Things like this make me sad. Don't get me wrong, I respect China and am in awe of the amazing culture and history they've got. I'd love to visit someday.
But on the whole Tibet thing, fuck them, seriously. The way they've tried to keep is swept under the rug is even worse. (This obviously isn't the only human rights issue with China, but its the one in the article I read.)
I dunno. Does this piss anyone else off? Can someone offer a counterpoint as to why its okay for China to pull this shit?
William Shakespeare wrote:
Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
Posts: 3332
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 01:54 pm
One of the many reasons I don't like the Chinese government.
SoldierHawk wrote:
I dunno. Does this piss anyone else off? Can someone offer a counterpoint as to why its okay for China to pull this shit?
While I don't agree, the view of the Chinese people is that since they "liberated" them from their feudal society in 1950, they have modernized the region, which has resulted in a financial burden for them. (Similar to how West Germany views the poor in East Germany, or how northerners in Italy view the poor southern regions in that country). So, they feel that Tibetans owe them. Any resistance is seen by them as being ungrateful and to be stamped out.
SoldierHawk
Moderator
Title: Warrior-Poet
Joined: Jan 15 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 6108
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 01:59 pm
Cattivo wrote:
One of the many reasons I don't like the Chinese government.
SoldierHawk wrote:
I dunno. Does this piss anyone else off? Can someone offer a counterpoint as to why its okay for China to pull this shit?
While I don't agree, the view of the Chinese people is that since they "liberated" them from their feudal society in 1950, they have modernized the region, which has resulted in a financial burden for them. (Similar to how West Germany views the poor in East Germany, or how northerners in Italy view the poor southern regions in that country). So, they feel that Tibetans owe them. Any resistance is seen by them as being ungrateful and to be stamped out.
Yeah, I understand their theory. I was more asking if someone *actually* believed it's the truth. The Chinese act like they're doing Tibet a favor, when all they've really done is strung a yolk over them. I mean, Tibet didn't ask to be fucking invaded. How can you be "ungrateful" for something you never wanted in the first place?
I have to say, I hold out secret hope that the Dali Lama will be able to go home in his lifetime, but he's getting up there and now I doubt it will happen. The Olympics weren't the catalyst for change I was secretly hoping for, and based on what Clinton has said lately, I don't think we're gonna be putting much pressure on them until our financial crisis is "resolved," whatever that means. *sigh*
William Shakespeare wrote:
Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.
Shut up, Dorn
Title: White Chocolate
Joined: Jan 04 2008
Location: Grate Whyte Norf
Posts: 1179
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 02:15 pm
As much as I don't like the Chinese government, the Dalai Lama is BS.
I really don't know how to feel about China and Tibet right now.
On the one hand, I don't agree with China's methods or treatment of Tibet. I believe in free speech, and while I don't believe war is the answer, someone needs to do something.
On the other hand, I feel kind of hypocritical criticizing China for treating Tibet the way it does when he still have colonies in the form of Puerto Rico, Guam, America Samoa, ect. I would like to say that if any of them asked for independence we would grant it, but somehow I doubt that is how it would go down.
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
Posts: 3332
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 05:51 pm
nihilisticglee wrote:
On the other hand, I feel kind of hypocritical criticizing China for treating Tibet the way it does when he still have colonies in the form of Puerto Rico, Guam, America Samoa, ect. I would like to say that if any of them asked for independence we would grant it, but somehow I doubt that is how it would go down.
1) Our possessions have all the democratic rights such as freedom of speech, religion, journalism, assembly, etc. - unlike China where such actions are prosecutable and can result in execution.
2) We call them territories, not colonies. Large distinction - one refers to possessions, the other to exploitation for resources/strategic location.
3) If a territory asked for independence and voted for it in an election, we would grant it to them, no question. For example, Puerto Rico has repeatedly voted down statehood in preference for remaining a territory, because that way they are not be obligated to be under all of our tax law. Also, one of McCain's positions in the recent campaign was finally settling the Puerto Rico issue once and for all by having a vote between statehood and independence.
nihilisticglee
Joined: Oct 12 2007
Posts: 821
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 06:24 pm
Cattivo wrote:
nihilisticglee wrote:
On the other hand, I feel kind of hypocritical criticizing China for treating Tibet the way it does when he still have colonies in the form of Puerto Rico, Guam, America Samoa, ect. I would like to say that if any of them asked for independence we would grant it, but somehow I doubt that is how it would go down.
1) Our possessions have all the democratic rights such as freedom of speech, religion, journalism, assembly, etc. - unlike China where such actions are prosecutable and can result in execution.
2) We call them territories, not colonies. Large distinction - one refers to possessions, the other to exploitation for resources/strategic location.
3) If a territory asked for independence and voted for it in an election, we would grant it to them, no question. For example, Puerto Rico has repeatedly voted down statehood in preference for remaining a territory, because that way they are not be obligated to be under all of our tax law. Also, one of McCain's positions in the recent campaign was finally settling the Puerto Rico issue once and for all by having a vote between statehood and independence.
1. That applies to the rest of China too, and I do have problems with that, but that will still be an issue even if Tibet was not involved.
2. The major difference is territory sounds nicer, as one of the definitions of colony is "any people or territory separated from but subject to a ruling power." Which leads me to
3. We still subject them to our Constitution and laws without their say in the matter. Yes, our laws aren't unfair in most case, but I don't think that makes it okay. And we say that we would be glad to give them independence, but I just don't think it would end up that way. Guess I am just a cynic about this.
I do find it weird that we pick and choose which laws we want Puerto Rico to follow though.
Also, I would totally support Puerto Rico voting between statehood or independence, it is one of the few things I would agree with McCain on.
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
Posts: 3332
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 06:43 pm
Yeah, there is a bit of "taxation without representation" hypocrisy there, but I rationalize that by saying that they do get non-binding reps in congress, and they're not fully taxed. The limbo remains, however. The situation is even grayer for D.C., which isn't a territory, but that might be resolved soon - even though counting their vote would technically violate the wording in the constitution about only states getting a vote. (I would like them to be a part of nearby districts in Virginia and/or Maryland.)
You may be a cynic in terms of us granting them independence, but I'm sure it's realistic that we would be hesitant to let go of some strategic land, especially in the Pacific. I'm sure we would be able to bargain military base lease agreements, though if any possessions did declare independence.
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
Posts: 3332
Posted:
Mar 05 2009 11:06 pm
SoldierHawk wrote:
I have to say, I hold out secret hope that the Dali Lama will be able to go home in his lifetime
In order to get a free Tibet, do I first need to buy one at regular price?
anorexorcist
Title: Polar Bear
Joined: May 21 2008
Location: The Cock and Plucket
Posts: 2131
Posted:
Mar 06 2009 01:38 am
I don't know if they included Tibet in the BOGO sale.
Lawyers, Guns and Money
TheRoboSleuth
Title: Sleuth Mark IV
Joined: Aug 08 2006
Location: The Gritty Future
Posts: 2739
Posted:
Mar 06 2009 02:50 am
Tibet is a backwards idiot state comprised primarily of starving uneducated poor and some puffed up mammals who contribute nothing to the world than the faux wisdom that hollywood actors value and bafflingly vapid koans and other odd phrases where semantics and obtuseness stand in for genuine insight.
If China modernizes Tibet, they might just learn enough to rebel proper.
As per China, they are my favored example as to why I won't support capital punishment. And although I'm pro-choice, they have managed to make stronger argument against at least state controlled abortion than anything the bible thumping fundamentalists ever did.
Well, in that case, I second that opinion. But what I saw on Penn and Teller BS was pretty strong.
Cattivo
Joined: Apr 14 2006
Location: Lake Michigan
Posts: 3332
Posted:
Mar 06 2009 03:31 pm
I wish Tebor was here to cheer my Twin Peaks reference.
JRA
Joined: Sep 17 2007
Location: The Opium Trail
Posts: 3475
Posted:
Mar 06 2009 04:12 pm
Black Zarak wrote:
I'll take it!
Can't believe no one has made that joke yet...
You beat me to it you son of a bitch!
But you haven't done this yet!
***Phone Ring***
"Hello, China? I have you something you may want. That's right...ALL THE TEA!!"
There are a lot of what if's in life Donny. What if I hit you really hard in the face, knocked yo shit to the back of yo skull? What if I....had you girl gargle my nuts? The fact remains, you are a fuckin mutant.
Don't get me wrong, I respect China and am in awe of the amazing culture and history they've got. I'd love to visit someday.
