Chinese Blogs, Netizens React To the Tibet Issue 926
Bibek Paudel writes "Over the past few weeks Chinese bloggers and people on Internet forums have been reacting to events in Tibet and the protests disrupting the torch relay. The BBC and Global Voices have interesting insights on the recent happenings on the Net. A western commentator says, 'Lots of Chinese people now view the Western media, human rights groups, and Western leaders' criticisms of their country as part of the Racist Western Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful.' One of the most vocal appeals by the Chinese blogs, forums, and text-messages has been to boycott French goods in response to the protests that accompanied the torch relay in Paris. One response post reads, 'Who is abusing human rights? Who is bringing violence to this world?' There also are two versions of music video of the song Don't Be Too CNN, and its lyric has assumed the status of a cult catch-phrase. Sina.com has a popular page: 'Don't be too CNN, fire to the Western media.' Many analysts believe that the protests over Tibet have only served to strengthen Chinese nationalism rather than evoke sympathy for the Tibetan cause. Sina.com has a petition against the Western media which has reportedly accumulated millions of signatures. There is also Mutant Palm, a blog by an expatriate in China who has been watching and commenting on the fallout from Tibet and torch protests online."
Uh.. (Score:2, Insightful)
'Lots of Chinese people now view the Western media, human rights groups, and Western leaders' criticisms of their country as part of the Racist Western Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful.'
Wh...WHAT? [census.gov]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
china helping out north korea was one communist nation helping out another, after UN forced had chased north korean into chinese territory iirc...
on the other hand, the leadership of china during ww2 ended up fleeing to what is now taiwan after the communist uprising.
and btw, china do not recognice taiwan as a nation. they insist that its chinese territory. but they do not invade as that would risk all out war with usa, who helped set up taiwan...
got to love that stuff. in us eyes, anything other then communist leadership was good. it could be just as dictatorial or worse then the communists, as long as they where not communists...
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not only that, but Taiwan is probably one of the best-defended chunks of land on the planet. There's also some pretty strong rumors that Taiwan either has or in short order could produce nuclear weapons, so any attack on it would likely lead to reciprocal attacks against major Chinese centers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Uh.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Times there are changing, they are growing out of the disassociation, open trade, foreign imports, outsourcing labor there. It's a matter of time until this current generation of Chinese take control, and push their country into the 21st century to join the rest of the modern world.
Granted human rights are just that human, they should apply to all peoples, but life isn't that simple. It doesn't always happen like that, freedom isn't free, it comes with a price, sometimes that price is in human life, sometimes the cost is time. Time to grow, and learn, or just plain time for a new generation to take over and say "let's do it our way".
Until such a time, I don't think we as a planet need to hinder their growth, while government actions still should not be condoned, it would be better to show them how life can be when government doesn't control everything you read, watch, do, or say.
Here's to the inevitable day when there is a truely free and unified China.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It also conflicts with one of the supposed strengths of capitalism, that consumers can be informed of the ethics of the companies they do business with. Now Americans are shitty shitty capitalists, we protest the sweatshops but we still buy the shoes. But the basic idea still stands, if China wants to isolate it's ethics then they need to be isolated in every other way as well, economically, scientifically, and politically. If they don't want to
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a pretty dramatic story, actually. The nationals had chased the communists all the way from southern China up to the north, spent months doing so in what is known as Mao's Long March, and were finally about to crush the rebellion. The nationals were camped at the ancient hot springs outside Xi'an (these springs have been in use by kings in China for 1,500 years at least). The Japanese had invaded, but the leader still wanted to crush the Communists before facing the Japanese. At that critical moment, some of the nationalist troops kidnapped the nationalist leader and forced him to give up chasing the Communists. This event is memorialized in Communist tradition as 'the Xian incident.'
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
But, the government of China isn't interested in the unbiased version of history. I'm sure the same can be said for Western governments on some topics as well to be fair.
It purely is about being able to control perception of their own citizens by controlling the message. "We have always been at was with East Anglia" from 1984 comes to mind.
Chairman Mao himself was the one who laid down the foundation for controlling the message of history. Make them believe your version of events, and you can shape how they'll feel about future events.
The more they can pretend that Tibet has always been under the direct control China, and that the people who lived in Tibet were "liberated" from slavery and serfdom when the Chinese army came in, the more they can change the focus of the issue. Their claim is that the people lived under a cruel and oppressive theocracy, and the Dalai Lama is secretly a villain is designed to support their position.
Sadly, if you get the whole Chinese populace riled up into thinking that everyone is picking on them, they have no strong basis for comparison. Heck, it's not like most of them know about what actually happened in Tianamen Square. They certainly don't really understand the oppression that has happened in Tibet over the last 50 years.
And, don't get me started on the Panchen Lama debacle -- the Chinese government don't feel the need to tell the truth about such things. They have always manipulated the truth to their own ends.
It is often hard to tell when the Chinese nationals are shouting down dissenting points of view if they actually believe that crap, or if they're just doing what they're told. I have a suspicion that a lot of them (even the ones here in Canada who were protesting against Western media bias last week) honestly don't know any different version of events. Therefore, they assume that we really are trying to hurt their national pride. They don't want to be told that their government is and has been lying to them.
Misinformed nationalism can be manipulated in lots of ways by those in power. As I said, I suspect some of it happens in the West as well. The "Us vs Them" mentality that it drives doesn't always help with informed debate.
Cheers
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, all that is true. And, it saddens me to see it happen.
However, I should imagine that after 50 years of occupation, loss
What the CCP isn't telling the Chinese population (Score:5, Informative)
What would the Chinese people be doing today if they'd been under constant genocidal foreign rule for two or three generations, under daily humiliation, millenia of their invaluable cultural heritage destroyed, their own language, religion, identity and history all but banned and twisted to serve the occupiers, their homeland flooded with ever greater numbers of aliens who consider themselves culturally and racially superior...?
The Han Chinese hate even the partial and relatively brief Japanese invasion in the 1930s and the trade imperialism by the Western colonial powers as absolute evils so why can't they possibly understand why the totally non-Chinese people of Tibet are desperate for their own freedom from colonial brutality under China?
But importantly, what the CCP proparanda machine isn't telling to the Chinese people is that the riots in Lhasa on the 14th of March started only after several days of *peaceful* demonstrations (starting on March 10th, the day of Tibetan Uprising in 1959) during which the Chinese paramilitary (PAP) violently beat and imprisoned a number of Tibetan monks. Monks are revered in Tibet as if they were one's family members, which they often are!
Also, there has been dozens of large demonstrations [phayul.com] (in chinese) [middle-way.net] all over Tibet (more than half of which was annexed into neighbouring Chinese provinces in the 1960s by the Chinese communists!) consisting of tens of thousands of Tibetans. All have been violently suppressed by the PAP, with hundreds of Tibetans dead (nearly 200 confirmed), hundreds more wounded or badly injured without medical care and several thousand Tibetans detained in the not-very-pleasant Chinese jails where abuse and torture in endemic, especially for the Tibetans.
These demonstration against Chinese misrule are still flaring up daily with the same results.
So yes, it is very sad that some young Tibetans' emotions boiled over and some Hans were attacked and some died while hiding inside the Chinese-owned buildings, but please, please try to also look at these issues from the Tibetans' perspective.
Yes, the western media also made some mistakes in labelling a few photos (though do realize that the Nepalese police were indeed beating and jailing Tibetans there at China's behest and for no other reason), but don't you think that the security cam footage from Lhasa, repeated ad nauseaum by the CCTV, was extremely selectively screened for propaganda purposes, and not just by mistake? The Chinese security apparatus has surveillance cameras at absolutely every part of Lhasa.
If the CCP has nothing to hide, why did they evict all foreigners and journalists from all Tibetan areas? Why are they promising massive 100,000 yuan (or well over $1000) reward for anyone who may have filmed the demonstrations and especially the bloody crackdowns that inevitably followed? Why is the CCP confiscating Tibetans' mobile phones, cameras and computers? Why does the CCP refuse even international (UN) observers and medical groups entry into Tibet?
"Free Tibet" is about Tibetans ruling themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.
Re:What the CCP isn't telling the Chinese populati (Score:3, Insightful)
While we can't rely on what the Chinese government tells us, it is just as risky relying on what the Tibetan-in-exile tells us. For one, the Tibetan movements are backed by some influence like the CIA behind the back [wikipedia.org] which, of course, would be very interested in having the US to deploy missiles over in Tibet.
The Chinese government have acknowledged atrocities occurred in the 1960's and 70's but those were due to Mao's Cultural Revolution which affected all of China and not just Tibet. In the current times
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
While I appreciate the point you're trying to make (and, in fact, some Quebecois are doing exactly that), the situations are somewhat different.
Nobody is accusing China of human rights abuses because they won't grant independence to Tibet. They're accusing them of human rights abuses because of the documented cases of arresting the monks and nuns, torturing or killing them, trying to force them to renounce their religion and the Dalai Lama, displacing locals and moving in large quantities of Chinese citizens to settle Tibet
To the best of the knowledge of anyone who lived in Tibet previous to the Chinese occupation
Believe me, I don't claim to have a viable solution to Tibet, Quebec, Kosovo, or any other such conflict. If I did, I'd be the one with the Nobel Peace Prize and not the Dalai Lama.
These things are complicated, and greater minds than mine haven't solved them yet. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion and see the different points of view as best I can.
Cheers
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Have monks and nuns been tortured? How many? Have locals been "displaced"? Have they been forced to move from where they were living before? How many? How valuable was the land that they lived on?
The problem I am having is that one side claims that these things are happening, the other side claims that they are not. Some times they agree that the thing happens but disagree on numbers by many orders of magnitude (ex: one side says 100s killed the other side says 100,000s killed when China invaded Tibet).
I am struggling to find clear documented evidence of these great "human rights" abuses. Of course, I am also finding no evidence that such things did not occur.
I cannot get factual answers to the following:
1. How many native Tibetans have advanced degrees?
2. What percentage of the bureaucracy in Tibet has native Tibetans in it?
3. What is the ratio of Tibetans to non Tibetans?
4. What geographic region is precisely the one being argued out about? It seems that there are edge case territories in the boundary that change the counting system when they are included or excluded.
5. Who exactly is participating in the turmoil in Tibet? Are normal everyday Tibetan citizens engaged in this? Again I get two sides claiming different facts.
6. What precise religious rights were taken away from native Tibetans?
7. What percentage of native Tibetans see the Dalai Lama as a great religious figure?
Every fact I have seen claimed seems to have no really strong foundation when you go inspect the original materials. If anybody can provide better sources of information, that would be great.
The problem of course is that China is in the best position to have accurate answers to these questions. But there is not a single example in history (counter examples are welcome) of self-appointed leaders (of reasonably large countries) ever providing non propaganda versions of information to others.
Re:Uh.. (Score:4, Informative)
The best single thing I've ever seen is a documentary film called Cry of the Snow Lion [cryofthesnowlion.com]. A lot of film which was smuggled out of Tibet which the Chinese government would rather never happened.
But, there are likely a lot of news footage and the like from when it all happened.
Some of your questions are strange -- how many Tibetans with advanced degrees for instance. They were largely an agrarian/livestock based culture, so not a whole lot of universities except the monasteries. Some of them just sound like they're designed so they either can't be discredited or to show how much life has been improved by the presence of the Chinese -- there was no bureaucracy for them to participate in before the Chinese came, the monks were the government. The Dalai Lama was the head honcho. Who knows what a couple of generations under Chinese rule have done to peoples opinions and the like.
Most of the entire Tibetan Plateau was devoid of Han Chinese, and the Chinese government has been moving large quantities their people into the region, building railroads, and generally making their presence known. Tibetans are ethnically and linguistically different from Chinese, and they've become a largely marginalized minority.
A google search might not readily turn it up, and I certainly can't give you numbers or statistics. But, I will say that a tremendous amount of this is documented historical fact, and the fact that several 10's of thousands of people walked over the Himalayas (not exactly a walk in the park) to escape wasn't so they could perpetrate a big historical fraud on the rest of us and claim all of this when they could have stayed home and had tea.
Most countries have a population of Tibetan immigrants who have been trickling out for the last five decades to escape the oppression. I won't even try to provide you corroborating evidence here. I've been satisfied with the evidence provided to me, but I'm hardly a store house of it.
People have been protesting and railing about this for a very long time. It's not like these are new or extra-ordinary claims being made.
Cheers
Re:Uh.. (Score:4, Informative)
Or Hanging Louis Riel in the 1880's?
Shooting the people protesting against the conscription in WW-I?
Ditto for WW-II
Or is it in october 1970, when martial law was declared and the political opponnents of Trudeau were jailed without trial???
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that Chiang was exactly an angel, either, but - had the Chinese Civil War played out differently - the country might have been spared a generation having its soul ripped from it as a hyper-Stalinist slave-labour state. But I digress.
While support of the right of Tibetans to national and cultural self-determination is laudable, one must also have some recognition of China's recent history. The Chinese are very sensitive to anything they perceive as an attempt to divide (or even dismember) their country. This perception is quite understandable, given the number of foreign colonies, puppet states, spheres of influence, and disvestitures that China saw in the 19th and 20th centuries. They're not anxious to see Tibet become another Mongolia (which exists as an independent country today only because Josef Stalin wanted to be able to station troops within 500 km of Beijing) or Manchukuo (Japanese puppet régime in North China).
Given the circumstances - rather than demand Tibetan independence - I think that a much more reasonable solution would be encourage China to adopt a 'one country, different systems' policy similar to how it has handled Macau and Hong Kong, where I've personally had the opportunity to see Falun Gong meetings taking place, in the open and unmolested, within sight of the PRC flag flying over Bauhinia Square.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It struck me as I read that that I've heard this line before in another sphere.
It's exactly what (some, mainly republican) Americans say about the rest of the world's concerns about pollution and global warming.
It's a conspiracy to stop the US being succesful, driven by jealousy of what they are achieving.
In both cases it's ludicrous.
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Interesting)
To be honest, I'm far more concerned about that than Al-Qaeda. Remember what happened the last time nationalism was this rampant and blind? 2 countries were invaded - 1 without any reason. Furthermore, many of the internal violence across the world can be traced to excessive attachment to a particular tribe/ethnicity/nation. The exception to that are the various communist movements and drug cartels.
Here's something else I've learned from the comments left by Chinese nationalists on various blogs and news stories: they have less in common with me than I have in common with Iraqis. Their concept of free speech is completely different. Their concept of human rights is completely different. Their concept of historic relativism is completely different. Here's what I see:
Chinese nationalists value territorial integrity, international face, unity and harmony above all. I value individual self-determination and free speech above all - in other words, chaos over harmony.
You can easily see this in their rage against news outlets, where a bad story about a Chinese government action is taken as an insult from all of western civilization against all of China.
Re:Uh.. (Score:5, Funny)
As nationalism increases, the probability of being pissed off at the French approaches one.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As for 9/11- the most horrific attack against civilians? Please. It doesn't rate in the top 100, it probably barely makes the top thousand. I can think of a dozen worse ones in this century alone, starting with the rape of Nanking, the firebombing of Dresden, and two nuclear bombs dropped by the US.
As for America being attacked for being successful- nope. We were attacked for being arrogant an
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They're Right (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They're Right (Score:5, Interesting)
But in this day and age of "remote" media, there is no (visual) connection between people - and the assumption fails at the very premise.
If Tibetans had an army, fought a war - and lost - they would have a much better say.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They're Right (Score:5, Interesting)
A LETTER FROM AN ORDINARY CHINESE
When we were seen as "Sick Men from East Asia", we were called The Peril.
When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.
When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!
So, we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communists.
Then we learned from Capitalism, you hated us for being Capitalists.
When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
So we tried to limit our population, you said it was Human Rights Abuse.
When we were poor, you think we are dogs.
When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.
When we build our industries, you blame us for global warming.
When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.
When we buy oil, you called that exploitation and assisting genocide.
When you fight for oil, you called that Liberation of Its People.
When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
When we uphold our law and order against violence, you called that Violating Human Rights.
When we were silent, you said we have No Free Speech.
When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed".
"Why do you hate us so much?" We asked.
"No" You answered, "We don't hate you."
Truth is we really don't hate you either, but do you understand us?
"Of course we do" You said, "We have BBC, CNN and AFPs."
So we ask you now "What do you really know and want from us?"
And "Why do you find it SO hard to accept us?"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When we were seen as "Sick Men from East Asia", we were called The Peril.
When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
Strong things *are* a threat.
When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
The major source of opiates, the drug of choice for centuries in China, is your neighbor Afghanistan. Don't blame us for that.
When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.
No we don't. That's why there aren't petitions to China to change what they charge. We blame our trade agreements with you for costing us jobs and try to change US consumers and leaders.
When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
As someone from a country that provided troops and supplies to you during WWII, has never invaded you (minus perhaps a few miles near the Korean border after you a
Britain invaded China to force opium trade (Score:4, Insightful)
Talk about ignorance. The behavior of the British in China was flat-out evil. From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
China banned the trade and importation of opium, on the basis that "Opium is a poison, undermining our good customs and morality. Its use is prohibited by law." They even wrote to Queen Victoria, asking why, since opium was banned in Britain, the British continued to sell it in China. When China seized opium from British traders who violated the law, Britain responded by invading China, seizing territory and forcing China to allow the opium trade. Other countries achieved similar concessions (including at least the French French, Italian, American sand Japanese). At one point, the British army marched to Beijing and burned down the Old Summer Palace, then said to be one of the wonders of the world .
The Chinese are on firm ground when they criticize past Western behavior in China. They are often correct when they describe our current policies and attitudes as hypocritical and self-serving. I detect an undertone of racism, or at least of xenophobia, in much of what is said about China. These are echoed by many Chinese, in China and in the West. We need to get beyond resentment, arrogance, and paranoia on both sides. The Chinese government is brainwashing its citizens. But (as a student of Communication) I can assure you, our media is doing something similar (in response to different pressures). Even though few people pursue alternative sources of information, it is important that in the West we are permitted access to them. For example, here's an in-depth argument [slashdot.org] by an expert that the Western media have slandered China with respect to Tibet. I haven't assessed it in detail, and I don't think it exonerates the Chinese government, but it is clear there's much more to this than we're hearing.
I live in Vancouver. Chinese comprise a large proportion of the population here. To stereotype a little, they are thoughtful, productive, essential members of my society. The same is true in Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa. For me, Canada would not be Canada without them. It saddens me greatly to witness the hatred directed toward them, just as it saddens me to see so many intelligent people (on both sides) follow the party line on Tibet.
Re:They're Right (Score:4, Informative)
A growing market will destabilize existing markets until they themselves are saturated. It's not just China, it's India, Brazil, and Russia (again) - all striving to be superpowers themselves. Unfortunately corruption and a lack of transparency hamstring each of you and it's beginning to tear the United States apart as well.
> When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.
> When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.
> When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.
This is a lie, since your trade is not 'Free', but listening to your compatriots whine about Indonesians taking your jobs is amusing.
> When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
Ah, yes, I suppose we should have let Japan run free and build the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. How many Nankings do you want?
> When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!
It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.
> So, we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communists.
Except you didn't, you were Maoists.
> Then we learned from Capitalism, you hated us for being Capitalists.
Except you're not.
> When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
No, we said 'the planet is starving', and an American man showed you how to feed a billion people.
> So we tried to limit our population, you said it was Human Rights Abuse.
No, when you perform gender-specific abortions, we called -that- a human rights abuse.
> When we were poor, you think we are dogs.
I think it's a pity, when entire rivers are drained dry and water supply is intentionally misregulated.
> When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.
Who's blaming -you-? You could always not lend, but that's not an option for you. When two people place themselves into a mutual trap the fault is not the sole fault of one or the other.
> When we build our industries, you blame us for global warming.
And we blame ourselves too. The corruption inherent to your coal industry is not our fault.
> When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.
Lead and arsenic in products is, by Western standards, inferior. Your point?
> When we buy oil, you called that exploitation and assisting genocide.
When did we say that? It's a bit ironic since:
> When you fight for oil, you called that Liberation of Its People.
Iraqi oil is for you, not us.
> When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
America has long appreciated peace. Peace is good for business. These past few decades have been an odd spot.
> When we uphold our law and order against violence, you called that Violating Human Rights.
Murdering intellectuals and running over protesters with tanks is generally called that by us, yes. We like to think that you got the Great Leap Forward out of your system. Do you even -know- about that?
> When we were silent, you said we have No Free Speech.
When people are arrested for making dissenting statements, we call that a move against free speech.
> When we are NOW
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.
Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.
Let's start the discussion with a wholehearted "fuck you". Consider it as a badge of honor, since I don't think I've been using this level of profanity since my first comment on slashdot.
> When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.
Nobody said USA "forced them open with drugs and guns". When this began to happen USA didn't even exist. Heh. Or you'd think the USA is the only Western country? Get a perspective. Take a look at the Opium Wars [wikipedia.org].
> When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!
It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.
The Tibet occupation/invasion was not a religious crusade of any kind. Unlike you Americans and those bible-lov
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Remember why people object to Guantanamo Bay. It has little or nothing to do with the treatment of the prisoners; people who have actually been there, even those very critical of the facility, find no fault there. (What few allegations there are show every sign of having been trumped up by the terrorists if you actually investigate it, and that is literally out of the terrorist playbook... and by literally, I mean that
Re:They're Right (Score:4, Insightful)
Perfect example of what? All I see is an inability to tell the difference. Tibet was a peaceful neighbor before it was invaded. Iraq had invaded two countries in the last 25 years. Iraq had invested heavily in a nuclear weapons program. Iraq donated considerable funds to terrorist groups. Iraq was a ruthless totalitarian state (even China is far better off now than Iraq was then). Tibet was a theocratic backwater, but it was never as disfunction or dangerous as Iraq was under Saddam Hussein. All of the current presidential candidates agree on leaving Iraq (except possibly a token military force, much like Germany). They only disagree on when and whether to set up a schedule ahead of time. Instead China claims that Tibet is as much a part of China as any other part of China.
We all are flawed. But there are things you cannot sanction. The best you can do is to try to do is to try to make the world a better place both at home and elsewhere. It is foolish to ignore a great evil elsewhere merely because your folk did something similar (possibly even worse) not so long ago. It remains a great evil.
No matter how the current Chinese government spins it, the occupation of Tibet remains a great evil. Tibet was an independent country when it was invaded and posed no threat to China. As I see it, it's only crime was that it was weak.
Further I don't see the government of China as legitimate. Who selected China's head of state? Who makes China's laws? Where in those processes do the Chinese people have a say? The US could be considerably more democratic, but they at least pick their head of state and the entire legislature via election. Those people are affirmed by the people with every vote. That is legitimacy. Further, the US citizen is permitted to complain, criticize, and denounce whatever they want to with mild restriction (you cannot legally incite public panic, reveal state secrets or medical information, say untrue things about another person or organization, etc). Despite what some slashdotters say here, that's what you can do in the US. Most stuff that would get you jailed in China, doesn't raise an eyebrow in the US.
As a citizen of the US, I have voted in every presidential election since 1988 (and most of the off year ones) and affirm every one of those elections. I have served in a jury. I have paid my taxes and obeyed (up to minor traffic violations) the laws of my land. By each of these acts, I reinforce the legitimacy of my government. The government and its citizens are occasionally stupid, but the system works pretty well. I've never had to watch my tongue for fear that I might say something unpleasing to some government official or bureaucracy. Sure, my government, my society, and I have done things which I am ashamed of. But I don't see how that should keep us from judging one another. The "flaws" in governments and countries kill people. We need justice at the international level not hollow laws that only the strong can break with impunity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Iraq had invaded two countries in the last 25 years. Iraq had invested heavily in a nuclear weapons program. Iraq donated considerable funds to terrorist groups
USA has invaded countless countries in the last 25 years. USA has the most extensive nuclear weapons program. USA funds many terrorist groups....
What's the difference? That the allegations against the USA are actually TRUE? (instead of some fabricated shit created by the US media-propaganda)
American invaded Iraq who posed no real threat. Where's the "difference" you speak of? If a "threat" to the rest of the world is a reason for invasion, the USA should be the first country to be exterminated from the fac
Re:They're Right (Score:5, Insightful)
Better a hypocrite than a slave to tyrants.
Re:They're Right (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, tells us then ... what is the source of your moral absolutism?
If it is any of "God", "because we say so", or "it should be self evident", you lose.
Morality comes from a reasoned assertion, a religious assertion, or the belief that the Universe had a plan in mind. It is not physics or mathematics, but a convention chosen and applied by men. It is most certainly not an inherent fact of the Universe.
I fail to see how you can asse
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not about condoning others' moral beliefs, it's about acknowledging that they have them, and are sincere about them, and might even be rather attached to them, and then modifying your behavior so that you can get along with them.
Unless you want to convert the world to your own particular morality (i.e., destroy freedom), you have to live and let live to a certain extent. You don't have to endorse others' beliefs to acknowledge that they
No, they are not (Score:5, Insightful)
No they aren't. There's no censorship in the west to the extent there is China. There's no individual right to keep and bear arms in China like there is in the west. The differences are staggering and people that proclaim dictatorship whenever politics don't go their way do more to undermine the very definition of what a dictatorship really is.
Re:No, they are not (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you mean by "west"? Is this U.S. American arrogance or ignorance? I am from Western Europe. Last time I checked we were part of the "West [wikipedia.org]." European countries tend to have much tighter gun laws than the United States. When I was in graduate school in physics in the U.S. I had friends from all over the world, including Europe and all of them agreed with me on thinking that Americans are crazy to tolerate their lax gun ownership laws. In fact all agreed that guns do not belong in the hands of civilians with the possible exception of hunting rifles. So be careful when you say "we", you Americans do not automatically speak for all Westerners. (A good example would have been the initiation of the Iraq invasion.) Of course I agree on your other point about the extent of censorship in the West vs. China even though I had my doubts about the U.S. in this area just prior to the Iraq invasion.
the us slaughtered native americans (Score:4, Insightful)
both of these things are wrong
however, you wish to use events of 200 years ago and 1000 years ago to excuse and condone the same kind of colonization by han imperialists in tibet today, or the actions of violent muslim fundamentalists today
this is not morality or a human conscience
the only morally and intellectually defensible position is to condemn:
1. the slaughter of native americans
2. european crusaders
3. han imperialism
4. violent muslim fundamentalism
condemn all of it. that's morality and intellectual honesty
to excuse 3 and 4 because of 1 and 2 is i don't know exactly what, but its not morality or intellectual honesty. its some sort of weird kind of attempt to avoid a human conscience
Re:They're Right (Score:4, Insightful)
They should call us on the things we do just as much as we should call them on the things they do.
China's government is evil. Why shouldn't we be able to say that?
Re:They're Right (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Capable of stopping: no.
There is an important difference there.
Re:They're Right (Score:5, Interesting)
I've said it once, and I'll say it again. We are in a state of economic mutually-assured destruction.
They call in our debt: our economy collapses. They can't sell their shit to us anymore. Their economy collapses.
We stop buying their shit: Their economy collapses and they're forced to call in their debt. Our economy collapses.
While China's economic strength is tied to ours, our strength is just as equally tied to theirs.
History (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to say nationalism is the new evil, but, unfortunately it's been around for as long as there has been nations.
Re:History (Score:5, Insightful)
Not true, really. A lot of Americans were either ambivalent or against the war. It's just that our news media decided that they supported the war and that serious foreign policy thinkers were those that 1) supported the war, and 2) show up in the same cozy Washington/NYC cocktail party circuit as the reporters. Part of this was because the Republican party made damn sure to question the patriotism and intelligence of anyone who didn't strictly believe the Bush administration's bullshit.
One day, I hope to have a full accounting of exactly how intentionally bullshitty the case for war really was, as well as some nice war crimes trials in the Hague for the responsible party. I'll not be holding my breath.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hmmmm...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:History (Score:5, Informative)
You know full well it was precisely because the french were not only not going to commit forces to Iraq, but actively opposed it and rubbished the evidence. They turned out to be correct.
yes, they may have had dodgy financial involvements in the region, but it was the sheer gall to oppose the US in its supposed hour of need (bullcrap) that caused the backlash.
Re:Spare me the French apologia (Score:5, Insightful)
You might not like the French, but they were still right about Iraq.
Re:History (Score:5, Insightful)
A pretty significant number of people both in Europe and the Middle East would thank you if you did.
Mod Parent UP PLEASE (Score:5, Insightful)
This makes me feel good actually. Don't you think the world would be better off if the USA had business office overseas, rather than troops. I keep asking myself, what country in their right mind really likes having foreign troops on its soil. I mean, I wouldn't really care for it too much if a German division was stationed in Delaware, and I can't imagine the Germans feel any differently. Now with the USA and UK, its a different animal and for some reason I could see the British being in the USA just because my grandfather and my wife's grandfather fought in the Pacific during World War II and to this day I am grateful that the British sent the largest fleet they ever produced (18 aircraft carriers, 4 battleships, and more), to have Seafires flying CAP over American landing forces at Okinawa. And, the British are with us in Iraq...
I keep thinking that the perception of America military hegemony with troops all across the globe is bad for public relations. The Cold War is over... if someone invades Europe, America will be there to defend you, but right now, I honestly think the best thing for the USA is to be a trading empire, not a military one.
I do not want the USA to make the Athenien mistake.
The reaction should not be surprising (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically, what's going to happen is that the pro-Tibet folks will be squelched, either by the Great Firewall of China, imprisonment, or self-censorship, and so only those voices advocating the pro-Tibet stance will be allowed through the filtering and be heard as the "popular" sentiment of the Chinese people.
Re:The reaction should not be surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
I was born in China but I grew up overseas. I have tons of relatives who live all over the world, from Paris to New York. They have access to all the information in the world.
But let me tell you this: Not a single person in my family supports Tibetan independence. Everyone supports the Olympics 100%.
My grandparents were Party members so we are relatively well off. Most of my aunts and uncles had university education and my cousins are studying overseas. These are people who regularly criticize the government in daily conversations over things like corruption and bureaucratic inefficiencies, because they are well-informed and aware of what is happening.
Westerners just can't grapple with the reality that the Chinese government is still generally popular and it's people, though overly addicted to nationalism and cultural pride, are NOT ignorant slaves that your corporate media and your condescending feel-good activists like you to believe.
I personally am very much against the operating principals of the Chinese government, as are my parents. But I think this whole Olympic protest business is just bullshit. It will only strengthen ugly nationalism and serve as an ego trip for those hippie protesters.
To fucking hell with karma.
Re:The reaction should not be surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
The Olympics are a waste of time. They have become too politicized and too many dedicate their whole lives and their families make sacrifices only to see governments like China's play it for all it is worth for propaganda.
I haven't watched them in years - even when they have been in the USA.
What's wrong with Tibetan independence? What's wrong with Taiwanese independence? China is way too nationalistic, expansionistic, and subversive for western investment. Opening trade with China, especially in anything high-technology has been a big mistake. They abuse western trust.
And you attitude is a window into that behavior.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
but it would be interesting to hear your opinion on the TIBETAN protestors, which, here in midtown manhattan near the UN, i've been seeing almost daily for the last few weeks
in other words, its one thing for you to dispute the words of idiotic westerners, which i agree with you about. but one would be really interested to hear in what way you dismiss the concerns of tibetans themselves
i think real peace in tibet comes when the han colonists stop treating the ti
True (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Must supporting Tibet and the Olympics be mutually exclusive?
2. Talking to my Chinese friends (I have many), almost none have ever actually seen CNN. They have A. read www.anti-cnn.com or B. read or seen about it in Chinese media.
3. China is not the last bastion of independent thought, nor is the USA for that matter. Chinese people almost never seek out secondary sources of information, either because of lack of education (cannot read English, etc), Western media is blocked (i've lived there, don't tell me it is not true, though it is accessible if you know where to look), or lack the desire, or discipline, to seek out other perspectives.
When I lived in Beijing from 2004-2006, I got the general feeling that Chinese were enamored with Tibet and thought they were doing no wrong when they brought development to Tibet. So naturally, Chinese think they are in the right. By human nature, people will believe what they want to believe, and furthermore, people develop strong convictions based on little or no information.
Another thing is that the Chinese have demonized the Dalai Lama, which is somewhat absurd. They cannot in any demonstrable way connect him to the violence. Furthermore, the Dalai Lama is a wily politician who has forged relationships with powerful people in the West, whereas the Chinese have little guanxi outside their own nation, save countries they are pouring money into.
Like I tell my Chinese friends, if I want to know what bad things Taiwan has done this week, I'll read Xin Hua or People's Daily. They are at least as crappy as CNN, though they are a different kind of poison than CNN.
One lesson China should be taking from this, and I have seen no evidence of this so far, is that they really need to do a better job of Public Relations. Frequently my Chinese friends, try to make the argument that Bush would not let Texas separate from the USA (I am from Texas), just as China would not let Tibet separate. To which I reply, Texas was already an independent nation, and if you really want a compelling argument, read about the American Civil War on Wikipedia (har har).
I have a fair number of friends from Taiwan as well, and I have guaged their reaction to be a combination of A. Apathy, because Taiwan has been going through this sort of nonsense for a long time, and they are sick of it B. Not agreeing with violence from either party C. Some empathy for the Tibetans, because the Olympics presents them with a rare opportunity to gain media attention.
So, what to take from all this. I'm not quite certain, because I do not have all the information. I am sympathetic to both sides. Living in China was the happiest part of my life.
My feeling is, if China wants to be a great nation, they need to act like a great nation, not whine on anti-cnn online forums.
West is appalled to futile suffering (Score:3, Insightful)
Westerners just can't grapple with the reality that the Chinese government would participate in such embarrassing lies and historical revisionism. At least in the west we are cynical about what the establishment feeds us
Totalitarian regime (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Totalitarian regime (Score:4, Insightful)
a little note (Score:5, Funny)
thank you,
the internet users who aren't douchebags
Matter of culture (Score:4, Insightful)
That and people don't like to be told why their country is bad. Just look at America.
Re:Matter of culture (Score:5, Insightful)
This is rubbish. There are always large numbers of Americans to be found who hate Bush and the Iraq invasion and are willing to say so loudly. For Pete's sake there are plenty of idiots who believe Bush planned 9/11.
Similarly, in Europe, there are lots of anti-government groups (just look at the anti-globalism nuts) who get lots of airtime.
Wherever the whole country agrees, you can be sure you're not in a western democracy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:so if you go over the urals, (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying that people are fundamentally different in China, but rather that you just can't discount millennia of cultural influence. The West has certainly had its aristocracies, but it was never as rigid as it was in China. Western society, even in such stratified cultures as England was for centuries, simply did not have the absolute respect or fear of authority that you find in China.
I can also understand the position of the Chinese government. They saw the absolute chaos that reigned in Russia for a decade, the loss of key parts of the Soviet Empire, the ethno-religious war in Chechnya and the break down of social order. They have taken a much slower approach to reform, and to an extent I can appreciate that, but for them it's still the ancient cultural motif of a remote and isolated ruling class. Only in the last few years have they finally started to deal with the millennia-old problem that came from that system, and that's a corrupt bureaucracy.
Still, that's a Chinese problem, but the invasion and attempted cultural genocide of Tibet is something else entirely.
Brilliant, evil, or both? (Score:5, Interesting)
Having observed the Dali Lama's tours and speeches for the last few year I find Chinese media assertion that The Dali Lama is running a terrorist network absurd, but their reporting to the contrary might be causing Tibetan supporters of the Dali Lama to become more extreme as the only media source available to them tell them that the Dali Lama is urging armed uprising.
In many ways the Chinese government is seeding the dissent which will give them an excuse for violent oppression of the Tibetan people. I am not sure whether this is evidence of a brilliantly executed evil agenda or standard government incompetence.
so the french get it both ways (Score:4, Funny)
Re:so the french get it both ways (Score:5, Funny)
Re:we have a winner (Score:5, Funny)
In all this noise... (Score:3, Interesting)
Just think about that, for a moment...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Welcome to the 21st century (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a lot of Chinese (national) friends, even one who is a member of the CCP. They definitely take the Tibet protests personally. The CCP has been very clever at manipulating national sentiment on this issue, and it is very interesting to me because it is a clash between the western narrative of China as a brutal oppressor and the eastern narrative of the west as a patronizing colonial force.
Talking to Chinese of all stripes, I find they don't understand the western image of China is a man standing down a tank. That isn't the life they came from. On the other hand, most can't grapple with the Maoist atrocities. They're taught all about the opium wars and colonialism, though. So when east meets west, both sides see the world in very different light.
Personally, while I do worry about Tibetan culture being diluted and people being oppressed, I'm not sure that (a) I have the moral standing to tell others not to opppress people (It's not like we're going to offer Hawaii autonomy now, is it?) (b) it's generally good for every ethnic group to live in its own autonomous enclave.
I also think that worrying about cultural dilution is something rich nations can ponder, along with rights for dogs, and all the other quandaries of affluence.
I do wish the Chinese would confront the human rights abuses in their past more fully. I wish they had better protections for workers and better labor laws. Communist regimes seem to always have this problem. If the government is made of labor unions ("soviets"), but the union is no longer responsive to the workers needs, who can they turn to?
It's not an idle question. Look at the coal mine riots in the USSR during the 30's. The workers "unionized" and complained about unsafe conditions and long hours. The government, nominally concerned primarily with the average worker, sent in the troops who busted the riot in a way that would make Pinkertons blush.
I'm not saying that's how life in China is, but I am saying it's a structural flaw of a one-party government. But if it looks like I'm casting stones from my glass house, I'd say that my own government was set up to have competition between branches that would protect my freedoms. However, the formation of political parties has lead to collusion between branches, undoing much of the good envisioned by the writers of our constitution. It'd be nice to have a structural change here to deal with that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this is a great example of what the 21st century has in store.
I have a lot of Chinese (national) friends, even one who is a member of the CCP. They definitely take the Tibet protests personally. The CCP has been very clever at manipulating national sentiment on this issue, and it is very interesting to me because it is a clash between the western narrative of China as a brutal oppressor and the eastern narrative of the west as a patronizing colonial force.
I very much agree with this. In highschool ~10 years ago, a good friend of mine was of Chinese origin. He had grown up in China until the age of 8, moved to Canada, and then to the US when he was 15.
Despite the fact that the majority of his thinking years were spent in Western countries, he was fiercely pro-Chinese government. He used to get in arguments with anyone that would bring up Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Tibet. Utterly unapologetic, and very much saw Americans/Westerners caring about these places as tr
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Read the wikipedia talk page - anyone on them related to the torch relay. Coming from nationalist family myself I can totally understand the knee jerk reaction from a Chinese - but it still baffles me that in this whole show, Tibetans are not even involved.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As for manipulating nationalism, you're spot on. There've been various stories in the past where there was conce
And the Chinese Communist Party.... (Score:3, Insightful)
The whole point of the protests is to embarrass the oligarchs, not to get the Chinese people to pay attention.
Sometimes it gets personal (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The last weekend in January I took a trip to Philly to pick up a car I'd bought. My eight year old daughter pleaded with me to go because she wanted to see the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, so picked up two extra one way tickets for her and my son and we flew out Friday morn.
Saturday, we spent all day at Independence hall, the National Constitution Center, and all that jazz. As we entered the building that houses the Liberty Bell (in which I had to submit to a search and I mused out loud,
Root problem: China's ownership claims over Tibet (Score:5, Insightful)
It is extremely rare to find a Chinese person who is willing to even listen to the Tibetans' own arguments about their millenia of independent history, not to mention about the horrors perpetrated by the CCP regime after Mao Zedong's 1950 invasion. Google for Grace Wang at Duke Uni. and "burned in oil" to learn how the true Chinese patriots deal with those of their own who merely want to promote debate.
For the Han Chinese race, and not just those still within the Great Firewall of China, this perceived imperial right to rule over neighbouring peoples has become an obsession, which is all the more ironic since the #1 pet hate of the Hans, basically taught since kindergarten, is against the foreign imperialists who "humiliated China" in the 19th and 20th centuries. The Chinese are taught, and this ideology only arose in the late 18th century, that the now billion+ overpopulated Han nation will violently break up if they allow their neighbouring peoples to regain their freedom and independence. (Why is that, btw.?)
Here's a fairly compact Aussie radio programme [abc.net.au], with a transcript, about the reasons why the Chinese rulers claim that Tibet and Tibetans are theirs to do what they wish. Basically, the Chinese regime claims that since both Tibet and China were (albeit in very different ways) ruled or under the protection (as Tibet was) by the same foreign power during roughly the same period, after that foreign rule had collapsed the Chinese emperor automatically assumed (perceived) ownership over Tibet as well, despite having no de facto control or rule over the Tibetan nation.
The ultra-nationalistic Chinese you may have seen screaming LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! to pro-Tibetan demonstrators during the CCP's recent global torch parade tend to shout slogans like "TIBET BELONGS TO CHINA!", but if you somehow manage to ask them on what basis, they'll either continue screaming or come up with wildly different historical explanations, ranging from a marriage between a powerful Tibetan king and a Chinese princess (they always forget the Tibetan and Nepalese princesses somehow) in the first millenium to the claims of the foreign Mongol rule (known as the Yuan dynasty in China) in the 13th and the foreign Manchu rule (the Qing dynasty for the Chinese) in the 17th centuries as giving the Mao Zedong's China the absolute right of ownership over Tibet. (waitasec, I thought the communists were totally against any such feudal claiming of lands and peoples??)
If only such mediaval imperial babble was the end of it, but unfortunately the brutal oppression and systematic destruction of Tibetan cultural heritage, identity and language which started with Mao's invasion in the 1950s is still going on [phayul.com] strong [phayul.com] today. Even sadder is that very few Chinese either know or choose to believe the horrors China has committed in Tibet over the last half century. Some, like the well-known Chinese dissidents Wei Jinsheng and Henry Wu Hongda, who spent years in a Tibetan prison unit alongside Tibetan prisoners of conscience, have told about their experiences, but why would the proud Chinese of today choose democracy and the admission of their own shame when the Communist Party is hauling in foreign money and promising unprecedented global power?
International law [tibetjustice.org] be damned [tibetjustice.org].
How much longer do the Tibetan people have to suffer until the Chinese learn that there are higher and more positive values in life than genocidal jingoism?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nationalist: sure. Valid? Not so much. (Score:3)
That doesn't make it right to colonize a whole people with a different language, a different alphabet, different customs, and a different religion.
Interesting factoid: there's oil in Tibet and lots of valuable minerals.
Re:Racist (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with your post about diversity,
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Brainwashed. (Score:5, Interesting)
I am currently teaching ESL in Korea.
there are a lot of Chinese people working in Korea, and since they speak limited English, and I am here with a friend who speaks Chinese, and we are foreigners in a strange land, we spend a lot of time together, talking.
One day, Tienanmen square came up, and they wondered why Westerners always made a big deal about that particular spot.
"it was just a bunch of bad students" one said to me. she knew something happened there one, but no specifics.
that was all they knew.
Tienanmen was just "A bunch of bad students"
I went online, showed them that famous footage.
there was shock, outrage, and disbelief.
2 of them now refuse to return to China.
makes you wonder what our governments are hiding from us.
My Chinese friends are always making little jabs at me here and there, because British Colonialism was so awful, and wrong. And being white makes me inherently guilty of everything wrong with the world. (despite the fact that i am not British)
They all agree that Tibet is a part of China
I told them all "fine, i will agree to that, Tibet is as much a part of China as India is a part of Britian."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And at least this American believes that patriotism is a huge problem. Unbridled patriotism; the thought that our country is the best and freest and can do no wrong is what got us into the Iraq war. As my sig says, patriotism is no different than racism, and should be fought just as vigorously.
Re: (Score:3)
At any rate, China has no more business ruling Tibet than Austria would Hungary. Trying to justify it with made-up stories about the state of the Tibetan people, particularly when it's China that's importing Han colonists to eventually wipe out a separate Tibetan people and culture is the wo