe?

Windscribe is a Canadian VPN provider founded in 2015.

They’re new, but highly respected in different VPN communities like reddit (/vpn/).

Windscribe offers you a very generous 10GB (month) bandwidth for you to test them out. If you tweet them out, you’ll receive another 5GB.

It’s a lot, as many free VPNs don’t give out that much bandwidth and the ones with no data cap tend to be VERY slow. Let’s see how WindScribe handles my 100 Mbps connection:

Windscribe VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 61ms
• Download: 39.81 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 19.77 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

For a free VPN, these speeds are nothing too bad. Some paid VPNs like PureVPN (review) are even slower. And for comparison, the free VPN called Betternet (review) comes with <5 Mbps download speed.

Features: Adblock, built in firewall, 11 locations, no logging.

As a free user, you will receive access to some features such as WindScribe’s built in firewall & adblock as well as P2P capabilities – but no OpenVPN Configs and the array of other Pro features.

Server-wise, you can connect to one of their 11 out of 46 locations:

• United States
• Canada
• United Kingdom
• Hong Kong
• France
• Germany
• Luxembourg
• Netherlands
• and 3 more.

According to WindScribe.com webpage, they do not log and store any of your VPN data and you can sign up to their services without email and pay via Bitcoin anonymously.

If that’s not taking privacy to an extreme, what is? Windscribe’s app (available on Win, Mac, iOS & Android) is minimal, sleek and intuitive to use.

Do I recommend Windscribe?

Yes.

Abundance of locations, torrenting possible and a huge data cap. I do love their progressiveness and innovative nature. They do seem to be one of the few legitimate free VPNs out there.

Pros: 100% free, zero logging, max connection speeds, 11 different server locations, ad block + firewall
Cons: 1 simultaneous connection max.

2. Hide.me: 2GB/mo Data Cap, 3 Countries, Free

What is Hide me VPN?

Founded back in 2011 by Malaysian eVenture Limited, Hide.Me is a fairly popular and well-known VPN service.

Next to their $5 and $10 plan, they offer a “free forever” option. Unlike WindScribe, Hide.Me unfortunately restricts your bandwidth to a 2GB monthly maximum.

If you plan to use VPN daily, you’ll run out quite quickly.

Hide.Me VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 61ms
• Download: 45.69 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 28.60 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

Things look a lot rosier when it comes to Hide.Me’s connection speeds. These are more than adequate speeds for a free plan.

Features: 3 locations, smooth app (Win, Mac, iOs, Android), no logging.

You’re offered a choice of only 3 locations

1. Netherlands
2. Singapore
3. Canada.

None of those servers are geo-block optimized, meaning they are unlikely to circumvent Netflix restrictions.

What disappointed me more is their protocol policy on free plans. No OpenVPN. A controversial choice I strongly disagree with. Free or not – there is no compromise for maximum security, if you have the capabilities.

They don’t keep any logs (stated clearly in their policy).

Their software client is more than acceptable. The straightforward, minimal client (Windows, Mac, iOS & Android) gives you a glimpse of what you can expect should you chose to convert to a paying customer.

And, of course, that was their goal from the get go.

Do I recommend Hide.Me?

Yes. If you don’t care about their 2GB/month data cap. It’s just meant to give you a taste of what they can do.

Pros: 100% free, zero logging, no ads and a good client.
Cons: 2GB data cap, 1 connection max.

or read Hide Me VPN review

3. ProtonVPN.com: No Data Cap, Windows Only

What is ProtonVPN?

ProtonVPN is one of the newest VPN providers in the industry. Proton AG are a group of CERN & Harvard scientists and privacy advocate, set out to change the world of cyber security..

Following their earlier success with innovating and disrupting the privacy industry (like protonmail), ProtonVPN continue their effort by imposing no bandwidth caps on your traffic.

ProtonVPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 44 ms
• Download: 34.40 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 23.15 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

Certainly good enough speeds for a free plan – with no data cap. With free plans it’s either low data cap and super-fast speeds, or no data cap and extremely slow speeds. Seeing such fast speeds, without a data cap is certainly refreshing.

Important: Don’t expect these speeds to last. As Proton becomes more and more well-known and used throughout the globe, speeds for free users will suffer.

Free Plan Conditions, Privacy & VPN Client

As a free user, you will have access to servers in:

• Netherlands,
• USA
• Switzerland
• Japan

All in all about a half a dozen servers.

None of those are enabled for geo-circumventing (Netflix) or P2P optimized (torrenting).

Next to only one max connection, you won’t have access to any of their unique features such as high-priority servers, their Secure Core, Tor integration etc. Situated in Switzerland and with so many privacy accolades under their belt, Proton is 100% the single most privacy-conscious VPN provider in the world, with no logging.

Being a very new VPN service, Proton have yet to develop standalone clients for operating systems other than Windows. They don’t have standalone app for:

• Android
• iPhone
• Mac

For Mac, iOS & Android you will have to go through a lengthy 3^rd party software installation and configuration process and won’t be able to make use of many ProtonVPN features.

Do I recommend ProtonVPN?

As a free VPN service? 100%.

Get in while they are still new and haven’t changed their terms. Even if you’re using a Mac, the workaround is worth the unlimited bandwidth and top free VPN speeds.

Pros: No data cap, decent download and upload speed
Cons: No app for Mac, iOS and Android (3rd party software installation is required), No Netflix, No Torrenting

www.ProtonVPN.com

or read ProtonVPN review

4. HotspotShield.com: 500MB/day Data Cap, 20 Countries

What is Hotspot Shield VPN?

One of the oldest public VPN providers, Hotspot Shield was created by the US company AnchorFree.

Neither the fact they are based in the USA nor that they backed by $52 million financing by Goldman Sachs makes me feel very safe.

Until very recently Hotspot Shield did not impose any bandwidth limits on their free users. You were instead monetized by being displayed ads.

That said, in June 2017, Hotspot implemented the following data caps:

• AndroidData Cap is 256MB per day and resets every 24hrs.
• DesktopData Cap is set to 750MB per day and reset every 24hrs.

At 500MB, you will lose access to video sites for 24 hours and will be prompted to “share Hotspot Shield with 10 friends to restore access”

Hotspot Shield VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 66ms
• Download: 26.82 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 30.95 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

This speed, for a free plan that has been offered for over a decade and used by presumably millions of users is quite good.

Features: 20 countries, Free Plan Conditions, Privacy & VPN Client

Hotspot Shield were mindful not to share too much about their free plan on their website, instead baiting you into just “giving them a go”.

As a free user, you will have access to 20 of their locations (US, UK, JP, IN, AU, CA, CN, TR, UA and more) and limited access to their features such as geo-circumvention and basic malware protection.

Hotspot clearly state in their prominently displayed Privacy FAQ that they do not log or store any user data.

The client is a bit more clunky than I’d like. It looks unpolished and isn’t as intuitive as other clients.

The ads which display don’t really help the situation. At least it’s supported on all major (Win, Mac, iOS, Android) operating systems and even some browsers (Chrome)

Do I recommend Hotspot Shield?

Yes, with a caveat.

For very basic users, who are in need for safe and anonymous browsing, not looking to watch videos, Hotspot Shield are a solid choice.

Pros: Good download and upload speed, works on all devices.
Cons: Data cap limitations.

www.HotSpotShield.com

or read Hotspot Shield VPN review

5. Tunnelbear.com: 500MB/mo Data Cap, 3 Countries

What is Tunnelbear VPN?

Without a doubt the cutest VPN service, the Canadian Tunnelbear Inc have been making the round ever since their 2011 inception.

A strong emphasis on putting forth an extremely beginner friendly VPN service, Tunnelbear offer you a monthly 500MB free data to test out their servers

PS: Hit them up on twitter, tell us we sent you and they’ll throw in another 1GB in free data.

The first thing you should think of when you see such a low data cap is “this isn’t meant for regular use; they are trying to sell me”. You’d be right of course. This is all marketing. Which make the following very, very strange.

Tunnelbear VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 98ms
• Download: 15.09 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 7.49 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

Clearly, a very unimpressive result. Say goodbye to productivity and hello to headaches and frustrating buffering.

Free Plan Conditions, Privacy & VPN Client

Tunnelbear are minimal to a fault – their website provides almost no information. No protocol, encryption, max connections, servers & countries or bandwidth info. The almost hidden “20+ countries” is about the extent of what they deem worth sharing.

At least they had the sense to lay out their privacy policies in which they clearly and fully state the extent of their information collecting – absolutely zero IP and data logging.

Their Tunnelbear client, available on Mac, Windows, iOS and Android, is very simple to use and further builds on their ideals of less is more. The free app even provides some basic options like a kill switch.

Do I recommend Tunnelbear?

No.

All in all, while they have done everything right, their speeds and low data cap make this a poorly executed marketing trick and nothing more. If you’re looking for a long term free VPN, Tunnelbear is not what you’re after.

Pros: 100% free, zero logging, works on all devices.
Cons: Data cap, very slow connection speeds, no torrenting allowed.

www.TunnelBear.com

or read our Tunnelbear review

6. Avira Phantom VPN: 500MB/mo Data Cap, 20 Countries

What is Avira Phantom VPN?

A subsidiary of famous German antivirus company Avira, Phantom is their new VPN.

Should you decide $5.95 a month isn’t a price you’re willing to pay, Phantom is offering you a 500MB data cap per month for you to use free of charge (similarly to Hotspot Shield)

Avira Phantom VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 41ms
• Download: 6.98 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 9.02 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

Not a surprise for such a massive corporation, it seems like Avira didn’t put in enough effort to ensure fast speeds.

In fact, they’re one of the slowest VPNs we’ve ever tested.

Free Plan Conditions, Privacy & VPN Client

With low data caps and abysmal speeds, Avira instead banked on converting you by showcasing many of their premium features.

DNS leak protection, geo-block circumvention and over 20 server locations will be available to you as a free user.

As should be expected, Avira do not track anything other than the amount of data you consume as a free user. No IP logging or websites tracked.

Offered to all major operating systems (but only the latest versions), Phantom’s connection client is both straightforward and easy to use.

Do I recommend Avira Phantom?

No. A bottom shelf data cap and some of the slowest speeds around, what could you possibly do with Phantom? With so many better options around, Avira have a lot of catching up to do.

Pros: 100% free, zero logging, works on all devices.
Cons: Very slow connection speed, small data cap

www.Avira.com

7. Betternet.com: 2GB/mo Data Cap, US Servers only

What is Betternet?

Founded in 2015 by Canadian Betternet Technologies Inc, Betternet used to be a “free only” VPN which has recently switched over to a premium model.

One of Betternet’s “Free forever” promises went hand in hand with their lack of data capping. The way they monetized their users (ads) allowed them to offer unencumbered use of their networks.

This hasn’t changed. You can use Betternet’s VPN for as much and as long as you want – no data caps, hooray.

Betternet VPN Connection Speeds

• Ping: 64 ms
• Download: 3.64 Mbps out of 100 Mbps
• Upload: 12.41 Mbps out of 100 Mbps

But here’s the catch – this VPN is practically useless. We did multiple tests are never managed to achieve a better download speed than that.

Free Plan Conditions, Privacy & VPN Client

As a free user, you do not seem to have a choice of servers. Should you attempt to change the server location, you will be greeted with a “Upgrade now!” page.

In our tests, Betternet defaulted to connecting us to a US server.

Additionally, Betternet do not seem to have implemented many features for their free users such as kill switches, DNS leak protection etc.

Betternet do not collect, log, store or share any identifiable personal information. This translates into a no logging policy as with most other VPN providers. Perhaps one of the simplest clients for free users, void of even mandatory user login, Betternet’s software is a breeze to use.

Betternet clients are available for Mac, Windows, iOS, Android as well as for both Chrome and Firefox

Do I recommend Betternet?

No. With less than 1% efficiency, just forget streaming video or torrenting anything bigger than a song file. It’s OK for changing your IP, but for serious use – forget it.

Pros: 100% free, zero logging, works on all devices.
Cons: Slowest connection speed, no torrenting is possible

https://thebestvpn.com/free-vpn/

We are failing to look at inequality in the right way, according to researchers who study people’s attitudes to wealth disparity.

Haves and have-nots. The 99%. The income gap. The chasm between rich and poor has never mattered more. It’s estimated that the top 1% of the world’s richest people owns 50% of the planet’s wealth.

Solving this level of inequality is often held up as a ‘grand challenge’ for the world. But is that the right way to look at it?

Some researchers argue that income disparity itself may not be the main problem. The issue, they say, is not the existence of a gap between rich and poor, but the existence of unfairness. Some people are treated preferentially and others unjustly – and acknowledging that both poverty and unfairness are related may be the challenge that matters more in the 21st Century.

While many people may already view inequality as unfairness, making the distinction much clearer is important: to improve the society we live in, these researchers are arguing that we need to all be on the same page as to what inequality actually is. Only then can we direct resources to the places that matter.

MORE GRAND CHALLENGES:

• Is the ‘end of modern medicine’ near?
• Are we running out of land?
• How automation will affect you

What is it about inequality that bothers us: the fact that some people are rich and others are poor? Or that not everyone has an equal shot? Or something else?

In a paper published in April in the journal Nature Human Behaviour called ‘Why people prefer unequal societies’, a team of researchers from Yale University argue that humans – even as young children and babies – actually prefer living in a world in which inequality exists. It sounds counter-intuitive, so why would that be? Because if people find themselves in a situation where everyone is equal, studies suggest that many become angry or bitter if people who work hard aren’t rewarded, or if slackers are over-rewarded.

And yet? When the researchers told the kids that one boy worked harder than the other, the group awarded the extra prize to the harder worker.

“We argue that the public perception of wealth inequality itself being aversive to most people is incorrect, and that instead, what people are truly concerned about is unfairness,” says Christina Starmans, a psychology post-doc at Yale who worked on the paper.

“In the present-day US, and much of the world, these two issues are confounded, because there is so much inequality that the assumption is that it must be unfair. But this has led to an incorrect focus on wealth inequality itself as the problem that needs addressing, rather than the more central issue of fairness.”

Starman’s co-author Mark Sheskin, a cognitive science post-doc at Yale, puts the findings of this research succinctly: “People typically prefer fair inequality to unfair equality”.

The reason this matters is that trying to create a world with no wealth disparity is at odds with people’s perception of fairness, and that could potentially lead to instability. A society where no poverty exists sounds rather utopian, but if that society is equal-but-unfair then it risks collapsing, argues Nicholas Bloom, an economics professor at Stanford University.

“As reasonable as it sounds, people don’t typically work, create or strive without the motivation to do so,” says Bloom. “If I’m a painter, dentist or builder, why would I work for 50 hours a week if everything I’m given is free? From my own experience managing people, humans actually think it’s unreasonable for people that skive to get rewarded. When you run large teams, there is nothing that sends people mad more than lazy individuals getting the same rewards and promotions as the hard workers.”

But how can we define inequality?

Researchers argue that we need an agreed-upon definition of the term ‘inequality’.

It’s important to remember that, as we figure out ways to combat inequality, that there are three separate (but related) ideas.

First, the idea that people should have equal opportunity in society, regardless of their background, race, sexuality, gender and so on.

The second idea is fair distribution, which says that benefits or rewards should be distributed fairly based on merit.

The final idea is the notion of equality of outcome, or that people receive equal outcomes regardless of circumstance. This last one is a little trickier to grasp. Many of the experts BBC Future talked to brought up the phrase ‘inequality of outcome’: say if you were given £5 and your friend was given £10. That represents inequality of outcome, since the two of you have different amounts of money, regardless of how that came to be.

Each of these ideas represent a different kind of inequality that manifests in everyday life and that contributes to the overarching mega-trend that many regular people think of as ‘economic inequality’. Recognising these different dimensions is crucial for formulating a holistic battle plan.

MORE GRAND CHALLENGES:

• Garry Kasparov: The upsides of AI
• How slow internet affects income
• Why ‘hydro-politics’ will shape the 21st Century

So which of these types of inequality should be addressed? Which leads to a potentially better society?

Fighting the real issue

Many of the researchers and economists interviewed for this piece agree: too much attention is paid to the fact that the 1%, and the super-rich all exist.

Instead, they argue we need to concentrate more on helping those less fortunate, who via a lack of fairness, are unable to improve their situation.

Harry G Frankfurt is a professor emeritus of philosophy at Princeton University. In his book On Inequality, he argues that the moral obligation should be on eliminating poverty, not achieving equality, and striving to make sure everyone has the means to lead a good life.

“I do think that people are likely to respond with greater sympathy to the suffering brought on by poverty than to the harms necessarily imposed on those who are less wealthy than some others,” Frankfurt says. “This might support appropriate legislation to relieve the disadvantages of poverty.”

Economic inequality is such a massive, sprawling, nuanced, intense issue; the product of complex cultural and political forces around the world throughout history.

However, by understanding the different definitions of inequality – like inequality of opportunity – it highlights more clearly that not everyone is afforded the same opportunities to succeed, even if they put in that hard work.

Depending on your political viewpoint, the way of addressing inequality might be different: perhaps the left might favour universal health care for all, while the right might favour job creation that employs low-wage workers. Whatever the political plan of action, however, experts say the solution lies in in addressing the fact that poverty and unfairness exist.

Because that should be the real moral obligation, these researchers say – empathising with our fellow humans.

“It will be beneficial to shift the conversation, and the research, away from inequality itself,” says Starmans, “and toward issues such as unfairness and poverty, which are the core of what we are concerned about.”

不平等和不公平哪个才是问题？

富人及穷人，99%，收入差距。贫富差距从未像今天这样引人瞩目。据估计，世界最富有的1%人口坐拥世界50%的财富。

有研究者认为，收入差距本身并不是问题的核心。他们说，收入差距问题的关键并不在于富人和穷人存在收入差距，而在于缺乏公平。有些人得到了优待，而有些人则受到不公正对待。承认贫困和不公平之间的关联在21世纪可能变成更为重要的挑战。

• 观点：有钱没钱不看才华，看运气
• 西方文明可能以何种方式崩溃
• 这是世界上最幸福快乐的国家吗？

尽管许多人已经把不平等和不公平看作是同一件事物，但是有必要把它们清楚地区分开：为了改良我们所处的社会，研究者说，我们首先需要就不平等的准确定义达成一致。只有这样，我们才能把资源投放在真正重要的地方。

什么是不平等？这个问题一直困扰着我们：不平等就是有些人富裕，有些人贫穷吗？还是每人获得的机会不同？还是其他什么？

《自然人类行为》（Nature Human Behaviour）杂志于今年4月发表了一篇题为《为什么人们更愿意生活在不平等社会？》的论文。这篇由一个耶鲁大学研究小组撰写的论文认为，人类——即便是儿童和婴儿——也愿意生活在一个不平等的世界里。这个说法听起来和人们的直觉相悖，人类为什么会出现这种想法？研究揭示了个中原因：如果人们处于一个所有人平均分配的无差异社会，那么很多人就会对努力工作的人得不到应得报酬，而滥竽充数的懒汉则会不劳而获这种现象感到愤怒和痛苦。

例如，在一项实验研究中，要求一群6-8岁的小孩给两个打扫了房间的男孩分配橡皮作为给他们的奖励。研究者发现，要是他们告诉这群小孩，两个男孩的工作都很出色，然后发给评判者们奇数块橡皮，他们就一致同意把多余的一块橡皮扔掉，而不是把它奖给其中一名男孩作为一种不公平的奖励。

但是，当研究者告诉这群小孩，其中有一个男孩比另外一个打扫得更加努力时，他们就会把多余的一块橡皮奖励给工作更努力的男孩。

“我们发现，认为大多数人对不平等感到厌恶的想法是错误的。恰恰相反，人们真正担忧的是不公平，”论文撰写人、耶鲁大学心理学博士后克里斯蒂娜·斯塔曼斯（Christina Starmans）表示。

“在今天的美国和世界上很多国家，这两个问题都混乱地交织成了一团。人们会简单地认为，不平等本身就是不公平。由于这种想法，人们往往认为真正急需解决的问题在于不平等，而对更核心的公平问题则视而不见。”

• 如何向公众扩散无知混淆视听
• 职场语言中隐含的性别歧视
• 如何让人们克服偏见？

论文联合作者、耶鲁大学认知科学博士后马克·谢思金（Mark Sheskin）则以更为简洁的语言对研究发现做了总结：”人们宁可要公平的不平等，也不要不公平的平等。”

这一点至关重要的原因在于，由于人们更加看重公平，创建一个没有贫富差距的世界的目标无法在人群中达成一致，进而会导致社会动荡。斯坦福大学经济学教授尼古拉斯·布鲁姆（Nicholas Bloom）说，一个不存在贫困现象的社会听上去很美，但是如果这个社会消除了贫富差距但却没有公平可言，则将面临社会崩溃的风险。

“人们如果没有这样做的动机，是不会去工作、创造或奋斗的，这一点非常合理，”布鲁姆说。”如果我是一名画家、牙医或建筑工人，在一个所有东西都免费的社会伦理，我为什么要一周辛苦工作50个小时呢？根据我自己的人力资源管理经验，人们会把整天旷工也能挣工资看成是不公的。你要是管理一个大型团队，没有什么比懒汉和勤快人挣一样的钱、并获得同样的晋升机会更能破坏团队士气的了。”

但是，我们该如何定义不平等？

研究者认为，我们需要给”不平等”一词下一个能普遍接受的定义。

应当记住，在对抗不平等的过程中，我们会用到三个各自独立，但却相互关联的观点

首先，无论其背景、种族、性取向、性别等特质如何，人们都应当在社会中获得公平的机会。

第二个观点是公平分配。福利和奖励应当根据贡献大小加以公平分配。

最后一个观点是成果的公平，或者说无论情况如何，人们都可以获得公平的成果。最后一个观点较难把握。BBC未来频道采访的许多专家都提到了”成果的不平等”这个概念：如果给你5英镑，给你的朋友10英镑，你们两个获得的金额不同，这就构成了成果的不平等，不管它是如何得到的。

这三个观点都代表了存在于日常生活中的各种不平等现象，并且都影响到普通人对于”贫富差距”的看法。在制定总体计划时，必须考虑到这几个不同维度。

那么应当解决哪个不平等现象？解决了哪个不平等现象就有望打造一个更好的社会？

解决真正的问题

很多接受采访的研究者和经济学家都认为，人们对于最富有的1%富人给予了过多关注，这些超级富豪的身影简直无处不在。

他们认为，我们应当更加专注于中低收入群体。由于没有受到公平对待，他们无法改变自己的地位。

普林斯顿大学名誉哲学教授哈里·G·法兰克福（Harry G Frankfurt）在他的著作《论不平等》（On Inequality）里写道，人们的道德义务倾向于消除贫困，而非争取公平。人们会努力让每个人都能享受到美好生活。

“我认为，与较贫困者所处的相对困境相比，极度贫困者的悲惨生活更能引起人们的同情，”法兰克福说。”这种心态会促进扶持穷人的法律出台。”

贫富差距是一个规模庞大、不断扩展、敏感微妙且极度激烈的问题。这是长期以来世界各地高度复杂的文化和政治作用力的产物。

然而，通过了解不平等的不同定义，例如机会的不平等，这一定义认为，有很多人没有获得同样的机会，即便他们努力工作，也最终被排除在成功之外。

解决不平等问题的手段取决于你的政治观点：左派会选择全民医疗保险，右派则选择为低收入群体创造就业岗位。然而，无论政治行动计划为何，专家都认为消除贫困和不平等的方法是存在的。

研究者称，我们负有同情穷人的道德义务。

“应当把争论和研究从不平等本身移开，”斯塔曼斯说，”转移到不公平和贫困上去。这两个问题才是我们最应关注的核心问题。”

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170706-theres-a-problem-with-the-way-we-define-inequality

http://www.bbc.com/ukchina/simp/vert-fut-40741752

Activist Liu Xiaobo has died after spending eight years in prison.

“There is nothing criminal in anything I have done but I have no complaints.”

So stated Liu Xiaobo in court in 2009, and in the eight long prison years between then and now, he refused to recant his commitment to democracy. No wonder China’s leaders are as afraid of him in death as they were in life.

The Chinese Communist Party was once a party of conviction, with martyrs prepared to die for their cause, but it’s had nearly 70 years in power to become an ossified and cynical establishment. It imprisons those who demand their constitutional rights, bans all mention of them at home and uses its economic might abroad to exact silence from foreign governments. Under President Xi, China has pursued this repression with great vigour and success. Liu Xiaobo is a rare defeat.

Beijing’s problem began in 2010 when he won a Nobel Peace Prize. That immediately catapulted Liu Xiaobo into an international A-list of those imprisoned for their beliefs, alongside Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi and Carl von Ossietzky.

The last in that list may be unfamiliar to some, but to Beijing he’s a particularly uncomfortable parallel. Carl von Ossietzky was a German pacifist who won the 1935 Nobel Peace Prize while incarcerated in a concentration camp. Hitler would not allow a member of the laureate’s family to collect the award on his behalf.

Strict censorship is another shared feature of both cases. Mention of Carl von Ossietzky’s 1935 Nobel peace prize was banned in Nazi Germany and the same is true of Liu Xiaobo’s award in China today. For a time China even banned the search term “empty chair”. So he has been an embarrassment to China internationally, but at home few Chinese are aware of him. Even as foreign doctors contradicted the Chinese hospital on his fitness to travel, and Hong Kong saw vigils demanding his release, blanket censorship in mainland China kept the public largely ignorant of the dying Nobel laureate in their midst.

• China’s propaganda war over Liu Xiaobo
• Who is Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo?
• The love that survived a Chinese labour camp
• What is China accused of?

Selective amnesia is state policy in China and from Liu Xiaobo’s imprisonment until his death, the government worked hard to erase his memory. To make it hard for family and friends to visit, he was jailed nearly 400 miles from home. His wife Liu Xia was shrouded in surveillance so suffocating that she gradually fell victim to mental and physical ill health. Beijing punished the Norwegian government to the point where Oslo now shrinks from comment on Chinese human rights or Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel prize.

But in death as in life, Liu Xiaobo has refused to be erased. The video footage of the dying man which China released outside the country was clearly intended to prove to the world that everything was done to give him a comfortable death. The unintended consequence is to make him a martyr for China’s downtrodden democracy movement and to deliver a new parallel with the Nobel Peace Prize of 1930s Germany.

Liu Xiaobo was granted medical parole only in the terminal stage of his illness, and even in hospital he was under close guard with many friends denied access to his bedside. Nearly 80 years ago, Carl von Ossietzky also died in hospital under prison guard after medical treatment came too late to save him.

Comparisons with the human rights record and propaganda efforts of Nazi Germany are particularly dismaying for Beijing after a period in which it feels it has successfully legitimised its one-party state on the world stage. At the G20 summit in Hamburg earlier this month, no world leader publicly challenged President Xi over Liu Xiaobo’s treatment. With China increasingly powerful abroad and punitive at home, there are few voices raised on behalf of its political dissidents.

Liu Xiaobo was not always a dissident. An outspoken academic with a promising career and a passport to travel, until 1989 he’d led a charmed life. The Tiananmen Square democracy movement that year was the fork in his path. After the massacre on June 4th, the costs of defying the Party were tragically clear to all.

Most of his contemporaries, and of the generations which followed, judged those costs too high. They chose life, liberty and a stake in the system.

Liu Xiaobo was one of the few who took the other fork. He stayed true to the ideals of 1989 for the rest of his life, renouncing first his opportunities to leave China, and then, repeatedly, his liberty. Even in recent years, his lawyers said he had turned down the offer of freedom in exchange for a confession of guilt.

‘If you want to enter hell, don’t complain of the dark….’

Liu Xiaobo once wrote. And in the statement from his trial which was read at his Nobel award ceremony alongside his empty chair, Liu Xiaobo said he felt no ill will towards his jailers and hoped to transcend his personal experience.

No wonder such a man seemed dangerous to Beijing. For a jealous ruling party, an outsider with conviction is an affront, and those who cannot be bought or intimidated are mortal enemies.

But for Liu Xiaobo the struggle is over. The image of his empty deathbed will now haunt China like the image of his empty chair. And while Beijing continues to intimidate, persecute and punish those who follow his lead, it will not erase the memory of its Nobel prize winner any more than Nazi Germany erased its shame 81 years ago.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-40585327

中国著名异见人士、诺贝尔和平奖得主刘晓波于2017年7月13日因病去世，终年61岁。

沈阳市司法局在其门户网站上确认了这一消息。

刘晓波是中国知名作家，曾任北京师范大学中文系讲师。他是中国著名持不同政见者，曾任独立中文笔会主席，是《零八宪章》的发起者和起草者。

2009年，刘晓波因所谓”煽动颠覆国家政权罪”被判处有期徒刑11年，剥夺政治权利2年。

2010年10月，刘晓波因其多年来”推动中国民主化的努力”而获得诺贝尔和平奖。

• 刘晓波：”被遗忘”的诺贝尔奖得主
• 英媒：刘晓波狱中患癌引发愤怒、震惊和难过
• 刘晓波肝癌晚期获保外就医带出人权疑问

主要经历

刘晓波于1955年12月28日生于吉林长春。曾当过知青，建筑工人等。

1977至1982年，他在吉林大学中文系学习，获学士学位，随后进入北京师范大学中文系攻读硕士研究生，获硕士学位，并在该校中文系任教。1986年在北京师范大学中文系读博士学位，多次去北欧和美国讲学。

1980年代中期，刘晓波因对李泽厚的批判而名震文坛，被称为”黑马”。后因参与天安门六四事件、呼吁为六四平反和要求中国当局进行民主宪政改革而多次被捕。他和侯德建、高新和周舵被称为”天安门四君子”。

1989年他在美国哥伦比亚大学作访问学者时，北京发生八九民运，他随即回国参加六四学生运动。

1989年6月6日，刘晓波因所谓”反革命宣传煽动罪”被捕，同年9月被开除公职。1991年1月获释后在北京从事写作以及参与中国民运活动。

1995年5月至1996年1月被监禁在北京郊区。

1996年至1999年被当局以扰乱社会秩序罪判处劳动教养3年。获释后继续在北京从事自由写作。

刘晓波的文章抨击时政，关注民间维权。这使他成为中国当局重点监控的对象，在每年的一些敏感时期，中国当局对刘晓波实施某种程度的软禁，要求不得外出、访友，甚至切断其电话。

2008年，刘晓波发起并起草了《零八宪章》，该宪章在12月10日世界人权日发表。12月8日，刘晓波因涉嫌”煽动颠覆国家政权罪”被刑事拘留，12月9日被监视居住。2009年6月23日被当局以涉嫌”煽动颠覆国家政权罪”正式逮捕。

2009年12月25日，北京第一中级人民法院以”煽动颠覆国家政权罪”判处刘晓波有期徒刑11年，剥夺政治权利2年。一审判决书中指控刘晓波在包括BBC等的境外网站上发表”煽动性”文章。刘晓波对判决提出上诉，但2010年2月11日北京高级法院驳回上诉，维持原判。

2010年5月26日，刘晓波开始在辽宁省盘锦监狱服刑。

刘晓波入狱后，他的妻子刘霞一直生活在软禁状态中。但是中国当局从来没有解释为什么要对刘霞采取这种措施。

• 12名诺贝尔和平奖得主呼吁释放刘晓波
• 路透社：有中共太子党建议假释刘晓波
• 胡佳：刘晓波之妻刘霞抑郁严重

获奖与著作

刘晓波曾多次获奖。其中包括，1990年获美国《人权观察》颁发的”海尔曼人权奖”，1996年再次获得”海尔曼人权奖”。

2004 年获得无国界记者和法兰西基金会颁发的2004年度”捍卫言论自由奖”。

2005年获第十届香港人权新闻奖大奖。

2009年获得美国笔会颁发的该年度巴巴拉·戈德史密斯自由写作奖。

他的主要作品包括《选择的批判- 与李泽厚对话》、《审美与人的自由》、《赤身裸体，走向上帝》、《中国当代政治与中国知识分子》、《向良心说谎的民族》、《未来的自由中国在民间》、《单刃毒剑——中国当代民族主义批判》等。

诺贝尔和平奖

2010年10月8日，诺贝尔基金会宣布，刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖。他成为首位居住在中国境内的获得诺贝尔奖的中华人民共和国公民。

评选委员会把诺贝尔和平奖授予刘晓波的理由是，表彰其”在中国为基本人权持久而非暴力的奋斗”，”纵然身陷刑罚，刘晓波已经成为了方兴未艾的中国人权奋斗的标志与丰碑。”

刘晓波获奖后， 中国外交部发言人马朝旭表示：”刘晓波是触犯中国法律而被判刑的罪犯，其所作所为和诺贝尔和平奖宗旨背道而驰。”

当年12月10日，狱中的刘晓波未能出席在奥斯陆举行的诺贝尔和平奖颁奖典礼，中国当局也不准他的亲属代为领奖。

诺贝尔和平奖委员会在颁奖台上安排了一把空椅子。

当诺贝尔和平奖委员会主席托尔比约恩·亚格兰宣布，以空椅代表遭监禁的刘晓波、诺贝尔委员会会保留奖状和奖金，等候刘晓波领取时，全场嘉宾，包括挪威国王和王后，起立鼓掌达一分钟之久。

挪威诺贝尔和平奖委员会给刘晓波颁奖，导致中国政府迁怒于挪威政府，中国与挪威两国关系近年来才有所解冻。

• 中国警告勿授予刘晓波诺贝尔和平奖
• 中国：以刘晓波命名广场将有”严重后果”
• 马英九祝贺刘晓波获诺贝尔和平奖
• 莫言：希望刘晓波尽快获得自由

狱中罹患绝症

刘晓波被监禁引起国际社会的强烈反响。国际特赦、人权观察、无国界记者和国际笔会等组织不断呼吁中国当局释放刘晓波。

美国国会曾通过决议案呼吁北京当局立即释放刘晓波，德国总理默克尔也对刘晓波的审判结果表示震惊。

在他被监禁八年后，2017年6月26日，辽宁省监狱管理局在其网站上公布，刘晓波已被诊断患有肝癌，辽宁省监狱管理局批准其保外就医。

据悉，现年61岁的刘晓波是今年5月23日被确诊为肝癌晚期。

刘晓波保外就医：中国”妥协”邀德美专家来华会诊

• 英媒：家人和好友收到刘晓波”病危”通知
• 刘晓波保外就医：中国”妥协”邀德美专家来华会诊

刘晓波因癌症晚期获保外就医的消息被海外媒体纷纷报道，但中国官方媒体只字不提。中国外交部6月26日被问及刘晓波时表示不了解情况。

挪威诺贝尔委员会对刘晓波保外就医发表声明：”委员会对刘晓波出狱感到高兴，但同时极其遗憾的是他病重至此中国当局才同意他离开监狱。”

“他是因为言论自由被判刑，本不应该受此牢狱之灾。”

该委员会还再次重申，对刘晓波前往挪威的邀请仍然有效。

但是，刘晓波于7月13日在医院去世。

这位诺贝尔和平奖得主，永远失去了亲自领奖的机会。

http://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-40516593

Non-governmental organizations

Legal Resources

Refugee Resources

Online Tools