Tibet- the best way forward

Politics International Politics
41

:liar: I think this is a preposterous claim that can be refuted by looking at any online discussion on China and western relations. All you people talked about before the Olympics was how you were finally making up for past humiliations (as that’s all you talked about when HK was handed back over). It is built into the Han man’s dna to resents the imperial west for past relations, and I have called you out on this very subject many times. As I always say, I am not about to feel the least bit sorry for something my great grandfather did to yours. It’s just too far past and China’s modern troubles are entirely of its own making.

That said, don’t turn around and say that Tibetans should also forget the past because they still very much live with the repercussions of what has been done to them over the past 50 years.

42

[quote=“ABC”][quote=“Buttercup”]
So does China see Britain as a benevolent force for liberation from their backward habits, with the benefit of hindsight? I always had the impression they were still pissed off about that. And was the communism just a blip?[/quote]
Not really. There’s no real grudge against Britain on what they did more than 100 years ago. But since they’re still hoarding all the cultural relics and artifacts looted from China back then, there’s always a reason to be pissed.[/quote]

‘They’? Ah, so that’s where all China’s ‘cultural artifacts’ are! Britain! I thought the majority were smashed up in the ‘Cultural Revolution’ or taken to Taiwan! No wonder the museums in the Forbidden City were so boring.

Like so many people who have an opinion on Tibet, I’ve only ever read books about it. I’m more inclined to believe MM’s take on it because he’s been there, and isn’t fully of silly Chinese propaganda.

43

Sounds like a bunch of foreigners in Taiwan better start packing their bags :wink:

44

So, then next time we don’t like the Chinese envoys, we can kill them all without repercussion from China?

45

There’s solid historical evidence that Tibet has been part of China for many years, but for variety of reasons(remote location, weakness of central government, etc), Tibet had not been under China’s direct and effective jurisdiction most of the time. China was simply reclaiming what’s theirs all along. Also isn’t it a bit pointless to argue about that now. Wasn’t annexing Indian land how both US and Canada was formed? Wasn’t Hawaii an independent country, both de-facto and de-jure, before US annexed it? Yeah, I though so.

No, but neither are the vast majority of Han people. Keep things relative here. It would be unfair to the Han and rest of the country if Tibetans get rights that are not afforded to non-Tibetans now isn’t it?[/quote]

I love when people like you bring the issue of ‘fairness’ into an argument…it really shows up your hypocrisy.
It’s unfair that Tibetans have no freedom of speech, religion, movement or organisation, that’s what unfair. But as Muchaman pointed out that is broadly the same for Chinese, just they are more sensitive about Tibetans.
Claiming ‘what is theirs’ is a really bizarre comment, something like people in Rome claming the rest of Europe because some of our languages are based on Latin. We should all be eating pizzas and pasta and singing ‘O Sole Mio’ as our national anthems :slight_smile:

Perhaps Caucasians should claim ‘what is ours’ and throw out all Asians from Europe and N.America, time to handover your passport and claim your PRC one, put your money where your mouth is, of course you won’t like most armchair patriots of China, saying one thing and doing another…! You got to decide if you are in the 21st century or the 19th century, which one is it?

46

That’s why for a long time China itself was an isolated and backward place, because it had resisted developement and open trade. But now China has opened up, and that’s not a bad idea at all. The Tibetans should learn something from this and open up too.[/quote]

China opened up - finally - as the result of its own decision. China is proudly Chinese, takes umbrage at any perceived slight to their honour, and blames the West for trying to devour it in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Yet China denies Tibet the right to its own vision of itself, and insists on forcibly applying its own. Again, you missed the point completely: you can’t shove your vision of right or wrong down someone else’s throat, regardless of how right you feel it may be. It creates resentment and division. So now China still has a problem in Tibet, and blames it all on the DL instead of on their heavy handed methods. No one who is credible is saying that Tibet should be totally free. But it needs to have a more meaningful level of autonomy than it now has in order for the Tibetans to be happy. What idiot cannot understand this: if the people they rule are unhappy, then the rule will be problematic.

47

Sounds like a bunch of foreigners in Taiwan better start packing their bags :wink:[/quote]

You just don’t understand Tibetan argument culture. :slight_smile:

48

[quote=“Mucha Man”]

Your observations are superficial. Tibetan culture in the provinces is often stronger than in the TAR because the PRC has no need to settle remote regions in the provinces. (Look back a few decades though and you will see massive destruction.) They do have a need to settle the TAR both to make their claims that it is part of Chinese territory legitimate, and because of the need to bring economic growth to the region. The PRC knows it cannot win the hearts of the Tibetans and so is on a drive to win their pocketbooks. Unfortunately, development in the TAR needs a lot of outside skilled and semi-skilled labour. Hence the drive to keep growth up is actually further marginalizing a lot of Tibetans. Last years riots were in part the result of Tibetan anger over inflation and lack of opportunity.

You also need to travel to Lhasa to see just how awful the destruction of traditional culture had been. The city is cut in half with a gaudy Chinese section and an increasingly fragile Tibetan. Han already outnumber Tibetans and walk about as if it is their city. They treat the Potala as a museum, light it up at night and play marching songs. Really sick.

So, bob, not cool. Yes Tibetans can speak their own language and do in fact learn it in school, but their culture is beleagured in every way. I’m not sure how anyone could say a culture is not under fire when it has to accept spy cameras in its places of worship (as all monasteries in Lhasa do), or not being able to use children’s real names, or having 18 years old foreign soldiers walking around the holiest sites with pump action shot guns, or having foreign soldiers stand at the corner of every alley (and I mean every alley) in their holy city, and so on. The Chinese run Tibet like an occupied territory, not like a part of their own country. It’s shameful.[/quote]

Why do you say my observations are superficial? Rather they are different to yours, reflecting differing levels of Han Chinese influence in different Tibetan areas. In western Sichuan I didn’t see any soldiers. There wasn’t even an overt police presence. Many of the locals, and the monasteries, had pictures of the Dalai Lama. I got the impression that the locals were pretty much left alone, on the tacit understanding of course that they did not cause any trouble.
Also no one seemed to care about foreigners wondering around, and there was no need to apply for a permit.

49

[quote=“Mawvellous”][quote=“Muzha Man”]

Your observations are superficial. Tibetan culture in the provinces is often stronger than in the TAR because the PRC has no need to settle remote regions in the provinces. (Look back a few decades though and you will see massive destruction.) They do have a need to settle the TAR both to make their claims that it is part of Chinese territory legitimate, and because of the need to bring economic growth to the region. The PRC knows it cannot win the hearts of the Tibetans and so is on a drive to win their pocketbooks. Unfortunately, development in the TAR needs a lot of outside skilled and semi-skilled labour. Hence the drive to keep growth up is actually further marginalizing a lot of Tibetans. Last years riots were in part the result of Tibetan anger over inflation and lack of opportunity.

You also need to travel to Lhasa to see just how awful the destruction of traditional culture had been. The city is cut in half with a gaudy Chinese section and an increasingly fragile Tibetan. Han already outnumber Tibetans and walk about as if it is their city. They treat the Potala as a museum, light it up at night and play marching songs. Really sick.

So, bob, not cool. Yes Tibetans can speak their own language and do in fact learn it in school, but their culture is beleagured in every way. I’m not sure how anyone could say a culture is not under fire when it has to accept spy cameras in its places of worship (as all monasteries in Lhasa do), or not being able to use children’s real names, or having 18 years old foreign soldiers walking around the holiest sites with pump action shot guns, or having foreign soldiers stand at the corner of every alley (and I mean every alley) in their holy city, and so on. The Chinese run Tibet like an occupied territory, not like a part of their own country. It’s shameful.[/quote]

Why do you say my observations are superficial? Rather they are different to yours, reflecting differing levels of Han Chinese influence in different Tibetan areas. In Western Sichuan I didn’t see any soldiers. There wasn’t even an overt police presence. Many of the locals, and the monasteries, had pictures of the Dalai Lama. I got the impression that the locals were pretty much left alone, on the tacit understanding of course that they did not cause any trouble.
Also no one seemed to care about foreigners wondering around, and there was no need to apply for a permit.[/quote]

It’s superficial because it is based on nothing more than random observations which pertain only to the remote parts of the provinces, at this particular time in history. Yes, at the particular time you visited, Tibetans were not being harrassed, jailed, killed, etc, in huge numbers in Sichuan. You were also able to travel freely, however, that is not always the case as I experienced last summer trying to get into Tibetan regions in Gansu and Qinghai. Very much closed and guarded.

You are right that Tibetans do have a small degree of freedom regarding their language and religion. This does not suggest that all is well with Tibetan culture any more than a superficial look at indigenous cultures aroudn the world (and noting that the people are speaking their own languages), should convince anyone that all is well with them either.

I’ll have to check the news carefully but all the Tibetan regions in the provinces are experiencing heavy police and army presence at the moment as they were a year ago. So they are not being left alone, they are being carefully watched all the time and when there is the slightest potential for trouble the army comes in. Does this really strike you as a scene of people being left alone by the government?

[quote]China has deployed thousands of extra troops and paramilitary forces across Tibetan regions to head off unrest after several recent protests against government by Beijing…

Columns of army vehicles have been seen clogging narrow mountain roads into Tibetan-populated regions of southwestern Sichuan province in the past few days. Soldiers have been sent out from the Chengdu Military Region — one of seven military commands in China – along with members of the paramilitary People’s Armed Police. Their numbers could amount to as much as two divisions, or as many as 20,000 men, but such numbers could not be confirmed in a country in which all military movements are a state secret.

The troops have even been permitted to carry loaded weapons, a rare and extreme measure for soldiers operating within China’s national borders, local sources said.

In several other towns, residents described seeing an increase in troops movements in the past few days. In Aba and Ganze, two other of the most restive regions last year, residents said that army patrols were now taking place around the clock. In Langmusi, on the border between Sichuan and Gansu provinces, squads of paramilitary have filled hotels in the town surrounded by ancient Buddhist temples.

In Litang, where the arrest of a lone monk demonstrator led to a protest this week, people said they had seen about 100 military vehicles on the streets. Local sources said two that Chinese traffic police and one paramilitary had been stabbed to death in the night and police were warning each other not to wear their uniforms after dark.
[/quote]

50

[quote=“Mucha Man”]

It’s superficial because it is based on nothing more than random observations which pertain only to the remote parts of the provinces, at this particular time in history. Yes, at the particular time you visited, Tibetans were not being harrassed, jailed, killed, etc, in huge numbers in Sichuan. You were also able to travel freely, however, that is not always the case as I experienced last summer trying to get into Tibetan regions in Gansu and Qinghai. Very much closed and guarded.

You are right that Tibetans do have a small degree of freedom regarding their language and religion. This does not suggest that all is well with Tibetan culture any more than a superficial look at indigenous cultures aroudn the world (and noting that the people are speaking their own languages), should convince anyone that all is well with them either.

I’ll have to check the news carefully but all the Tibetan regions in the provinces are experiencing heavy police and army presence at the moment as they were a year ago. So they are not being left alone, they are being carefully watched all the time and when there is the slightest potential for trouble the army comes in. Does this really strike you as a scene of people being left alone by the government?[/quote]

Sorry, I used “recent” in a very loose sense. I was in Sichuan before the disturbances. My point was that Tibetan culture and language is still very much alive, and that the reach of the state into more remote areas is in fact very weak.

Of course I am aware that China does not tolerate political dissent or separatist activities.

51

[quote=“Mucha Man”] You also need to travel to Lhasa to see just how awful the destruction of traditional culture had been. The city is cut in half with a gaudy Chinese section and an increasingly fragile Tibetan. Han already outnumber Tibetans and walk about as if it is their city. They treat the Potala as a museum, light it up at night and play marching songs. Really sick.

So, bob, not cool. Yes Tibetans can speak their own language and do in fact learn it in school, but their culture is beleagured in every way. I’m not sure how anyone could say a culture is not under fire when it has to accept spy cameras in its places of worship (as all monasteries in Lhasa do), or not being able to use children’s real names, or having 18 years old foreign soldiers walking around the holiest sites with pump action shot guns, or having foreign soldiers stand at the corner of every alley (and I mean every alley) in their holy city, and so on. The Chinese run Tibet like an occupied territory, not like a part of their own country. It’s shameful.[/quote]

OK. Not cool. I kind of reckoned that what with all the rioting and stuff. Anyway, my role is more like a facilitator. Usually I’m about five days ahead and seek only to inspire the best form my compatriots, etc.

52

It’s no less bizarre than the US claiming North America or annexing Hawaii. But since Tibet is now an integral part of China for a long time and is recognized as such by every other country, maybe the Chinese government should stop defending the claiming of Tibet and stop being so defensive about it. Frankly, China doesn’t need to justify it’s ownership of Tibet anymore than the US needs to justify how it acquired Hawaii or Indian land. For disputed island like Diaoyutai or Spratly, then yes, China should continue to make claims to them because they’re currently not under Chinese jurisdiction. But for Tibet there’s simply no need to claim what’s already yours.

Then I guess the Caucasians will have to go back to England and Europe because Indians have a claim on North America.

53

‘Caucasian’ is such a dumbass word. Still, at least you don’t call us ‘waiguoren’.

ABC. If you want to convince people, you need to

  1. Work on your language skills so that you can respond to your audience on their level (not saying higher or lower, just coming from a different set of values).
  2. Try to think about why people hold different opinions from yourself and think of ways that those people would accept to challenge and alter those views.

If you aren’t doing that, you’re not achieving anything other than self-expression.

hh, English is not ‘based on Latin’, it’s based on Icelandic and old forms of Danish.

54

I’m only using the same word that appeared in the quote I was responding to, in case you didn’t know. If there’s anything wrong with the word “Caucasian”, that’s the fault of the author of my quote, not me.

55

Hehe! You are super funny. Is it deliberate?

I guess you could say the same about ‘the policies and actions of the leaders of the PRC’, hey?

56

I’ve never even BEEN to the Caucasus Mountains. Sheesh!

Just call me Bignose.

57

It’s no less bizarre than the US claiming North America or annexing Hawaii. But since Tibet is now an integral part of China for a long time and is recognized as such by every other country, maybe the Chinese government should stop defending the claiming of Tibet and be so defensive about it. Frankly, China doesn’t need to justify it’s ownership of Tibet anymore than the US needs to justify how it acquired Hawaii or Indian land. For disputed island like Diaoyutai or Spratly, then yes, China should continue to make claims to them because they’re currently not under Chinese jurisdiction. But for Tibet there’s simply to need to claim what’s already yours.

[/quote]

Again, you are confused. We in the west, in particular Canada, very much have to justify our claims on aboriginal land which is why we have so many court cases, many of which have restored huge tracts to aboriginal control. Aboriginal claims are valid, and the courts of free countries take them seriously.

In China, Mao recognized that Tibet was different. It had never been directly under China’s control, nor had it ever been occupied. For this reason he choose not to outright invade but to persuade Tibet to return to the fold. Had China upheld it’s end of the bargain, or later, after recognizing its mistakes, implemented saner policies such as those of Hu Yaobang, you would not have this trouble. Instead you killed, jailed or drove out all the artisans, businessmen, religious masters, and social and political leaders and destroyed every holy site in the entire region. China’s crimes against Tibet are monstrous.

I actually think China’s claim to Tibet’s sovereignty is fairly strong, and since it is not disputed even by the DL, I see no reason to argue against it. That said, Tibet only allowed itself to be integrated politically because it was under duress, and because it was supposed to be given a high degree of autonomy. It is after all an autonomous region, and if the designation is to mean anything more than a clarion call for tourists interested in “them ethnics” it has to mean real control of Tibet by Tibetan within the overarching framework of the PRC government.

You are not there, not even close, and until you acknowledge that China by law, custom, and tradition must treat Tibet differently if it is to claim it as part of the country, I will continue to believe you are merely another Han chauvinist.

58

Hehe! You are super funny. Is it deliberate?

I guess you could say the same about ‘the policies and actions of the leaders of the PRC’, hey?[/quote]

Care to tell me what’s wrong with the word “Caucasian”? It’s a commonly used word to describe white people.

59

[quote=“ABC”]
Care to tell me what’s wrong with the word “Caucasian”? It’s a commonly used word to describe white people.[/quote]

By whom? Sorry, it’s not my job to help you. You’re trying to win over hearts and minds, here.

60

[quote=“Buttercup”][quote=“ABC”]
Care to tell me what’s wrong with the word “Caucasian”? It’s a commonly used word to describe white people.[/quote]

By whom? Sorry, it’s not my job to help you. You’re trying to win over hearts and minds, here.[/quote]

You know this is a real funny response. You said “Caucasian” is a dumbass word but won’t tell me why that’s the case. Of course in the US the word Caucasian is used to describe white people(I lived there for a number of years), though very often they’re simply called “white”.

It looks like it’s you who’s clueless and need to work on your language skills.