Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Blogs, Netizens React To the Tibet Issue
Bibek Paudel writes "Over the past few weeks Chinese bloggers and people on Internet forums have been reacting to events in Tibet and the protests disrupting the torch relay. The BBC and Global Voices have interesting insights on the recent happenings on the Net. A western commentator says, 'Lots of Chinese people now view the Western media, human rights groups, and Western leaders' criticisms of their country as part of the Racist Western Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful.' One of the most vocal appeals by the Chinese blogs, forums, and text-messages has been to boycott French goods in response to the protests that accompanied the torch relay in Paris. One response post reads, 'Who is abusing human rights? Who is bringing violence to this world?' There also are two versions of music video of the song Don't Be Too CNN, and its lyric has assumed the status of a cult catch-phrase. Sina.com has a popular page: 'Don't be too CNN, fire to the Western media.' Many analysts believe that the protests over Tibet have only served to strengthen Chinese nationalism rather than evoke sympathy for the Tibetan cause. Sina.com has a petition against the Western media which has reportedly accumulated millions of signatures. There is also Mutant Palm, a blog by an expatriate in China who has been watching and commenting on the fallout from Tibet and torch protests online."
I'd like to say nationalism is the new evil, but, unfortunately it's been around for as long as there has been nations.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Because of China's overt and explicit censorship of the news media, those outside of China (and probably those inside China, too, for that matter) can't possibly be aware of the actual sentiments of the Chinese people.
Basically, what's going to happen is that the pro-Tibet folks will be squelched, either by the Great Firewall of China, imprisonment, or self-censorship, and so only those voices advocating the pro-Tibet stance will be allowed through the filtering and be heard as the "popular" sentiment of the Chinese people.
As long as they call all non-Chinese media "Western Media" they clearly cannot seriously criticize it in any meaningful way. I mean, Fox News, Slashdot, BBC, FAZ and Corriere della Sera are all part of same group of anti-Chinese conspiracy? With that argument, dear Chinese blogging friends, you are becoming pretty laughable.
839*929
So our past injustices excuse their modern day oppression?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
WEll maybe we are hypocrites, but I can still write an invective against my government and not get trundled off to prison where I'm to be re-educated.
Better a hypocrite than a slave to tyrants.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Chinese culture is vastly different from western cultures. People either don't understand or refuse to acknowledge this. They've always been ruled by a totalitarian regime, communism is just another variation. They aren't apt to enact quick changes unless their is an actual benefit. Some of the people I've talk to, point to Russia as an example of why it's not a good idea to quickly move to a democratic system.
That and people don't like to be told why their country is bad. Just look at America.
Mod parent up, moral relativism is a bullshit creed of cowards and sophists.
If you haven't made a developer cry, you've wasted a day.
You mean like the racist western conspiracy that instigated a war with a formerly allied country mainly because of that countries despicable actions in China? And how did the West get repaid for taking that stance and helping to liberate China? With the Chinese intervention against the United Nations (not just the United States) during the Korean War. Nice going -- we help to stop Japanese aggression and get repaid by China flipping off the entire World to support an aggressive regime that tried to conquer it's Southern neighbor.
If they want to make this into a nationalist cause celebre then somebody should remind them that there's a lot more history behind Chinese relations with the West then just the unequal treaties and not all of that history is the West "oppressing" China.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
So our ongoing injustices excuse their behavior in Tibet and towards their own people?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
They're calling us hypocrites, and as a citizen of "the West" I can say they're exactly right.
No they aren't. There's no censorship in the west to the extent there is China. There's no individual right to keep and bear arms in China like there is in the west. The differences are staggering and people that proclaim dictatorship whenever politics don't go their way do more to undermine the very definition of what a dictatorship really is.
This is my sig.
"Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful."
It struck me as I read that that I've heard this line before in another sphere.
It's exactly what (some, mainly republican) Americans say about the rest of the world's concerns about pollution and global warming.
It's a conspiracy to stop the US being succesful, driven by jealousy of what they are achieving.
In both cases it's ludicrous.
I'm not sure that the west's hypocrisy is relevant. For one there are many United States politicians have the testicular fortitude to stand up and condemn China. Secondly I am unclear just how the US is even vaguely capable of stopping China from doing anything much less from being successful. Lastly the existence of one hypocritical government of earth isn't a get out of morality for free pass for the rest of the governments we have.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
europe sent crusaders to the middle east
both of these things are wrong
however, you wish to use events of 200 years ago and 1000 years ago to excuse and condone the same kind of colonization by han imperialists in tibet today, or the actions of violent muslim fundamentalists today
this is not morality or a human conscience
the only morally and intellectually defensible position is to condemn:
1. the slaughter of native americans
2. european crusaders
3. han imperialism
4. violent muslim fundamentalism
condemn all of it. that's morality and intellectual honesty
to excuse 3 and 4 because of 1 and 2 is i don't know exactly what, but its not morality or intellectual honesty. its some sort of weird kind of attempt to avoid a human conscience
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
different leaders at different times...
china helping out north korea was one communist nation helping out another, after UN forced had chased north korean into chinese territory iirc...
on the other hand, the leadership of china during ww2 ended up fleeing to what is now taiwan after the communist uprising.
and btw, china do not recognice taiwan as a nation. they insist that its chinese territory. but they do not invade as that would risk all out war with usa, who helped set up taiwan...
got to love that stuff. in us eyes, anything other then communist leadership was good. it could be just as dictatorial or worse then the communists, as long as they where not communists...
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
Just because our leaders are hypocrites doesn't make me one. And something that is evil is evil regardless of who calls it out.
They should call us on the things we do just as much as we should call them on the things they do.
China's government is evil. Why shouldn't we be able to say that?
At which point in the war (prior to the Chinese intervention) did the UN violate Chinese territory?
on the other hand, the leadership of china during ww2 ended up fleeing to what is now taiwan after the communist uprising.If you mean the Nationalists/Kuomintang fled to Taiwan then you are accurate. But they weren't the only 'leadership' of China during WW2. The Communists contributed more to the defeat of the Japanese than the Nationalists did. The Communist leadership was also engaged by the Western Powers during this period -- Stillwell in particular spoke highly about the Communists and their resistance towards the Japanese. So it's a bit of a mistake to say the 'leadership' of China during WW2 fled to Taiwan -- part of the leadership did. The part that actually resisted the Japanese stayed behind.
got to love that stuff. in us eyes, anything other then communist leadership was good. it could be just as dictatorial or worse then the communists, as long as they where not communists...Well, if you consider the context of the times and the Soviet actions in Europe/violation of their wartime agreements (Potsdam and Yalta) then it really isn't that hard to understand why we were afraid of Communism. In retrospect our actions (particularly in Latin-America) weren't justifiable but it's too easy to condemn them with the full benefit of historical hindsight.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
But, the government of China isn't interested in the unbiased version of history. I'm sure the same can be said for Western governments on some topics as well to be fair.
It purely is about being able to control perception of their own citizens by controlling the message. "We have always been at was with East Anglia" from 1984 comes to mind.
Chairman Mao himself was the one who laid down the foundation for controlling the message of history. Make them believe your version of events, and you can shape how they'll feel about future events.
The more they can pretend that Tibet has always been under the direct control China, and that the people who lived in Tibet were "liberated" from slavery and serfdom when the Chinese army came in, the more they can change the focus of the issue. Their claim is that the people lived under a cruel and oppressive theocracy, and the Dalai Lama is secretly a villain is designed to support their position.
Sadly, if you get the whole Chinese populace riled up into thinking that everyone is picking on them, they have no strong basis for comparison. Heck, it's not like most of them know about what actually happened in Tianamen Square. They certainly don't really understand the oppression that has happened in Tibet over the last 50 years.
And, don't get me started on the Panchen Lama debacle -- the Chinese government don't feel the need to tell the truth about such things. They have always manipulated the truth to their own ends.
It is often hard to tell when the Chinese nationals are shouting down dissenting points of view if they actually believe that crap, or if they're just doing what they're told. I have a suspicion that a lot of them (even the ones here in Canada who were protesting against Western media bias last week) honestly don't know any different version of events. Therefore, they assume that we really are trying to hurt their national pride. They don't want to be told that their government is and has been lying to them.
Misinformed nationalism can be manipulated in lots of ways by those in power. As I said, I suspect some of it happens in the West as well. The "Us vs Them" mentality that it drives doesn't always help with informed debate.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
A pretty significant number of people both in Europe and the Middle East would thank you if you did
This makes me feel good actually. Don't you think the world would be better off if the USA had business office overseas, rather than troops. I keep asking myself, what country in their right mind really likes having foreign troops on its soil. I mean, I wouldn't really care for it too much if a German division was stationed in Delaware, and I can't imagine the Germans feel any differently. Now with the USA and UK, its a different animal and for some reason I could see the British being in the USA just because my grandfather and my wife's grandfather fought in the Pacific during World War II and to this day I am grateful that the British sent the largest fleet they ever produced (18 aircraft carriers, 4 battleships, and more), to have Seafires flying CAP over American landing forces at Okinawa. And, the British are with us in Iraq...
I keep thinking that the perception of America military hegemony with troops all across the globe is bad for public relations. The Cold War is over... if someone invades Europe, America will be there to defend you, but right now, I honestly think the best thing for the USA is to be a trading empire, not a military one.
I do not want the USA to make the Athenien mistake.
This is my sig.
Not that Chiang was exactly an angel, either, but - had the Chinese Civil War played out differently - the country might have been spared a generation having its soul ripped from it as a hyper-Stalinist slave-labour state. But I digress.
While support of the right of Tibetans to national and cultural self-determination is laudable, one must also have some recognition of China's recent history. The Chinese are very sensitive to anything they perceive as an attempt to divide (or even dismember) their country. This perception is quite understandable, given the number of foreign colonies, puppet states, spheres of influence, and disvestitures that China saw in the 19th and 20th centuries. They're not anxious to see Tibet become another Mongolia (which exists as an independent country today only because Josef Stalin wanted to be able to station troops within 500 km of Beijing) or Manchukuo (Japanese puppet régime in North China).
Given the circumstances - rather than demand Tibetan independence - I think that a much more reasonable solution would be encourage China to adopt a 'one country, different systems' policy similar to how it has handled Macau and Hong Kong, where I've personally had the opportunity to see Falun Gong meetings taking place, in the open and unmolested, within sight of the PRC flag flying over Bauhinia Square.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
- spied on its citizens
- taps their phone calls
- monitors internet traffic
- torture and imprisonment of people who don't get a trial (yay patriot act)
- kidnapped people in foreign lands and delivered them to torture centers
- meddled in the affairs of foreign governments to the point of overthrowing elected gov's and putting dictators in place (hello iran!)
- Hey, you don't think the patriot act is good? you're effing unamerican! While it isn't to the point of McCarthyism, it is present to an extent
- Their people are blinded by unfounded national pride.
The only difference is the extent at which the atrocities are performed (but where do you draw the line?) and the communist nature of their government compared with our own capitalist oligarchy.It is extremely rare to find a Chinese person who is willing to even listen to the Tibetans' own arguments about their millenia of independent history, not to mention about the horrors perpetrated by the CCP regime after Mao Zedong's 1950 invasion. Google for Grace Wang at Duke Uni. and "burned in oil" to learn how the true Chinese patriots deal with those of their own who merely want to promote debate.
For the Han Chinese race, and not just those still within the Great Firewall of China, this perceived imperial right to rule over neighbouring peoples has become an obsession, which is all the more ironic since the #1 pet hate of the Hans, basically taught since kindergarten, is against the foreign imperialists who "humiliated China" in the 19th and 20th centuries. The Chinese are taught, and this ideology only arose in the late 18th century, that the now billion+ overpopulated Han nation will violently break up if they allow their neighbouring peoples to regain their freedom and independence. (Why is that, btw.?)
Here's a fairly compact Aussie radio programme, with a transcript, about the reasons why the Chinese rulers claim that Tibet and Tibetans are theirs to do what they wish. Basically, the Chinese regime claims that since both Tibet and China were (albeit in very different ways) ruled or under the protection (as Tibet was) by the same foreign power during roughly the same period, after that foreign rule had collapsed the Chinese emperor automatically assumed (perceived) ownership over Tibet as well, despite having no de facto control or rule over the Tibetan nation.
The ultra-nationalistic Chinese you may have seen screaming LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! to pro-Tibetan demonstrators during the CCP's recent global torch parade tend to shout slogans like "TIBET BELONGS TO CHINA!", but if you somehow manage to ask them on what basis, they'll either continue screaming or come up with wildly different historical explanations, ranging from a marriage between a powerful Tibetan king and a Chinese princess (they always forget the Tibetan and Nepalese princesses somehow) in the first millenium to the claims of the foreign Mongol rule (known as the Yuan dynasty in China) in the 13th and the foreign Manchu rule (the Qing dynasty for the Chinese) in the 17th centuries as giving the Mao Zedong's China the absolute right of ownership over Tibet. (waitasec, I thought the communists were totally against any such feudal claiming of lands and peoples??)
If only such mediaval imperial babble was the end of it, but unfortunately the brutal oppression and systematic destruction of Tibetan cultural heritage, identity and language which started with Mao's invasion in the 1950s is still going on strong today. Even sadder is that very few Chinese either know or choose to believe the horrors China has committed in Tibet over the last half century. Some, like the well-known Chinese dissidents Wei Jinsheng and Henry Wu Hongda, who spent years in a Tibetan prison unit alongside Tibetan prisoners of conscience, have told about their experiences, but why would the proud Chinese of today choose democracy and the admission of their own shame when the Communist Party is hauling in foreign money and promising unprecedented global power?
International law be damned.
How much longer do the Tibetan people have to suffer until the Chinese learn that there are higher and more positive values in life than genocidal jingoism?
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
None of which contradicts the point of the post, that the whole anti-French thing in the lead up to the Iraq war was because they dared to say that they thought the case for war was stupid.
You might not like the French, but they were still right about Iraq.
While I appreciate the point you're trying to make (and, in fact, some Quebecois are doing exactly that), the situations are somewhat different.
Nobody is accusing China of human rights abuses because they won't grant independence to Tibet. They're accusing them of human rights abuses because of the documented cases of arresting the monks and nuns, torturing or killing them, trying to force them to renounce their religion and the Dalai Lama, displacing locals and moving in large quantities of Chinese citizens to settle Tibet
To the best of the knowledge of anyone who lived in Tibet previous to the Chinese occupation
Believe me, I don't claim to have a viable solution to Tibet, Quebec, Kosovo, or any other such conflict. If I did, I'd be the one with the Nobel Peace Prize and not the Dalai Lama.
These things are complicated, and greater minds than mine haven't solved them yet. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion and see the different points of view as best I can.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Perfect example of what? All I see is an inability to tell the difference. Tibet was a peaceful neighbor before it was invaded. Iraq had invaded two countries in the last 25 years. Iraq had invested heavily in a nuclear weapons program. Iraq donated considerable funds to terrorist groups. Iraq was a ruthless totalitarian state (even China is far better off now than Iraq was then). Tibet was a theocratic backwater, but it was never as disfunction or dangerous as Iraq was under Saddam Hussein. All of the current presidential candidates agree on leaving Iraq (except possibly a token military force, much like Germany). They only disagree on when and whether to set up a schedule ahead of time. Instead China claims that Tibet is as much a part of China as any other part of China.
We all are flawed. But there are things you cannot sanction. The best you can do is to try to do is to try to make the world a better place both at home and elsewhere. It is foolish to ignore a great evil elsewhere merely because your folk did something similar (possibly even worse) not so long ago. It remains a great evil.
No matter how the current Chinese government spins it, the occupation of Tibet remains a great evil. Tibet was an independent country when it was invaded and posed no threat to China. As I see it, it's only crime was that it was weak.
Further I don't see the government of China as legitimate. Who selected China's head of state? Who makes China's laws? Where in those processes do the Chinese people have a say? The US could be considerably more democratic, but they at least pick their head of state and the entire legislature via election. Those people are affirmed by the people with every vote. That is legitimacy. Further, the US citizen is permitted to complain, criticize, and denounce whatever they want to with mild restriction (you cannot legally incite public panic, reveal state secrets or medical information, say untrue things about another person or organization, etc). Despite what some slashdotters say here, that's what you can do in the US. Most stuff that would get you jailed in China, doesn't raise an eyebrow in the US.
As a citizen of the US, I have voted in every presidential election since 1988 (and most of the off year ones) and affirm every one of those elections. I have served in a jury. I have paid my taxes and obeyed (up to minor traffic violations) the laws of my land. By each of these acts, I reinforce the legitimacy of my government. The government and its citizens are occasionally stupid, but the system works pretty well. I've never had to watch my tongue for fear that I might say something unpleasing to some government official or bureaucracy. Sure, my government, my society, and I have done things which I am ashamed of. But I don't see how that should keep us from judging one another. The "flaws" in governments and countries kill people. We need justice at the international level not hollow laws that only the strong can break with impunity.
There are substantial societal and cultural differences. Chinese cultural has long been a strongly hieararchical one, with each level of society showing great deference to the next level up. That's one of the basis of Confucianism, the moral obligation of each individual, whatever their station, to those above them. The Chinese Communists tried to some extent to undermine that, but once Mao had gained power, he essentially took on the mantle of an Emperor, isolating himself from his inferiors, creating a sort of spiritual cult around himself. This was intentional, because it invoked a very ancient cultural motif. If Chiang Kai-shek failed, it's in large part because he was really too Western, a Christian who fashioned himself more in the mold of a Western military dictator, in a sense he was an alien cultural presence.
I'm not saying that people are fundamentally different in China, but rather that you just can't discount millennia of cultural influence. The West has certainly had its aristocracies, but it was never as rigid as it was in China. Western society, even in such stratified cultures as England was for centuries, simply did not have the absolute respect or fear of authority that you find in China.
I can also understand the position of the Chinese government. They saw the absolute chaos that reigned in Russia for a decade, the loss of key parts of the Soviet Empire, the ethno-religious war in Chechnya and the break down of social order. They have taken a much slower approach to reform, and to an extent I can appreciate that, but for them it's still the ancient cultural motif of a remote and isolated ruling class. Only in the last few years have they finally started to deal with the millennia-old problem that came from that system, and that's a corrupt bureaucracy.
Still, that's a Chinese problem, but the invasion and attempted cultural genocide of Tibet is something else entirely.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You also have to take into consideration Chinas longtime stance from Chairman Mao about disconnection with anything outside China.
Times there are changing, they are growing out of the disassociation, open trade, foreign imports, outsourcing labor there. It's a matter of time until this current generation of Chinese take control, and push their country into the 21st century to join the rest of the modern world.
Granted human rights are just that human, they should apply to all peoples, but life isn't that simple. It doesn't always happen like that, freedom isn't free, it comes with a price, sometimes that price is in human life, sometimes the cost is time. Time to grow, and learn, or just plain time for a new generation to take over and say "let's do it our way".
Until such a time, I don't think we as a planet need to hinder their growth, while government actions still should not be condoned, it would be better to show them how life can be when government doesn't control everything you read, watch, do, or say.
Here's to the inevitable day when there is a truely free and unified China.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Talk about ignorance. The behavior of the British in China was flat-out evil. From Wikipedia:
China banned the trade and importation of opium, on the basis that "Opium is a poison, undermining our good customs and morality. Its use is prohibited by law." They even wrote to Queen Victoria, asking why, since opium was banned in Britain, the British continued to sell it in China. When China seized opium from British traders who violated the law, Britain responded by invading China, seizing territory and forcing China to allow the opium trade. Other countries achieved similar concessions (including at least the French French, Italian, American sand Japanese). At one point, the British army marched to Beijing and burned down the Old Summer Palace, then said to be one of the wonders of the world .
The Chinese are on firm ground when they criticize past Western behavior in China. They are often correct when they describe our current policies and attitudes as hypocritical and self-serving. I detect an undertone of racism, or at least of xenophobia, in much of what is said about China. These are echoed by many Chinese, in China and in the West. We need to get beyond resentment, arrogance, and paranoia on both sides. The Chinese government is brainwashing its citizens. But (as a student of Communication) I can assure you, our media is doing something similar (in response to different pressures). Even though few people pursue alternative sources of information, it is important that in the West we are permitted access to them. For example, here's an in-depth argument by an expert that the Western media have slandered China with respect to Tibet. I haven't assessed it in detail, and I don't think it exonerates the Chinese government, but it is clear there's much more to this than we're hearing.
I live in Vancouver. Chinese comprise a large proportion of the population here. To stereotype a little, they are thoughtful, productive, essential members of my society. The same is true in Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa. For me, Canada would not be Canada without them. It saddens me greatly to witness the hatred directed toward them, just as it saddens me to see so many intelligent people (on both sides) follow the party line on Tibet.