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
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.
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.
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.
That and people don't like to be told why their country is bad. Just look at America.
This is rubbish. There are always large numbers of Americans to be found who hate Bush and the Iraq invasion and are willing to say so loudly. For Pete's sake there are plenty of idiots who believe Bush planned 9/11.
Similarly, in Europe, there are lots of anti-government groups (just look at the anti-globalism nuts) who get lots of airtime.
Wherever the whole country agrees, you can be sure you're not in a western democracy.
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
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.
My God, Slashdot groupthink at its very best.
:/
I was born in China but I grew up overseas. I have tons of relatives who live all over the world, from Paris to New York. They have access to all the information in the world.
But let me tell you this: Not a single person in my family supports Tibetan independence. Everyone supports the Olympics 100%.
My grandparents were Party members so we are relatively well off. Most of my aunts and uncles had university education and my cousins are studying overseas. These are people who regularly criticize the government in daily conversations over things like corruption and bureaucratic inefficiencies, because they are well-informed and aware of what is happening.
Westerners just can't grapple with the reality that the Chinese government is still generally popular and it's people, though overly addicted to nationalism and cultural pride, are NOT ignorant slaves that your corporate media and your condescending feel-good activists like you to believe.
I personally am very much against the operating principals of the Chinese government, as are my parents. But I think this whole Olympic protest business is just bullshit. It will only strengthen ugly nationalism and serve as an ego trip for those hippie protesters.
To fucking hell with karma.
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.
We have lots of ignorant and stupid people here too. They also have access to lots of information. Some people here that are stupid and ignorant are otherwise well educated.
The Olympics are a waste of time. They have become too politicized and too many dedicate their whole lives and their families make sacrifices only to see governments like China's play it for all it is worth for propaganda.
I haven't watched them in years - even when they have been in the USA.
What's wrong with Tibetan independence? What's wrong with Taiwanese independence? China is way too nationalistic, expansionistic, and subversive for western investment. Opening trade with China, especially in anything high-technology has been a big mistake. They abuse western trust.
And you attitude is a window into that behavior.
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.