No you do that by controlling the household registrations… same thing really.
After all I am Taiwanese and get a nice little green travel document that says I live in Taiwan Province. Now why would I need a visa and a travel document to board what should be a domestic flight?
Of course having too many HAN Chinese is detrimental in Tibet. They ruin everything do the HAN’s with their everybody is Chinese propoganda.
Last time I went to Shanghai they tried to tell me to get out of the PRC queue because I was the wrong race.
I have to go to Shanghai again on Monday and get the same shit again no doubt.
Good for you. But no one is claiming otherwise. Here a Han there a Han would make no difference.
In any case, while you do have a certain freedom of movement under the constitution, autonomous regions are given (in theory) so many rights to self-governing that there would be no mass Han migration without the direct and unconstitutional interference by the central government. Han are migrating in part because of direct subsidies. Without these very very few would move to Tibet: the climate and altitude are simply too harsh. Nor would they move if the education system, legal system, and media were all conducted in the Tibetan language as again the constitution provides. Nor if local self-governing administrations were given the right to resources again provided by law: most of the hydroelectric projects for one would have been halted, or at worst been directed to Tibetan enterprises and not Han.
To recap: without tax breaks, subsidies to electric production, free land; and faced with a legal, educational, media, and institutional environment that was Tibetan, very very few Han would take up residence in the TAR. And of course if Tibetans were actually running Tibet then that is the kind of environment that you would be facing.
If I were a Han, I would be angry that my government is both wasting funds to subsidize migration and not upholding the law of the land. :no-no:
You know what? That is a very good question. Why in the world should the good people of Taiwan need a visa to travel to China? But it doesn’t seem to me that it’s China who wants to keep it that way. If the people of Taiwan and their leaders want to make travel between China and Taiwan a domestic route, I can assure you no one in China will be against that.
So the question is, does China have a right to develop Tibet? The answer of course is yes. Nothing from China’s constitution or the 17 point agreement preclude that. Autonomy doesn’t mean you’re isolated from the rest of China. What you’re saying is akin to another example I used, that the US can declare the entire state Alaska off limits to non-native people, and then rationalize it by saying since Alaska is all snow and ice, who would want to live there anyway. It obviously doesn’t work that way. There are many reasons why the US want to develope Alaska just like China want to develope Tibet. There are economic reasons, strategic reasons, that’s going to benefit both the local population and the rest of the country.
And Tibetans DO have the right to use their own language. Tibetan is used in schools, in courts, and in local governments. There are Tibetan TV, radio, news programs, etc. What you’re saying about the environment being non-Tibetan is simply not true. The Chinese government has always respected minority languages. Just look at the reverse side of the Renminbe note and see how many languages are printed there.
No, it’s not akin to Alaska. As others have already pointed out, it’s akin to treaties with native Americans giving them land that they have the ultimate decision over and then barging in and developing that land anyway. I really think you’d be extremely hard pressed to find examples of that in the U.S. or Canada right now. I’m not American or Canadian, but I’m sure some North Americans here could shed some more light on that.
How many times do I need to say it? There’s nothing in the agreement with Tibet or in the constitution that prevents the Chinese government from developing Tibet. The Chinese government didn’t agree, ever, to give land to Tibetans where they have the ultimate decision over.
That is because Taiwan is not a part of China. :aiyo: :aiyo: Very few Taiwanese support Taiwan being a part of the greater PRC. As time goes by less and less want it. Many Taiwanese already do business in China and want no part of being a PRC Citizen or being part of China.
Mainlanders need visa’s to visit Taiwan because they come from another country, and they always cause a stink at the airport when told to stand in the foreigners queue, as they certain are not able to stand in the same queue as local citizens and other foreign residents.
Taiwan doesn’t have to be part of China. I’m sure Beijing is willing to work out some kind of Hong Kong-like model for Taiwan. Mainlanders need a special permit to visit Hong Kong too, that doesn’t mean Hong Kong is a different country. Same with Macau.
You show not the least awareness of how states are run. In any political entity there are various divisions with clear rules and laws laid out as to who can collect taxes, who can run a police force, who controls education, who has control over resources and critically what land is federal and what is state/provincial. You better believe the federal government in the US cannot just march in and start making decisions about how the state of Alaska or any other state is going to be developed. They don’t have that right under their constitution. Nor does China have the right under it’s constitution and under the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Regional National Autonomy. If the federal government controlled every thing there would be no need for provinces and autonomous regions.
Tibetan is used is some schools but increasingly fewer from what I’ve read. In any case students face immense pressure to learn the be fluent in Chinese if they want to get ahead. This is unlike true multicultural societies such as Canada, Switzerland, South Africa etc where one can be a full member of society and engage in productive work speaking only the language of your region.
As for the rest Tibetan is in no way on par in the legal or political system with Chinese. It is not the equivalent say of French in Canada and the presence of some classes, some newspapers, and some TV programs does not mitigate that.
You can protest all you want but around the world there are clear examples of multi-ethnic countries with minority provinces or regions that are administered by the minority. China doesn’t come near to these.
Replace “Gao” with “Mucha Man” and I could have written the exact same post, with the same sentiments all around. I believe I misinterpreted your earlier post, my apologies. Can we get back to chastising the PRC lackeys now?
Both the PRC Constitution and the 17 Point Agreement explicitly grant Tibet regional autonomy. From the 17 Point Agreement:
It goes on to limit development to “actual conditions” in Tibet, and explicitly states that the PRC cannot unilaterally impose reforms on Tibet.
I know you don’t like it, but your own laws grant autonomy to Tibet, and explicitly forbid imposing reforms without consent of the Tibetan government. Your frequent claims that the PRC Constitution and 17 Point Agreement grant the PRC the power to unilaterally develop Tibet, without local consent, are simply false. Either you’re ignorant of your own laws, or you’re a liar. Which is it?
ABC, here is something for you. In 1949 Newfoundland joined with Canada to become the 10th province. Here are a few of the terms of union:
In other words, there is an agreement with respect to federal-provincial powers. The federal government cannot interfere with education for example. And they don’t. Nor do they make grabs at mineral rights this being under the jurisdiction of the provincial government.
Newfoundland agreed to the terms of union fully expecting that the conditions would be followed. Canada, being a nation ruled by law, has followed the agreement. Now let’s consider the 17 point agreement, and in light of the fact that Tibet at the time was self-ruled:
Neither in deed or spirit have these terms been honored as Gao points out above. There’s no defense except that of excusing the exercise of raw power to achieve the results you want.
Tibet does have its regional autonomy. Autonomy according to Chinese laws means that you can manage your own affairs, speak your language, and practice your customs. It doesn’t mean that you can make yourself into an island and forbid outsiders from going there. Neither is China unilaterally imposing reforms. That would be like changing their customs, altering their governance of their own affairs, or start charging admission to the Potala Palace(that’s 100yuan for non-Tibetan people, by the way.) Economic development doesn’t by itself infringe on Tibet’s autonomy, as the land still belongs to China. And the Chinese government has always been mindful of the local people with the various projects.
I think the problem is that people are all using other country’s policies and applying them to China. It obviously doesn’t work that way. In China, we do things according to our own laws. So, it really doesn’t matter that other country’s minority regions are administered differently, or that they’re more “multi-cultural”. China doesn’t pretend that it’s like those western countries. So while there are Indian tribes in America that are essentially a country within a country, or that in Canada everything have to be in both english and french, again, it doesn’t matter. In China, people get what they get under the Chinese law, not other country’s laws.
So I’ve established that Tibetans can and do use their own language, and your next complaint is that they’re not used enough, and god forbid they have to learn Chinese to get ahead in life. Hey look, Mandarin Chinese is the dominant language in China, so of course they’re encouraged to learn it. This is like everyone is encouraged to learn English. Why do college students in China have to pass English tests, or that many jobs require English proficiency? Probably has something to do with English being the dominant language in the world, so learning it will probably help you get ahead in life. So if some Tibetan decide not to learn Chinese and thus don’t get ahead in China, who do they have to blame? For one they wouldn’t be talking to me here because I sure as hell don’t speak Tibetan.
No it hasn’t, as evidenced by the riots. And subsidizing Han migration to Tibet is in clear violation of regional autonomy and other stipulations of the treaty with Tibet.
No we’re not. We’re directly quoting from China’s own laws and demonstrating how Beijing’s actions are in clear violation. The comparisons with North America are simply for reference, and are redundant.
No you don’t. You’re violating your own laws. As Mucha Man said, China is simply using raw power to achieve its ends. If you support that, fine, but nobody believes you that the PRC Constitution and 17 Point Agreement sanction the PRC’s actions. We’ve read them, and since we’ve quoted them here, so have you. No need to keep pretending.
That’s all complete nonsense. Are you saying reform of Tibet’s government was voluntary? Of course not. And I know you will answer this by saying China had no choice because Tibet was a repressive theocracy as you’ve stated in other threads.
In any case, the fact remains that without massive subsidies and a Chinese friendly environment there would be no immigration. And i remind you again that neither subsidies nor a promotion of Mandarin would be the policies of a truly autonomous Tibetan government that was managing its own affairs.
No. As Gao and I have repeatedly demonstrated, people get what the central government wants without respect to previous treaties and agreements.
I never contradicted this. You simply misread me.
I see, so Tibet offers a complete bilingual experience, including a rich media environment and yet Tibetan children have to learn Mandarin if they want to get ahead (or even get a job). Again, this contradicts the experience of other multi-ethnic countries where one can live and work within one’s own ethnic region. But of course you will counter that China is a special case. Blah blah blah.
China does what it wants and disregards its own laws. That has been a common problem in China. The citizens of China do not get the enjoy the laws. Who is this “We” you speak of? We the people? I am glad you are not talking on behalf of everybody as even many PRC Nationals would not agree with you on many or your arguments put forth here.
No it’s not. Don’t look at the word “autonomy” in the Chinese constitution or the treaty and interpret it to mean something it isn’t. Like I said, autonomy in China means the governance of your own affairs, the right the use your language and practice your customs. This is what autonomy was meant to be in China and has always been. It does not give the right to make your land(and Tibet is a huge swath of land) into an island and forbid other people from going in it. Other countries may have a different interpretation of autonomy, and that doesn’t matter. China doesn’t claim it has the same minority policies as other countries. China does things according to its own laws, and nothing it is doing or has done in Tibet violated any laws.
You know what else I find baffling? China has 55 recognized minorities, and all the other minorities get along fine with Han and everyone else. Only the Tibetan is moaning and groaning about having to live with other people, or about dilluting their race, or their culture, or of development, or heck, having a railroad that links them with rest of the world. Like I proposed earlier, if the Tibetans think they’re too good to live with anyone else, than I say we give them their own plot of land, then they can live in caves and be in the stone age if they want, while the rest of Tibet is developed and brought into the modern world.
No one in Tibet have to learn Madarin. It’s obviously encouraged, as it is the dominant language in China. But no one is going to force them to learn it, or to learn anything at all. This isn’t different for people anywhere else in China. You aren’t forced to learn anything. Sit on your fat ass and do nothing if you want. But the consequences? Well, not getting ahead in society and not getting a job are two of them.
