5
   

FREE TIBET!!!!...and then what?

 
 
fbaezer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 09:27 pm
@msolga,
I admit I'm not very familiar with the Tibetan situation.

To scape from oppression of the Beijing regime and fall into oppression of the oh-so-peaceful lamas?
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 09:38 pm
@hawkeye10,
Your citation of wiki merely proves my point that China is made up of more than Han. 92% does not equal 100%. Unless you think the 8 percent are invisible and non existent, therefore China is Han. That's what you're implying, so your point about me being an idiot if I say that America is Washintinions (which I DO NOT) applies equally to you.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Dec, 2008 10:13 pm
@fbaezer,
My argument is that people living in the situation should have the right to choose what is "good" for them. We should respect their rights to choose what they want, how they want to live. Of course, they may be choosing what turns out to be a rocky road. But that is their wish & their choice. That's what comes with autonomy, if ever it is achieved.

East Timor is one of the poorest countries in the world now. It became a part of Indonesia against the majority of the peoples' wishes after years of Portuguese (sp?) colonial rule. The East Timorese are Catholic in the majority & Indonesia is overwhelmingly Muslim. Years & years of struggle (with a horrendous human toll) meant that East Timor finally became independent from a very reluctant Indonesia. It is now a struggling, independent nation. High unemployment, social instability. A long way to go before it can stand capably on its own. Off-shore oil may proove be the life saver - IF the East Timorese retain control over it. But, I'm certain that if you asked them, you'd find many East Timorese would say the struggle was worth it. They would probably be much better off, financially as part of Indonesia. They would also most likely lose their identity, too. As is often the way in these situations, many of the "improvements ", the development (roads, business, education, etc) in East Timor were seen as part of the "Javanization" of their culture & country. I don't know how you can accurately measure loss of identity & rights against material improvements provided by what you consider to be an oppressive power. Me, I tend to have sympathy with those who are fighting against oppression. Who are we to tell them what is "best" for them?
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Dec, 2008 11:43 am
Quote:
BEIJING " The police have detained 59 people in Tibet on charges that they sought to foment unrest by spreading ethnic hatred and by downloading and selling banned songs from the Internet, Chinese state media reported Thursday.

The detainees, none of whom were identified, are accused of acting at the behest of the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader whom the government blames for encouraging separatist sentiment in heavily Tibetan areas.

Since Dec. 4, public security officials have been sweeping the markets of Lhasa looking for compact discs that contain “reactionary songs,” according to the China News Service. Those who distribute such songs, the report said, “hope to spark violence and damage Lhasa’s political stability.” Lhasa is the capital of the Tibet Autonomous Region of China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/world/asia/26tibet.html?_r=1&hp

For anyone who is still in doubt about the Han's controlling Tibet, and their unwillingness to reconsider overrunning and killing off Tibetan culture.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2009 07:07 pm
@hawkeye10,
Tibet has been part of China since the Mongols conquered China and Tibet. China protected Tibet from Nepal and India over the centuries. In their expansion of Indian territory, Imperial Britain tricked and massacred Tibet troops at the Tibetan border. They unilaterally drew the Macmahon Line that delineated the northern Indian border with Tibet and China to their own benefit. They sold opium to the Chinese and that is how Hong Kong came to be a British Colony. British Imperialist policies affected the whole region in a deleterious manner for the locals. Britain, Russia, France and Japan attacked a weakened China and carved it up to their own gains. Today the British including those from Ozzieland and crazies from 'Merrica are still trying to destroy China by interfering with internal Chinese matters. How about discussing Northern Ireland? Britain can't even get their own house in order. Is there no end to Zenophobia? Tibet is part of China as surely as the Ku Klaux Klan are Americans.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jan, 2009 07:21 pm
Don't forget that the recent violent riots in Lhasa were aimed at the Chinese and Chinese properties. The perpetrators were Tibetan monks who represent the ruling elite and do not represent the majority. They are the ones causing the trouble. There is no general unrest in Tibet. As Tibet is part of China don't the Chinese have the freedom to live anywhere in China?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 10:04 pm
Quote:
Lhasa's entire investigative police force mobilized more than 600 people and 160 vehicles to check 2,922 rented apartments or houses, 14 hotels and guesthouses, 18 bars, and three Internet cafes, the Lhasa Evening News said, according to a translation e-mailed by the International Campaign for Tibet, which advocates more autonomy for the Himalayan region. The police push follows 10 months of tight security after rioting broke out March 14, leading to the deaths of at least 18 civilians and one police officer and sparking anti-government protests and a massive government crackdown.


"Strike hard" campaigns have historically been launched in China to fight crime and corruption. But in this case, the Tibetan Center for Human Rights and Democracy said in a statement, "the motive is to intimidate and eliminate those supporting Tibetan independence and human rights activists in Tibet."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/28/AR2009012801176.html?hpid=topnews

china has no intention of allowing an ember of the freedom movement to ignite, they will rub out all traces of the " free Tibet" movement.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  2  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 09:37 pm
@msolga,
msolga wrote:

My argument is that people living in the situation should have the right to choose what is "good" for them. We should respect their rights to choose what they want, how they want to live. Of course, they may be choosing what turns out to be a rocky road. But that is their wish & their choice. That's what comes with autonomy, if ever it is achieved.

This is a really old thread I'm reviving, but ... the majority of the population of current-day Tibet is, apparently, already Han Chinese. "Native" Tibetans now form a minority. So that raises the question: who gets the right to choose what the future of Tibet should be? Everyone who lives there? Only those of the 'native' ethnic group? Only those who were born there? Or whose parents were born there?

These are questions that a simple invocation of the right to self-determination doesn't cover or resolve. It would be a dilemma very similar to that which played out in Latvia and Estonia after 1991, except the Latvians and Estonians at least still constituted some 50% and 60% of their republics' population. Wait another couple of generations, and won't the situation be more like that in Kosovo in the 90s, with the Tibetans in the unlikely role, demographicaly speaking, of Asian Serbs - formerly a majority in the territory, but long since outnumbered and outbred by a newly dominant majority population (be it, of course, without all the trappings of the economically and politically dominant group)?

Discuss. ;-)
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Thu 17 Jun, 2010 09:43 pm
@nimh,
Quote:
This is a really old thread I'm reviving, but ... the majority of the population of current-day Tibet is, apparently, already Han Chinese.
this did not "just happen"...it is the result of an active and productive effort on the part of the Chinese government to rub out Tibet. There is no longer any way to save Tibet,,,,it is a lost cause.
nimh
 
  3  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 04:12 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
this did not "just happen"...it is the result of an active and productive effort on the part of the Chinese government

I know. That's how it's like Latvia and Estonia, where the Soviets had deliberately encouraged migration to those republics to dilute the native populations, who were considered too unreliable. Doesn't change the dilemma though - the immigrants are still there, a hefty chunk of them were by now born there and lived there all their lives, and it's not their fault either.
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 04:17 am
@nimh,
or like the settlements in the west bank. oh well.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 04:19 am
@nimh,
Dammit...no quick solutions coming to my mind...except to be sad and angry with governments who do this stuff.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 07:00 am
@dagmaraka,
Mmmmm i think that's slightly different.

In both current-day china and the then-soviet union, workers moving to a job in latvia, georgia, tibet or xinjiang are/were merely moving within the accepted and functional territory of their country, and had little reason to think of themselves as anything but labour migrants looking for an opportunity. No state of war exists/ed, and circumstances in their new location must not have seemed particularly different from other far-flung places in their country they might have chosen, lured by government-provided subsidies, job opportunities and/or higher wages, to move to.

I think an Israeli moving into a settlement in the occupied territories is acting within a quite different context, and with much more specific motivations. I may be ill-informed, but I don't think there are many random internal migrants moving into the settlements for a better job or a better shot at a nice apartment. I think that this is much more a case of individuals consciously participating in an ideologically-inspired colonisation of territories which are inescapably marked by a near-continous insurrection, and which are not recognized internationally as the legal territory of Israel in the first place.

I mean, I can sort of see that this is a gliding scale of sorts. But still, if it is, the position of Israeli colonists, I think, is in a fairly substantially different place, no?
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 07:28 am
@nimh,
Actually, there were many random migrants merely looking for work and cheap housing, especially from former Russia... (few other problems attached to that particular group).

There is no one homogeneous group of settlers and the orthodox zealots who move there out of conviction do not constitute a majority these days anymore, or so I was told from several sources. Don't have any data, this is merely hearsay.
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 08:48 am
@dagmaraka,
(there are statistics about settlements. but since this is not a thread about them, i put it as a comment on the margin. here's a link to some: http://www.fmep.org/settlement_info/)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 10:47 am
@dagmaraka,
dagmaraka wrote:
the orthodox zealots who move there out of conviction do not constitute a majority these days anymore,

didnt know that. huh. well, ****.

i still think it's different though .. an israeli moving into the occupied territories vs a russian moving to riga in the soviet union..
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2010 11:08 am
@dagmaraka,
Sorry I havn't read through the entire posts, but here goes.

Unfortunaly too many countries has major economical interests in China, thus they won't provoke any dipomatic incidents, leaving Tibet screwed.

0 Replies
 
weiwei
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 07:09 am
Sorry. If a state of America claims sovereignty through "cry out for freedom", would you like to advocate them?

0 Replies
 
curefix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 Dec, 2010 08:44 pm
@dagmaraka,
I strongly recommend you to go that place and live half or one year so that you can feel and touch the real thing from the so called "independence" article.
And by the way, both argument and discussion are meaningless.
if you want truth, you'd better experience the truth.
0 Replies
 
Nonic
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2016 04:29 am
@dagmaraka,
I only know that I get on well with my tibetan roomates.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

6.9 Quake near Tibet - Discussion by Butrflynet
This time to China and Tibet for 22-days - Discussion by cicerone imposter
How about take a train to Tibet? - Question by Liffity
Ani Choying - Question by littlek
Protestors in London - You make me SICK. - Discussion by pragmatic
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/20/2019 at 05:19:55