Quantcast

Tibet; Why should anyone care?

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,007
149
The Cleft of Venus
Seriously...

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

Many ordinary Tibetans want the Dalai Lama back in their country, but it appears that relatively few want a return to the social order he represented. A 1999 story in the Washington Post notes that the Dalai Lama continues to be revered in Tibet, but

. . . few Tibetans would welcome a return of the corrupt aristocratic clans that fled with him in 1959 and that comprise the bulk of his advisers. Many Tibetan farmers, for example, have no interest in surrendering the land they gained during China’s land reform to the clans. Tibet’s former slaves say they, too, don’t want their former masters to return to power. “I’ve already lived that life once before,” said Wangchuk, a 67-year-old former slave who was wearing his best clothes for his yearly pilgrimage to Shigatse, one of the holiest sites of Tibetan Buddhism. He said he worshipped the Dalai Lama, but added, “I may not be free under Chinese communism, but I am better off than when I was a slave.”
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
The question should not be whether they want the Dalai Lama back, the question should be whether the Chinese are oppressing the Tibetans. We should not see them as having to choose between the two.

An oppressive regime is an oppressive regime regardless of what went before it, no?
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,027
3
Denver
I think the question is... what would happen to Tibet if they were "freed". Many seem to think they'd slide back into their previous state, including the average folks of that country.

And i put that in quotes cuz Tibet is part of China and China has no obligation to release the land. They should treat the citizens with humanity, but that's a different issue than "free Tibet".
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
I think the question is... what would happen to Tibet if they were "freed". Many seem to think they'd slide back into their previous state, including the average folks of that country.

And i put that in quotes cuz Tibet is part of China and China has no obligation to release the land. They should treat the citizens with humanity, but that's a different issue than "free Tibet".
Wait, are we in favour of oppressive, totalitarian regimes that have no respect for human rights, or are we against them?

Just checking; I've been away a while. Need to work out which way the wind's blowing before i nail my colours to the mast, etc.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
re-read my post... two seperate issues tantamount to USA and Indians.
Well, I'm not clear what your point was, that people freed from oppression may not establish a utopian society? That's certainly true and proven many times over, but is that a reason to remain silent about their oppression?

As regards whether Tibet is part of China, clearly it is at present but it has not always been so and it disputed whether it should be now.

Should people care that Tibetan peoples' human rights are being transgressed?
 

ire

Turbo Monkey
Aug 6, 2007
6,199
4
I think the US should invade Tibet and take that land in the name of freedom and democracy....isn't that our goal? To spread democracy? We could free them from the Commies
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,027
3
Denver
Well, I'm not clear what your point was, that people freed from oppression may not establish a utopian society?
Are you being dense on purpose? AGAIN, the people are afraid of liberation. That's their opinion, not mine.

As regards whether Tibet is part of China, clearly it is at present but it has not always been so and it disputed whether it should be now.
Wasn't it part of China in the 1800s before they rebelled and then China took it back?

Should people care that Tibetan peoples' human rights are being transgressed?
Anyone who cares about them enough to make an impact should first focus their efforts on Africa.
 

blue

boob hater
Jan 24, 2004
10,165
0
california
re-read my post... two seperate issues tantamount to USA and Indians.
Except the Chinese have yet to commit mass genocide on the Tibetans to squelch all opposition.

The Chinese government has as much claim on Tibetan lands as the British do on Indian ones, it's time to let it go before the above happens.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,411
0
SF
There are many monarchies still around today, and we do not stop them.

Tibet was forcefully taken, and lack any way to throw off the Chinese.
 

SPINTECK

Turbo Monkey
Oct 16, 2005
1,370
0
abc
I thought the point was no religious freedom and monks protesting. You mean the dala lama utilized the caste system and now the moaist gov't is going to let people be free??

A friend of mine is over there and claims this about NEpal, but earlier in the same LONG email she says free Tibet. I think it would take a political science class to understand the situation:

Now, I'm in Kathmandu working with CEN until the arrival of my
mountaineering guru and then off to Everest we go! :) Absolutely
cannot wait!

There is a historic election scheduled for April 10th, so hopefully
things won't get totally out of control (even though there have been
many acts of violence between parties). It's very important for
Nepal's future, so it'll be interesting to see the outcome. The
Nepalese are crying out for change and many are in support of the
Communist-Maoist party, which promises change and equality for all.
With the presence of the caste system in Nepal, many poor people are
hoping for better status in society. Whether the Maoists will win
majority is difficult to say, but it's a scary situation. Whoever
wins, let's hope they bring peace to a nation that deserves it after
seeing so many years of turmoil!

I hope you enjoy the attached photos which are a mix of images from
India & Nepal...mostly focusing on people and landscape (started with
20, then 10, 6 and now 2 - hoping at least they work!)
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,411
0
SF
seems like it was a f'ed up place to start with and communism is a small step up.
Freedom by the end of tank barrel?

Do you think control by the most repressive country on the UN Security Council is a good thing?

I appreciate your link to Parenti's article. I found it informative.

But one thing I hate about discussing any political matter with you N 8 is your lack of commitment. When your biggest concern is what kind of goblet goes with the chardonnay you drink, it is easy to make comments about any serious political topic.

Maybe if you get recalled to Iraq, and then you might gain some insight into your political arguments.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
Are you being dense on purpose? AGAIN, the people are afraid of liberation. That's their opinion, not mine.
Ah, insults. Nice. Perhaps they have little experience of freedom, is that any reason to deny it to them?
Wasn't it part of China in the 1800s before they rebelled and then China took it back?
How far do you want to go back? Is it not enough that they suffer under the Chinese rule?
Anyone who cares about them enough to make an impact should first focus their efforts on Africa.
Isn't that a bit of a cop-out? Sure there are many issues in Africa that need addressing, as there are in many other places, but that's not a reason to ignore Tibet, is it?
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
Freedom by the end of tank barrel?

Do you think control by the most repressive country on the UN Security Council is a good thing?

I appreciate your link to Parenti's article. I found it informative.

But one thing I hate about discussing any political matter with you N 8 is your lack of commitment. When your biggest concern is what kind of goblet goes with the chardonnay you drink, it is easy to make comments about any serious political topic.

Maybe if you get recalled to Iraq, and then you might gain some insight into your political arguments.
Furthermore, n8, Parenti's article concluded with comments that indicate his opinion is that continued Chinese rule is not a good thing. He did also rather skim over the past of Chinese rule, and at one point appears to imply that the Kuomintang were communist (which they were not). So a reasonable article, but by no means comprehensive or totally accurate.
 

FlyinPolack

Monkey
Jul 16, 2007
371
0
Until China stops the forced abortions, slave labor camps, and oppression to it's citizens, (all of them, not just tibetans) China should not be traded with, or even dealt with. Boycott China, & the Olympics.
They aren't even going to be close to finished with the facilities, so it's going to be a joke anyway..
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,027
3
Denver
Ah, insults. Nice. Perhaps they have little experience of freedom, is that any reason to deny it to them?

How far do you want to go back? Is it not enough that they suffer under the Chinese rule?

Isn't that a bit of a cop-out? Sure there are many issues in Africa that need addressing, as there are in many other places, but that's not a reason to ignore Tibet, is it?
not an insult, a question as you can't seem to grasp the issue... how about Tibet votes on it and we go from there?

How far? how about today? Tibet belongs to China, period.
 

Echo

crooked smile
Jul 10, 2002
11,818
1
Slacking at work
Somebody please think of the children.
I saw a movie about Tibet once. As far as I can tell, there's only one child in Tibet, but he was definitely getting seriously messed with. Some dude kept trying to get him to eat blood, but Eddie Murphy saved him.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,243
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
I saw a movie about Tibet once. As far as I can tell, there's only one child in Tibet, but he was definitely getting seriously messed with. Some dude kept trying to get him to eat blood, but Eddie Murphy saved him.
That kid was creepy.... he brought dead birds back to life. I don't need flying pet cemetery.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,027
3
Denver
I take it that's not a serious suggestion?

So imperialism is OK again? Should we not have kicked Saddam out of Kuwait?
:disgust1:

The point of voting isn't that China would listen, but rather that the world would. Right now, all we have is average Tibetians being interviewed saying the old way was worse, implying that China is at least a better owner.

Why are you being dense? Are you trolling? China and Kuwait aren't valid comparisons.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
:disgust1:

The point of voting isn't that China would listen, but rather that the world would. Right now, all we have is average Tibetians being interviewed saying the old way was worse, implying that China is at least a better owner.

Why are you being dense? Are you trolling? China and Kuwait aren't valid comparisons.
They are comparable in that the occupying/controlling state took control forcibly and are/were unlikely to leave any other way.

As for the vote, how exactly would you persuade the Chinese (who are imprisoning & beating people who write articles criticising regime) to allow a free vote on whether they should be there?

It's rich to accuse me of being dense and then be obtuse yourself.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,027
3
Denver
Look, the bottomline is that China ruled Tibet for hundreds of years, then China had a civil war and Tibet tried to break away, subsequently failed. Tibet IS part of China, just like North Dakota is part of the USA.

Tibet should not be "free" any more than Native-Americans.

Now, the OTHER issue is human rights and yes, that should be afford everyone on the planet. Not just Tibet, but all of China.


Is that less obtuse for you?

My opinion on the two issues:
- Tibet should not be free.
- China should treat people better.
 

fluff

Monkey Turbo
Sep 8, 2001
5,672
0
Feeling the lag
Look, the bottomline is that China ruled Tibet for hundreds of years, then China had a civil war and Tibet tried to break away, subsequently failed. Tibet IS part of China, just like North Dakota is part of the USA.
o rly? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet
Tibet should not be "free" any more than Native-Americans.

Now, the OTHER issue is human rights and yes, that should be afford everyone on the planet. Not just Tibet, but all of China.

Is that less obtuse for you?

My opinion on the two issues:
- Tibet should not be free.
- China should treat people better.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,638
4
SF, CA
did you have a point with the link there n8?
uh perhaps it was this:
wonkypedophile said:
Between the 17th century and 1951, the Dalai Lama and his regents were the predominant political power administering religious and administrative authority[2] over large parts of Tibet from the traditional capital Lhasa.

Tibet proclaimed its independence from China in 1911 on the eve of the fall of the Qing dynasty and the subsequent internal turmoil.

Tibet remained a defacto independent state until shortly after the conclusion of the Chinese civil war, when on October 1, 1949, the People's Republic of China was formally proclaimed in Beijing and the following year launched an armed invasion of Tibet.[3] The Chinese army of 40,000 men routed the unprepared defending Tibetan army of only 5,000 near the city of Chamdo. The defeat subsequently led to the signing of the Seventeen point agreement by the Tibetan Government.
doesn't sound so much like China ruled Tibet for hundreds of years as much as a few decades.