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."

118 of 926 comments (clear)

  1. They're Right by courtarro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They're calling us hypocrites, and as a citizen of "the West" I can say they're exactly right.

    1. Re:They're Right by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're calling us hypocrites, and as a citizen of "the West" I can say they're exactly right.

      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.
    2. Re:They're Right by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.
    3. Re:They're Right by courtarro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So our past injustices excuse their modern day oppression?

      We have our fair share of modern-day oppression. I know it's a beaten horse, but Iraq is the perfect example. We may justify our actions differently, but the end result is very similar. Of course, citizens and their governments don't have to agree, but the actions of the government are what typically represent its citizens in the international view.

    4. Re:They're Right by Malevolent+Tester · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.
    5. Re:They're Right by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib are not that far in the past

      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.
    6. Re:They're Right by junglee_iitk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have long held that Tibetans are doomed. It is the exact reason why Gandhism fails - it has in the core a belief that oppressor will feel you pain at some point (or shame at oppressing you, whichever way you put it).

      But in this day and age of "remote" media, there is no (visual) connection between people - and the assumption fails at the very premise.

      If Tibetans had an army, fought a war - and lost - they would have a much better say.

    7. Re:They're Right by bhima · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.
    8. Re:They're Right by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Would you consider our ongoing injustices an internal matter or one that should be roundly discussed, with a final course dictated by the international community?

      Two things:

      1. I think it's pretty dangerous to try and 'dictate' anything to a country armed with nuclear weapons and ICBMs. This includes China and the United States.
      2. Yes, I think our ongoing injustices (Gitmo comes to mind) should be part of the global discussion. I also think our Allies and Trading Partners should be encouraging us to live up to past promises (*cough* Geneva Conventions *cough*) and the better parts of our history.

      In that same vain, I don't think the West should be dictating anything to China. But we don't need to be their lapdogs either. We don't need to overlook their abuses simply because it's profitable to do business with them.

      Personally, while I'm not going to encourage a boycott of the Olympics, I'm not really feeling any particular desire to go out of my way to watch them either. I felt a lot better about them when the Chinese were treating them as a well-deserved (IMHO) reintroduction to the World after decades of oppression and stagnation. If they turn them into a nationalist spectacle than I don't think comparisons between 2008 and 1936 are entirely unjustified.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:They're Right by quanticle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you really think that Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib can compare to the mass scale of oppression practiced by the Chinese security services?

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    10. Re:They're Right by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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?

    11. Re:They're Right by lumierang · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am Chinese and I received this poem circulating in the Chinese circle which I think captures the sentiment of ordinary Chinese rather well .
      A LETTER FROM AN ORDINARY CHINESE

      When we were seen as "Sick Men from East Asia", we were called The Peril.
      When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.

      When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.
      When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.

      When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.
      When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!

      So, we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communists.
      Then we learned from Capitalism, you hated us for being Capitalists.

      When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
      So we tried to limit our population, you said it was Human Rights Abuse.

      When we were poor, you think we are dogs.
      When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.

      When we build our industries, you blame us for global warming.
      When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.

      When we buy oil, you called that exploitation and assisting genocide.
      When you fight for oil, you called that Liberation of Its People.

      When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
      When we uphold our law and order against violence, you called that Violating Human Rights.

      When we were silent, you said we have No Free Speech.
      When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed".

      "Why do you hate us so much?" We asked.
      "No" You answered, "We don't hate you."
      Truth is we really don't hate you either, but do you understand us?
      "Of course we do" You said, "We have BBC, CNN and AFPs."
      So we ask you now "What do you really know and want from us?"
      And "Why do you find it SO hard to accept us?"

    12. Re:They're Right by ClamIAm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They are hypocritical in calling us hypocrites.

    13. Re:They're Right by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up, moral relativism is a bullshit creed of cowards and sophists.

      So, tells us then ... what is the source of your moral absolutism?

      If it is any of "God", "because we say so", or "it should be self evident", you lose.

      Morality comes from a reasoned assertion, a religious assertion, or the belief that the Universe had a plan in mind. It is not physics or mathematics, but a convention chosen and applied by men. It is most certainly not an inherent fact of the Universe.

      I fail to see how you can assert that there is an objective, absolute morality unless you can show me some physical thing from whence it derives. Or, you're just decreeing that your own morality is absolute and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong -- which is the worst case of relativism there can be.

      Cheers
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    14. Re:They're Right by theelectron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Affect: yes.
      Capable of stopping: no.

      There is an important difference there.

    15. Re:They're Right by bishiraver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While China's economy is based on exporting crap to us, our federal bonds are issued mostly to the Chinese government.

      I've said it once, and I'll say it again. We are in a state of economic mutually-assured destruction.

      They call in our debt: our economy collapses. They can't sell their shit to us anymore. Their economy collapses.

      We stop buying their shit: Their economy collapses and they're forced to call in their debt. Our economy collapses.

      While China's economic strength is tied to ours, our strength is just as equally tied to theirs.

    16. Re:They're Right by Jerf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Comparing Guantanamo Bay to China is absurd, utterly absurd, and disproves your own point.

      Remember why people object to Guantanamo Bay. It has little or nothing to do with the treatment of the prisoners; people who have actually been there, even those very critical of the facility, find no fault there. (What few allegations there are show every sign of having been trumped up by the terrorists if you actually investigate it, and that is literally out of the terrorist playbook... and by literally, I mean that documents telling terrorists to make allegations of Koran abuse if they are captured have been found.) The complaint about Guantanamo Bay is that the people being held there weren't having their human right to a fair trial upheld, they were simply held there without trial.

      This is certainly a strong start to an argument that Guantanamo Bay is a place where human rights are repressed.

      However, in China, everyone is treated that way and worse . Everyone. Read that link. (The whole thing. It also shows some interesting progress being slowly made. But the rules for defense would be utterly unacceptable to the same people protesting Guantanamo. Read the last sentence, too.)

      To hold up Guantanamo Bay as an equivalent atrocity is to betray the very arguments being made against GB. To complain that treating a handful of active, violent enemies of a state that conduct their activities in flagrant and persistent violation of the Geneva Conventions (which as so many people conveniently forget lays responsibilities upon combatants too, not just countries) is equivalent to treating an entire country worse, not even the same but worse, is to display a moral relativism that simply staggers the mind.

      If you object to Guantanamo Bay, you should be objecting to the Chinese regime a millionfold more! In China, Guantanamo Bay would be the progressive prison.

    17. Re:They're Right by amplt1337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most people who harp on moral relativism grossly misunderstand it.

      It's not about condoning others' moral beliefs, it's about acknowledging that they have them, and are sincere about them, and might even be rather attached to them, and then modifying your behavior so that you can get along with them.

      Unless you want to convert the world to your own particular morality (i.e., destroy freedom), you have to live and let live to a certain extent. You don't have to endorse others' beliefs to acknowledge that they exist, and that others act as though they were legitimate.

      And between the choices of, say, moral relativism and Sharia law, well as nice as it would be not to have to shave any more, I think I'll choose the relativists, thank you.

      --
      Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.
    18. Re:They're Right by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We have our fair share of modern-day oppression. I know it's a beaten horse, but Iraq is the perfect example. We may justify our actions differently, but the end result is very similar. Of course, citizens and their governments don't have to agree, but the actions of the government are what typically represent its citizens in the international view.

      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.

    19. Re:They're Right by JerryLove · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When we were seen as "Sick Men from East Asia", we were called The Peril.
      When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat. Strong things *are* a threat.

      When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns. The major source of opiates, the drug of choice for centuries in China, is your neighbor Afghanistan. Don't blame us for that.

      When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs. No we don't. That's why there aren't petitions to China to change what they charge. We blame our trade agreements with you for costing us jobs and try to change US consumers and leaders.

      When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind. As someone from a country that provided troops and supplies to you during WWII, has never invaded you (minus perhaps a few miles near the Korean border after you attacked us), and that is largely responsible for the rapid growth in your economy thorough our trade (even gave you favored nation status), I'm really confused who you are talking about.

      When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion! I don't think your economy was related to the free Tibet movement. Was it an invasion? Seems you have a red-herring there.

      So, we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communists. That's fair. You hated us for being a republic.

      Then we learned from Capitalism, you hated us for being Capitalists. I'm looking for the "China sucks because it's capatalist" group but I can't find that. You are lying.

      When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."
      So we tried to limit our population, you said it was Human Rights Abuse. I'll side with you here. I think the one-clid policy was a good idea and it's wrong for those who criticize it to do so without offering solutions.

      When we were poor, you think we are dogs.
      When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts. Both simple lies. Our debts are the fault of our government and our buying. Few people are saying differently.

      When we build our industries, you blame us for global warming.
      When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products. You are warming the globe, your toothpaste tends to kill people. They are valid complaints.

      When we buy oil, you called that exploitation and assisting genocide.
      When you fight for oil, you called that Liberation of Its People. Are we committing genocide in Iraq? Is putting $80,000,000,000 per year into a country with no real return and loosing thousands of American lives "exploiting"?

      Don't get me wrong, I oppose the invasion of Iraq, but "exploting genocide" would have been continuing to support Saddam, much like China and Sudan.

      When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.
      When we uphold our law and order against violence, you called that Violating Human Rights. I am aware of no protest over China arresting people for violent crime. You are, again, making it up.

      When we were silent, you said we have No Free Speech.
      When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed". So before we said you had no free speech and now we say you have no free speech? Pointing out that we are consistant is hardly an argument. Prove you have free speech.

      Truth is we really don't hate you either, but do you understand us? Not really. I don't understand BinLauden either. Is understanding a prerequsite to something?
    20. Re:They're Right by microbox · · Score: 2, Informative

      They did have an army, did fight, and lost. I think Tibetan army was about 5000. The Dalai Lama asked his army to disband, but some continued fighting, esp. when the Chinese started pointing their artillery at monasteries.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    21. Re:They're Right by Xeriar · · Score: 3, Informative

      > When we were seen as "Sick Men from East Asia", we were called The Peril.

      A growing market will destabilize existing markets until they themselves are saturated. It's not just China, it's India, Brazil, and Russia (again) - all striving to be superpowers themselves. Unfortunately corruption and a lack of transparency hamstring each of you and it's beginning to tear the United States apart as well.

      > When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.

      Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.

      > When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.

      But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.

      > When we finally embraced Free Trade, you blame us for taking away your jobs.

      This is a lie, since your trade is not 'Free', but listening to your compatriots whine about Indonesians taking your jobs is amusing.

      > When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.

      Ah, yes, I suppose we should have let Japan run free and build the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. How many Nankings do you want?

      > When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!

      It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.

      > So, we tried Communism, you hated us for being Communists.

      Except you didn't, you were Maoists.

      > Then we learned from Capitalism, you hated us for being Capitalists.

      Except you're not.

      > When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."

      No, we said 'the planet is starving', and an American man showed you how to feed a billion people.

      > So we tried to limit our population, you said it was Human Rights Abuse.

      No, when you perform gender-specific abortions, we called -that- a human rights abuse.

      > When we were poor, you think we are dogs.

      I think it's a pity, when entire rivers are drained dry and water supply is intentionally misregulated.

      > When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.

      Who's blaming -you-? You could always not lend, but that's not an option for you. When two people place themselves into a mutual trap the fault is not the sole fault of one or the other.

      > When we build our industries, you blame us for global warming.

      And we blame ourselves too. The corruption inherent to your coal industry is not our fault.

      > When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.

      Lead and arsenic in products is, by Western standards, inferior. Your point?

      > When we buy oil, you called that exploitation and assisting genocide.

      When did we say that? It's a bit ironic since:

      > When you fight for oil, you called that Liberation of Its People.

      Iraqi oil is for you, not us.

      > When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.

      America has long appreciated peace. Peace is good for business. These past few decades have been an odd spot.

      > When we uphold our law and order against violence, you called that Violating Human Rights.

      Murdering intellectuals and running over protesters with tanks is generally called that by us, yes. We like to think that you got the Great Leap Forward out of your system. Do you even -know- about that?

      > When we were silent, you said we have No Free Speech.

      When people are arrested for making dissenting statements, we call that a move against free speech.

      > When we are NOW

    22. Re:They're Right by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But you're okay when China pushes their own system on others? Rule by force is fine indeed, but I suspect you'd be singing a different tune if you'd be the target of the boot.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    23. Re:They're Right by Jorophose · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Great, more wonderful propanganda on Slashdot.

      Would you like to educate us on "One China" now?

      The Chinese government is full of shit and so are the people who clearly can't seem to understand that.

      Instead of doing the responsible thing and learning from our mistakes, you took our mistakes and built right on them. The Chinese could have helped build up the solar energy industry, and I would have been 100% supportive of helping them. But no, you have to build more coal and oil energy plants. Thanks, Chinese; now instead of slowly heading towards a strange future, we are now shooting towards it.

      That's not even considering the fact that you killed off a nearly unique species of dolphins! You also killed off so much life in your country, you've turned your waters black and orange, and you're killing off whatever marine life that has been trying to stay alive. Not including the fact that you put everybody's space plans in jepoardy; we've now got chuncks of artificial satellites floating around, which they'll be doing for another few thousand years, and they might not ever fall down.

      Silent no more? I'd rather the PRC remain silent than spew bullshit. Syria isn't silent. Of course we all know they are full of shit. You are brainwashed. Tibet was a demilitarised country that you invaded, pillaged, and litterally raped. And why? The chairman demands it!

      Thanks China, really, thanks. I can see clearly now that you're a wonderful nation boasting freedom of speech and doesn't fall to the censorship that other nations take. And of course, your war of liberation for Tibet was nothing like our war of liberation for Iraq! Of course not! How could Saddam Hussein ever be doing anything wrong to his people!

      ("[...] as though suddenly millions of Tibetans cried to the sky and were silenced instantly.")

      (And as for modpoints, feel free. I don't give a damn.)

    24. Re:They're Right by sydneyfong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > When we strived to get stronger, we are called The Threat.

      Not many US policymakers consider China to be a threat, though China is the closest thing to a threat the US has. Consider it a badge of honor, only two other nations in history ever really were.

      Let's start the discussion with a wholehearted "fuck you". Consider it as a badge of honor, since I don't think I've been using this level of profanity since my first comment on slashdot.

      > When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.

      But forcing Tibet's doors is just fine. I'll freely admit that the US has committed many, many wrongs. Acting like China hasn't does not paint a healthy picture of you.

      Nobody said USA "forced them open with drugs and guns". When this began to happen USA didn't even exist. Heh. Or you'd think the USA is the only Western country? Get a perspective. Take a look at the Opium Wars.

      > When we put the broken pieces back together again, "Free tÂbet" you screamed, it was an invasion!

      It was an invasion. No matter how atrociously Tibet's previous leadership treated its people, it's still an invasion. In truth, it would not concern us so much if you did not try to suppress or co-opt belief systems.

      The Tibet occupation/invasion was not a religious crusade of any kind. Unlike you Americans and those bible-loving-fundamentalists, the Chinese are at least tolerant with religion as long as they don't involve politics.

      > When we were falling apart, you marched in your troops and robbed us blind.

      Ah, yes, I suppose we should have let Japan run free and build the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. How many Nankings do you want?

      In 1900, Your troops invaded Beijing, robbed and pillaged the city. The Japanese were resisted in China by the Communists and KMT.

      > When we sell you goods you can afford, you blame us for dumping inferior products.

      Lead and arsenic in products is, by Western standards, inferior. Your point?

      The point is, you don't bother to crank out the money to buy higher quality products. If you pay crap, you get crap. Simple.

      > When we were lost in chaos and rampage, you wanted Rules of Law for us.

      America has long appreciated peace. Peace is good for business. These past few decades have been an odd spot.

      Lol? Tell me which in decade America hasn't been at war invading others. Look at Chinese history in the past 300 (that's BEFORE your country was even established) years and the ONLY instance of so called "invasion" is Tibet?

      Yeah right America has long appreciated peace.

      > When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts.

      Who's blaming -you-? You could always not lend, but that's not an option for you. When two people place themselves into a mutual trap the fault is not the sole fault of one or the other.

      Trap????? Tell that to the Bank of America who should to be blamed for lending money to all these people and holding them mortgage. Duh money lending should be criminalized! I mean, a bankrupt person should be able to file suit on his creditors because they entrapped him into borrowing money from them!!

      > When we had a billion people, you said "The planet is starving."

      No, we said 'the planet is starving', and an American man showed you how to feed a billion people.

      Who is this great American man? You?

      > When we are NOW silent no more, you say we are merely "Brainwashed".

      You have your points, and we have ours. If you are unwilling to look at another side of an issue, you are.

      You mean, since you are all knowing, always correct, never wrong, you've investigated all sides of the issues, that if we don't agree with you

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    25. Re:They're Right by sydneyfong · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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 USA has invaded countless countries in the last 25 years. USA has the most extensive nuclear weapons program. USA funds many terrorist groups....

      What's the difference? That the allegations against the USA are actually TRUE? (instead of some fabricated shit created by the US media-propaganda)

      American invaded Iraq who posed no real threat. Where's the "difference" you speak of? If a "threat" to the rest of the world is a reason for invasion, the USA should be the first country to be exterminated from the face of the planet.

      We all are flawed. But there are things you cannot sanction. We'd like to see Bush and his warmongers sanctioned for their war crimes.
      --
      Don't quote me on this.
  2. History by Applekid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the most vocal appeals by the Chinese blogs, forums, and text-messages has been to boycott French goods . . . Many analysts believe that the protests over Tibet have only served to strengthen Chinese nationalism rather than evoke sympathy for the Tibetan cause. And 5 years ago just about every American was in favor of war against Iraq, and boycotting French goods due to their being "against us" in the UN?

    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
    1. Re:History by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And 5 years ago just about every American was in favor of war against Iraq, and boycotting French goods due to their being "against us" in the UN?


      Not true, really. A lot of Americans were either ambivalent or against the war. It's just that our news media decided that they supported the war and that serious foreign policy thinkers were those that 1) supported the war, and 2) show up in the same cozy Washington/NYC cocktail party circuit as the reporters. Part of this was because the Republican party made damn sure to question the patriotism and intelligence of anyone who didn't strictly believe the Bush administration's bullshit.

      One day, I hope to have a full accounting of exactly how intentionally bullshitty the case for war really was, as well as some nice war crimes trials in the Hague for the responsible party. I'll not be holding my breath.
    2. Re:History by zstlaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well because they were against us going to war. They "claimed" the war in Iraq was unjustified and that there was no evidence of WMDs. But we showed them! Ha Ha! Take that you Frenchies! Gonna eat me some more freedom fries.

    3. Re:History by truthsearch · · Score: 2, Informative

      The French also had a strong economic interest in keeping the region stable as a larger percentage of their oil comes from the middle east.

    4. Re:History by Applekid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's just that our news media decided that they supported the war and that serious foreign policy thinkers were those that 1) supported the war, and 2) show up in the same cozy Washington/NYC cocktail party circuit as the reporters. Wait a minute wait a minute... I think you just stumbled on something. Didn't China just recently stop blocking western English-language news agencies? I wonder if this anti-west anti-pro-tibet might be related.

      Hmmmm...
      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    5. Re:History by Nursie · · Score: 5, Informative

      Umm, please don't revise history this way.

      You know full well it was precisely because the french were not only not going to commit forces to Iraq, but actively opposed it and rubbished the evidence. They turned out to be correct.

      yes, they may have had dodgy financial involvements in the region, but it was the sheer gall to oppose the US in its supposed hour of need (bullcrap) that caused the backlash.

    6. Re:History by vidarh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still would like to see the USA withdraw all troops from Europe and the middle east, and let those people get their own oil, for the things Chirac said.

      A pretty significant number of people both in Europe and the Middle East would thank you if you did.

  3. Racist by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Racist Western Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful.

    China is a race? I thought the Chinese were Asian (or Oriental). Japan, Korea, Thailand, none of these Asian countries populated by Orientals have been stopped from being sucessful. When I was in Thailand in the USAF in 1974 it was incredibly primitive, but we had a Thai intern a few years ago who informed me that the roads are now paved, they have electricity and running water now, and it has become thoroughly modern and industrialized.

    I'm starting to believe that whenever someone starts screaming "race" (Jesse Jackson et al) the one screaming "racist" is, in fact, the true racist.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    1. Re:Racist by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      China is pretty much a race. China has had a culture of extermination and assimilation for the last couple thousand years that has led them to have 92% of their subjects sharing a single ethnicity. This is what they're trying to do in Tibet - move in Han Chinese to overwhelm and eventually erase everything Tibettan about Tibet. It's the same way the U.S. basically stole Texas from Mexico a long time ago. I'm glad, though, that immigration and a relative attitude of acceptance toward diversity has made America such a diverse place. I'd hate to become a Borg.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    2. Re:Racist by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When I was in Thailand I learned that the Thais hated the Chinese, that China had been trying to take over Thailand for 5,000 years. Bit both are Asian countries populated by orientals, to say that the Chinese are a race is like saying the Irish are a race. Sure, the Irish and Germans are both caucasians but there are marked differences in looks and culture, far more than the difference between a Thai and a Korean (there are pretty much the same types of differences).

      I agree with your post about diversity, and although I'd hate to be a Star Trek borg I'm already a cyborg by dictionary definition. I have a device planted in my left eye that replaces its focusing lens, the first IOL that actually can focus. Details are in the link in my sig, I just had another operation to that eye 2 weeks ago that replaced most of its vitreous (latest journal) because the retina detached.

      I'm fond of saying "you will be assimilated. Resistance is not only futile but when the time comes you will beg to join us".

      You have a great sig btw. So sad, too true.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    3. Re:Racist by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mexico controlled Texas, but didn't have a lot of citizens there. An American named Austin encouraged settlement of Texas by Americans, who were then Mexican citizens in name, but English-speaking Americans culturally. This was done with approval of Mexico at first, but as more Americans showed up they started to get nervous. The American-Mexicans first started stirring up unrest when Mexico began making motions toward abolishing slavery. The eventual war took place, and was won by the American-Mexicans, because of this aggressive settlement that took place 30 years preceding it.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  4. The reaction should not be surprising by Enlarged+to+Show+Tex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:The reaction should not be surprising by Serenissima · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, the news that's actually making it TO the Chinese people is so edited and biased that they're not getting the real facts about stuff.

      I would think the Chinese Government would rather tells lies and half-truths to get as many people as possible pissed off at the West. If you can get everyone pissed off, you won't have to block or make up news coming out. We all know genuinely pissed off people have no problem telling the whole world about it on the internet. They'll be angry based on lies, but I'm pretty sure the Chinese Government (or any Government) is going to lose any sleep by lying to the public if it can make them - at least appear to be - stronger and more patriotic.

      --
      Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
    2. Re:The reaction should not be surprising by hoshino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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. :/

    3. Re:The reaction should not be surprising by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:The reaction should not be surprising by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

      i understand your point about stupid westerners

      but it would be interesting to hear your opinion on the TIBETAN protestors, which, here in midtown manhattan near the UN, i've been seeing almost daily for the last few weeks

      in other words, its one thing for you to dispute the words of idiotic westerners, which i agree with you about. but one would be really interested to hear in what way you dismiss the concerns of tibetans themselves

      i think real peace in tibet comes when the han colonists stop treating the tibetans so badly. perhaps even back out of tibet. or, barring that, stop being allowed a two-tiered class system where the han get jobs, and tibetans get kicked to the roadside. appeasment of the tibetans will of course also include a large amount of self-rule, return of the dalai lama. but apart from outright independence, if china were to allow tibet more internal autonomy, this might even pave the way for china to prove to the world that the absorption of taiwan would proceed smoothly too

      but when the wider world watches how han imperialism crushes tibetan basic rights, in their own damn country/ province, one thinks nothing but that china does not deserve to get its hands on taiwan

      think about it. making the tibetans happy is the path to china peacefully reuniting with taiwan

      outright xenophobic ultranationalism and han imperialism and treating tibetans like dirt means the wider world defying taiwanese reunion

      nationalism is ugliness, and self-defeating. even when the chinese do it. the chinese must learn this, and they will, the hard way, or the easy way. not because the west has anything to teach the chinese, but simply that blind pride and hubris is self-defeating

      the point is, han imperialism is the real problem, western idiots are the sideshow. not visa versa. western hippies do not create han imperialists. han imperialists inflame western hippies. you have your cause and effect backwards. and therefore, if you understood the real cause and effect you would be focusing most of your criticism at han imperialism, not western idiots

      or continue your chinese nationalist pride, and justify to yourself why it is ok to think the tibetans have no validity to their complaints

      and reap what you sow

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  5. Brainwashed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just goes to show you how powerful the propaganda machine in China is. To give you an idea of how unsurprising this really is, consider the fact that there are many Chinese people who believe that Tiananmen Square never happened.

    1. Re:Brainwashed. by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 5, Interesting

      you have no idea how true this is.

      I am currently teaching ESL in Korea.

      there are a lot of Chinese people working in Korea, and since they speak limited English, and I am here with a friend who speaks Chinese, and we are foreigners in a strange land, we spend a lot of time together, talking.

      One day, Tienanmen square came up, and they wondered why Westerners always made a big deal about that particular spot.

      "it was just a bunch of bad students" one said to me. she knew something happened there one, but no specifics.

      that was all they knew.
      Tienanmen was just "A bunch of bad students"

      I went online, showed them that famous footage.
      there was shock, outrage, and disbelief.
      2 of them now refuse to return to China.

      makes you wonder what our governments are hiding from us.

      My Chinese friends are always making little jabs at me here and there, because British Colonialism was so awful, and wrong. And being white makes me inherently guilty of everything wrong with the world. (despite the fact that i am not British)

      They all agree that Tibet is a part of China

      I told them all "fine, i will agree to that, Tibet is as much a part of China as India is a part of Britian."

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
    2. Re:Brainwashed. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually it's more insidious than that. I dated a Chinese girl who said something like "the government had to stop the riot, they killed some soldiers by burning them alive".

      And it's true, some of the soldiers who cleared out Tiananmen were lynched and set on fire in the anarchy after tanks went in. But that was after tanks went in, before that the demonstration was peaceful and about democracy. Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Zhao Ziyang talked to the students and told Gorbachev (according to Gorbachev's autobiography) that over the short term there would be democracy inside the party but in the long run multi party democracy was inevitable and the Communist party should have to adapt to the point where it could win elections. His more brutish colleagues sent the tanks in and then used resulting deaths to justify it. Zhao was put under house arrest until he died. In an odd sort of way, that was a sign of progress, previous purged leaders were killed or sent to a concentration camp.

      In Taiwan, one year after Tiananmen, there was a similar movement, the Wild Lily movement. Lee Teng Hui, who had just been elected President by a parliament last elected 50 years before met the students and told them that he would call Presidential and Parliamentary elections where every Taiwanese citizen could vote and allow the recently formed opposition party to stand. The students left, LTH ended the State of Emergency which had lasted since the civil war, called elections and won them. Even more remarkably he enacted term limits and stepped down when his ended. No tanks, no lynched soldiers. And it's funny how the Chinese don't care about the 20,000 soldiers that died in the Sino Vietnam war. Oddly enough it was mostly soldiers who fought in that war who were sent into Tiananmen, since they came from the part of China bordering Vietnam and had been told that a violent counter revolution was happening in Beijing. And relations with Vietnam improved which Vietnam's equally loathsome Communist government enthusiastically supported

      You can see the same thing with Tibet - some Tibetans did kill Han Chinese and that is clearly wrong. And the Western Media did not cover that for a while. But that's because the Chinese government banned them from Tibet to avoid coverage of the crackdown. Any violence in Tibet is unnecessary too. The Dalai Lama has said he is not seeking independence, opposes violence and is willing to talk. If they talked to him and made a few concessions like legalising the Tibetan language, he could probably sell that to the Tibetans. Instead they demonize him, oppress them and then publicise any riot as proof that more oppression is needed. If China was a democracy, Tibetans would be allowed to change policy without rioting. And violent groups could be marginalised by media criticism.

      I actually hope that the CCP is dooming itself. Protests in Tibetan and rising inflation were supposed to be the causes of Tiananmen. Most Chinese I suspect hate them and want a free society. Actually if China was a democracy which allowed its regions a high level of autonomy, they could probably do a deal with Taiwan too, another nationalist cause the CCP exploits to stay in power.

      Even this attempt to substitute absolute censorship for a creepy groupthink set up by more selective censorship is dangerous. The people ranting about the Western media now have much more serious things to complain about nearer to home, and they can find out just how much they have been lied too if they take advantage of the recent unblocking of the BBC and CNN. Then again, maybe it's like Iran where the people demonstrating against the West are all either government zealots or dragged along against their beliefs.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Brainwashed. by piemcfly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      QFT.

      I'm currently studying in Seoul, Korea, and the nationalism of the chinese students I encounter is pretty frightening.

      The weird way they swerve between the official government line that's burned into their minds and their own rationality is extremely interesting to see too. Very 1984-ish.

      On the other hand, nothing discredits the western fear-mongering over chinese intentions quicker than a sitdown over a cup of soju with a chinese dude.

      It'll be interesting to see how the chinese government will handle the rampant nationalism. Sometimes they can use it, like now with the olympics/tibet, but other times it really messes up their whole 'peaceful rise' idea... they're doing their darndest to become a non-threatening part of the international capitalist system, and then their own internal problems always get brought up as criticism.
      Not that it isn't their own fault for allowing economical freedom without political freedom...

  6. Totalitarian regime by should_be_linear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Totalitarian regime by Yvanhoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, we are calling a group of nationalist Chinese bloggers "Chinese blogs". I am not sure this is more believable.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  7. a little note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    please never use the word "netizens" ever again, in any circumstance.

    thank you,
    the internet users who aren't douchebags

  8. Matter of culture by The+Analog+Kid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Matter of culture by Xenna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Matter of culture by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe... maybe... they could be misinformed ? Imagine America where only Fox News would be authorized. This is not cultural difference, the Chinese people act in a sane way given the informations they are fed with.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  9. Brilliant, evil, or both? by zstlaw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    On one hand I don't get good coverage of the situation in Tibet because western reporters just do not go there. And on the other hand Chinese reporting is state run and thus essentially a state run propaganda outlet.

    Having observed the Dali Lama's tours and speeches for the last few year I find Chinese media assertion that The Dali Lama is running a terrorist network absurd, but their reporting to the contrary might be causing Tibetan supporters of the Dali Lama to become more extreme as the only media source available to them tell them that the Dali Lama is urging armed uprising.

    In many ways the Chinese government is seeding the dissent which will give them an excuse for violent oppression of the Tibetan people. I am not sure whether this is evidence of a brilliantly executed evil agenda or standard government incompetence.

  10. so the french get it both ways by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Funny

    do they call french fries fuck tibet fries in china?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:so the french get it both ways by PinkyDead · · Score: 4, Funny

      People's Fries.

      --
      Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  11. In all this noise... by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..the voice of the Tibetans is lost. I say, who cares about hypocrites and nationalists, who even cares about Olympic games and sponsors and the Great Market of China; isn't sympathizing with an oppressed minority a good thing - regardless? ESPECIALLY when the odds are stacked so firmly and outstandingly against them? Because being on the receiving end of China is, in the end, being on the receiving end of any country that wants to do business with and in China.

    Just think about that, for a moment...

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:In all this noise... by moeinvt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I suppose that "sympathizing with an oppressed minority" is generally a good thing. However, making a complete ass out of yourself by doing something as obnoxious and futile as physically impeding the running of the Olympic torch isn't the best way to express your sympathy.

  12. Re:Uh.. by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Insightful

    '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.'

    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.
  13. Welcome to the 21st century by Hoplite3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think this is a great example of what the 21st century has in store.

    I have a lot of Chinese (national) friends, even one who is a member of the CCP. They definitely take the Tibet protests personally. The CCP has been very clever at manipulating national sentiment on this issue, and it is very interesting to me because it is a clash between the western narrative of China as a brutal oppressor and the eastern narrative of the west as a patronizing colonial force.

    Talking to Chinese of all stripes, I find they don't understand the western image of China is a man standing down a tank. That isn't the life they came from. On the other hand, most can't grapple with the Maoist atrocities. They're taught all about the opium wars and colonialism, though. So when east meets west, both sides see the world in very different light.

    Personally, while I do worry about Tibetan culture being diluted and people being oppressed, I'm not sure that (a) I have the moral standing to tell others not to opppress people (It's not like we're going to offer Hawaii autonomy now, is it?) (b) it's generally good for every ethnic group to live in its own autonomous enclave.

    I also think that worrying about cultural dilution is something rich nations can ponder, along with rights for dogs, and all the other quandaries of affluence.

    I do wish the Chinese would confront the human rights abuses in their past more fully. I wish they had better protections for workers and better labor laws. Communist regimes seem to always have this problem. If the government is made of labor unions ("soviets"), but the union is no longer responsive to the workers needs, who can they turn to?

    It's not an idle question. Look at the coal mine riots in the USSR during the 30's. The workers "unionized" and complained about unsafe conditions and long hours. The government, nominally concerned primarily with the average worker, sent in the troops who busted the riot in a way that would make Pinkertons blush.

    I'm not saying that's how life in China is, but I am saying it's a structural flaw of a one-party government. But if it looks like I'm casting stones from my glass house, I'd say that my own government was set up to have competition between branches that would protect my freedoms. However, the formation of political parties has lead to collusion between branches, undoing much of the good envisioned by the writers of our constitution. It'd be nice to have a structural change here to deal with that.

    --
    Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
    1. Re:Welcome to the 21st century by Moridineas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this is a great example of what the 21st century has in store.

      I have a lot of Chinese (national) friends, even one who is a member of the CCP. They definitely take the Tibet protests personally. The CCP has been very clever at manipulating national sentiment on this issue, and it is very interesting to me because it is a clash between the western narrative of China as a brutal oppressor and the eastern narrative of the west as a patronizing colonial force. I very much agree with this. In highschool ~10 years ago, a good friend of mine was of Chinese origin. He had grown up in China until the age of 8, moved to Canada, and then to the US when he was 15.

      Despite the fact that the majority of his thinking years were spent in Western countries, he was fiercely pro-Chinese government. He used to get in arguments with anyone that would bring up Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Tibet. Utterly unapologetic, and very much saw Americans/Westerners caring about these places as trying to keep the Chinese government down. He would defend crackdowns and government actions as the price of improving the nation, etc.

      On the otherhand, another friend of mine from China had the exact opposite point of view he did. She was in fact VERY anti-Chinese government. Then again, she had vivid memories of hearing gunshots as she was in gradeschool a few blocks from Tianamen square when the protests there went down... I think that's the kind of thing that can change your perspective.
    2. Re:Welcome to the 21st century by junglee_iitk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In all this controversy, where are the opinions of Tibetans? It has been either painted as "West" or "Chinese".

      Read the wikipedia talk page - anyone on them related to the torch relay. Coming from nationalist family myself I can totally understand the knee jerk reaction from a Chinese - but it still baffles me that in this whole show, Tibetans are not even involved.

    3. Re:Welcome to the 21st century by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My main beef is that Chinese nationalists do not understand that when I say "The Chinese government ought not to oppress Tibetans", I say it - not the economist, not CNN, not Bush. Conversely, when anyone of them says anything, it doesn't mean I'm saying it. For some reason, that seems lost on them. As a result, I can't be a hypocrite for advocating human rights while Bush advocates Guantanmo Bay.

      As for manipulating nationalism, you're spot on. There've been various stories in the past where there was concern that the CCP was breeding a monster it will ultimately not be able to control. We'll see if that'll be the case. But I think the Olympic Games will be the most interesting in years.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  14. No, they are not by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:No, they are not by VirginMary · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no individual right to keep and bear arms in China like there is in the west.

      What do you mean by "west"? Is this U.S. American arrogance or ignorance? I am from Western Europe. Last time I checked we were part of the "West." European countries tend to have much tighter gun laws than the United States. When I was in graduate school in physics in the U.S. I had friends from all over the world, including Europe and all of them agreed with me on thinking that Americans are crazy to tolerate their lax gun ownership laws. In fact all agreed that guns do not belong in the hands of civilians with the possible exception of hunting rifles. So be careful when you say "we", you Americans do not automatically speak for all Westerners. (A good example would have been the initiation of the Iraq invasion.) Of course I agree on your other point about the extent of censorship in the West vs. China even though I had my doubts about the U.S. in this area just prior to the Iraq invasion.

      --
      When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
  15. Re:Uh.. by Nursie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "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.

  16. And the Chinese Communist Party.... by the_raptor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... had absolutely nothing to do with starting this "backlash". Why do we even care what the average Chinese citizen thinks about this issue? They have no power, and would be arrested if they tried anything like the Paris protests.

    The whole point of the protests is to embarrass the oligarchs, not to get the Chinese people to pay attention.

    --

    ========
    CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
  17. Welcome to the age of mob rule by marketanomaly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Welcome to the age of mob rule. We created the tech tools for the world to raise it's voice and assert its values. I think we generally assumed that this voice would express our values better, more clearly. I do not think this is going to be the case. Maybe oppressive authoritarian regimes are actually a good thing. They seem to be pretty popular!

  18. Don't make China angry... by Dreadneck · · Score: 2, Funny

    or else they might start shipping us lead tainted toys, poison pet food and contaminated medicines... oh, wait.

    Xenophobes being xenophobic - why is this news?

    --
    Power does not corrupt - power attracts the corrupt.
  19. the us slaughtered native americans by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  20. Re:Uh.. by hitmark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  21. Re:Uh.. by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yup - you're absolutely right. It's nothing but nationalism run amok. I find it particularly amusing that the Chinese are pissed off at the French as well. This has the exact echoes of the nationalistic frenzy many Americans were in when the French decided to not believe the WMD bullshit.

    To be honest, I'm far more concerned about that than Al-Qaeda. Remember what happened the last time nationalism was this rampant and blind? 2 countries were invaded - 1 without any reason. Furthermore, many of the internal violence across the world can be traced to excessive attachment to a particular tribe/ethnicity/nation. The exception to that are the various communist movements and drug cartels.

    Here's something else I've learned from the comments left by Chinese nationalists on various blogs and news stories: they have less in common with me than I have in common with Iraqis. Their concept of free speech is completely different. Their concept of human rights is completely different. Their concept of historic relativism is completely different. Here's what I see:
    Chinese nationalists value territorial integrity, international face, unity and harmony above all. I value individual self-determination and free speech above all - in other words, chaos over harmony.

    You can easily see this in their rage against news outlets, where a bad story about a Chinese government action is taken as an insult from all of western civilization against all of China.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  22. Re:Uh.. by wattrlz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, but who's going to do that? China, as a country, seems to have a tendency to enjoy sticking its fingers in its ears and humming when someone brings up a point that doesn't fit neatly into its worldview. Like a child being told there's no Santa Claus or a Neo-Nazi being confronted with evidence of the holocaust.

  23. Re:Uh.. by ClamIAm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought the same thing, but in regard to another issue: civil rights.

    Basically, the issue of "sympathy toward oppressed Tibetans vs. Chinese pride" sounds extremely similar to the era of the civil rights movement in the US, where the issue was "sympathy toward oppressed black people vs. Southern pride". In both cases the oppressors get all offended when you dare to question their practices.

    And for folks who aren't familiar with how this story ends, well, there are still idiots in the South who cling to the idea that agitators and Yankees were meddling with their Utopia, and everything would have been fine if the White Citizens Councils and the KKK had taken care of everything. If similar resentment becomes ingrained in the Chinese people (or if their government manufactures enough of it), this has serious implications for human rights in that country.

  24. Re:Uh.. by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, the Japanese actually helped the Communists in China. At a time when the communists were about to be crushed by the national government, the Japanese invaded and distracted the national army long enough to let the communists get strong.

    It's a pretty dramatic story, actually. The nationals had chased the communists all the way from southern China up to the north, spent months doing so in what is known as Mao's Long March, and were finally about to crush the rebellion. The nationals were camped at the ancient hot springs outside Xi'an (these springs have been in use by kings in China for 1,500 years at least). The Japanese had invaded, but the leader still wanted to crush the Communists before facing the Japanese. At that critical moment, some of the nationalist troops kidnapped the nationalist leader and forced him to give up chasing the Communists. This event is memorialized in Communist tradition as 'the Xian incident.'

    --
    Qxe4
  25. Re:Uh.. by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    after UN forced had chased north korean into chinese territory iirc

    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.
  26. Re:Uh.. by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    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.
  27. Mod Parent UP PLEASE by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  28. Re:Uh.. by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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. The US helped "liberate" China in such a fashion that it pretty much handed the country to Mao on a silver platter. American leaders were foolish enough to swallow propaganda pieces like Red Star Over China and so thought that the Communists were a little rough, but they were basically nice guys who were concerned with workers' and peasants' rights. (Some of them probably were, but by then Mao was in control, and he was not a nice guy at all.) In that mistaken belief, the Americans twisted Chiang Kai-Shek's arm (by threatening to withhold aid) until he agreed to continue co-operating with the Reds rather than mopping the floor with them when he had the chance.

    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.
  29. Re:Uh.. by Trigun · · Score: 3, Funny

    I find it a slap in the face of democracy that China is allowed to host the Olympic games. This is a country that spies on its citizens, taps their phone calls, monitors pretty much all of the e-mail and internet activity of its people. They are responsible for the torture and imprisonment of people who have never been given the chance to prove their innocence. They have kidnapped people in foreign lands and delivered them to torture centers. They have consistently meddled in the affairs of foreign governments, to the point of overthrowing democratically elected governments and putting dictators in their place, merely to protect their own interests. Any time something bad is said of them, the person is labeled a foreign sympathizer and attacked publicly. Their people are blinded by unfounded national pride.

    I could go on and on as to why those damn Chinese should never be allowed to host a tea party, let alone the Olympics.

  30. Re:Uh.. by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Informative

    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...


    Not only that, but Taiwan is probably one of the best-defended chunks of land on the planet. There's also some pretty strong rumors that Taiwan either has or in short order could produce nuclear weapons, so any attack on it would likely lead to reciprocal attacks against major Chinese centers.
    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  31. Re:Uh.. by bishiraver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And then there's all those ethnic Han Chinese that were murdered/had their houses burned/had their businesses raised in the latest riots in Lhasa.. To a lot of the ethnic Han living in Tibet, the "free tibet" initiative is more about kicking all the Han out, instead of true liberation. There are political motivations to be sure, but there are strong racist elements within the unrest.

  32. Re:Uh.. by bishiraver · · Score: 3, Insightful
    While you're definitely referring to the Chinese government, many of those accusations could be applied just as aptly (but to a lesser extent) to the current US government.
    1. spied on its citizens
    2. taps their phone calls
    3. monitors internet traffic
    4. torture and imprisonment of people who don't get a trial (yay patriot act)
    5. kidnapped people in foreign lands and delivered them to torture centers
    6. meddled in the affairs of foreign governments to the point of overthrowing elected gov's and putting dictators in place (hello iran!)
    7. 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
    8. 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.
  33. Re:we have a winner by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wouldn't that be Maonnaise?

  34. Re:Uh.. by Choad+Namath · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
    I think you should read up a little on this. Both the Nationalists and the Communists fought against the Japanese, but it was the Nationalists who were fighting the major battles, while the Communists were fighting more of a resistance/guerrilla war. I'm sure that the US was engaged with both sides, but the officially recognized government was the KMT. So saying that the "leadership" fled to Taiwan might be kind of technically true, but not really accurate.
  35. Re:Uh.. by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Informative

    said actions in europe can be blaimed squarely on stalin

    Did I blame them on anybody else?

    and i do believe the nationalists where the recognized government of china when they fled...

    And your point is....?

    We were engaged with and provided assistance to the Communists during WW2 even if they weren't the recognized Government. In fact, Stillwell spoke in favor of cutting off supplies to the Nationalists and working with the Communists specifically because the Communists were actually fighting the Japanese -- the Nationalists were hording everything we sent them to use against the Communists after the war was over and were only too happy to let the Communists absorb the blunt of the fighting with Japan.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  36. Sometimes it gets personal by bornyesterday · · Score: 3, Informative

    At a pro-Tibet rally at Duke University, some 4-500 Chinese counter-protesters showed up from across the area. The two sides were shouting back and forth, waving flags and such like that, when a Chinese freshman at Duke came on the scene and recognized people she knew in both groups. She positioned herself between the two groups and attempted to get people to actually talk about the issues instead of just shouting insults back and forth. Pictures of her were taken, as was video, and they were posted to the web. As news of her actions spread around Chinese message boards, a picture of her with the Chinese word for "traitor" written on her head was posted, as was her Chinese identification number and directions to her parents' home in China. Soon thereafter a picture was taken of a bucket of feces dumped outside her parents' door, and they had told her in emails that they had gone into hiding. She has also received numerous death threats and emails telling her that she should never return to China. The story made the New York Times and Washington Post, but I can't help if wonder if this girl has ruined her chance for a safe return to her home.

    1. Re:Sometimes it gets personal by MetaPhyzx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Recent tale.

      The last weekend in January I took a trip to Philly to pick up a car I'd bought. My eight year old daughter pleaded with me to go because she wanted to see the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, so picked up two extra one way tickets for her and my son and we flew out Friday morn.

      Saturday, we spent all day at Independence hall, the National Constitution Center, and all that jazz. As we entered the building that houses the Liberty Bell (in which I had to submit to a search and I mused out loud, "I'm surrendering my liberty, in order to SEE the Liberty Bell. how ironic." The guards were not amused.) there was a large Chinese tour group ahead of us. My impatient kids ran ahead to the back of the building to see the bell; I stopped to take in the displays.

      If you've not been there, there is a display with a photo of the Dalai Lama visiting the Liberty Bell. Several members of the tour group were standing there, taking photos of themselves with the photo, forming a gun with their fingers behind his head. I openly snickered in disgust when I saw what they were doing.

      Of course, I'm quite sure you won't catch anyone giving the gun salute to photos of Chairman Mao in the PRC.

      --
      Blacker than my baby girl's stare. Black like the veil that the muslimina wear. Black like the planet that they fear...
  37. Root problem: China's ownership claims over Tibet by Anonymous+Bullard · · Score: 4, Insightful
    At the root of this whole shameful (both to the Chinese and to the Free World which chooses to do nothing) and tragic (to the Tibetans) issue of Tibet is China's perceived "suzerainty" or "ownership of the Tibetan territory, with the Tibetan people naturally included in the claim.


    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?

  38. Re:Uh.. by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And then there's all those ethnic Han Chinese that were murdered/had their houses burned/had their businesses raised in the latest riots in Lhasa.. To a lot of the ethnic Han living in Tibet, the "free tibet" initiative is more about kicking all the Han out, instead of true liberation. There are political motivations to be sure, but there are strong racist elements within the unrest.

    Yes, all that is true. And, it saddens me to see it happen.

    However, I should imagine that after 50 years of occupation, loss of freedoms, having all of those ethnic Han trucked in to settle it (there were NO Han Chinese in Tibet before 1959 -- they were brought in to bolster the claims of China) and all of that stuff could eventually build some resentment. After so many years of the Tibetans being trampled upon, some of them have reached their breaking point, and are trampling back. :(

    Sadly, most such conflicts simmer and get progressively worse over decades. Israel and Palestine. Northern Ireland. The Bloods and the Crips. Kosovo. Pick any two groups with a long-simmering dispute. I'm sure it goes back through all of history.

    One group of humans craps on another. Over time, someone gets tired of being crapped on and responds. More retaliation ensues, shit goes downhill.

    Sadly, the more I try to look at all this crap with a long lens and see as many sides of the story as possible, the more disheartened I get, because there's not a single right and wrong, and there's never a simple way out of it.

    I don't condone the violence done by any of them, but I can empathize with how they may have gotten there. Unfortunately, non-violence is hard to maintain in the face of decades of violence.

    Cheers
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  39. Re:Spare me the French apologia by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  40. Re:Uh.. by oldhack · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    But just about all the US aid to China went to KMT, not the communist. Communists was more tolerated than helped by the US at the time. And after the war, guess which side the US backed when KMT and communist went after each other? Hence the fallout between the US and China.

    Btw, I think Stillwell (or was it his predecessor), while sent to help KMT, was reported to be disgusted with KMT and suggested to help the communists instead, to no avail.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  41. Re:Uh.. by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How would "western media" react? Would us Canadians get attacked for human rights abuse for not granting Quebec independence?

    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 ... you know, human rights abuses. This stuff is fairly well documented, despite attempts by the Chinese government to the contrary.

    To the best of the knowledge of anyone who lived in Tibet previous to the Chinese occupation ... they already were independent.

    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.
  42. Re:Root problem: China's ownership claims over Tib by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here's a fairly compact Aussie radio programme [abc.net.au], 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 claim is ridiculous anyways. You might as well state that the Ukraine should be reabsorbed into Russia, or that the Vatican has some claim to Central Italy. Maybe Austria should demand Hungary back. Austria controlled Hungary a helluva lot more recently than any Chinese emperor ever controlled Tibet.
    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  43. Chinese shoes by SirLanse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How many of us are talking high and mighty about the EVIL Chinese while wearing chinese shoes, sitting at a chinese made desk, typing on a chinese made keyboard.
    If you want to protest, stop messing with the torch and stop buying their CRAP!
    Buy mexican or indian or german, just get off of chinese stuff.

  44. Re:so if you go over the urals, by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  45. Re:Uh.. by oldhack · · Score: 2, Informative

    And you don't think the Japanese atrocities in China had anything at all to do with our decision to "check" Japan as you put it?
    Well, I'm sure there were many secondary considerations for engaging Japan, but "helping Chinese" seems relatively marginal. Rememeber, at the time we were banning immigrations from China, and the Chinese weren't particularly popular in the US. Your argument that we went to war against Japan because of China is like saying we went to war with Afghanistan (Taliban) because Taliban oppressed women, not because of 9/11 al Queda.
    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  46. Re:Uh.. by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 3, Informative

    At what point in the history of the Quebecois Independence Movement has the Canadian Government resorted to the types of tactics that we've seen China employ in Tibet/Tiananmen Square?
    The battle of St-Eustache in 1837, maybe?
    Or Hanging Louis Riel in the 1880's?
    Shooting the people protesting against the conscription in WW-I?
    Ditto for WW-II
    Or is it in october 1970, when martial law was declared and the political opponnents of Trudeau were jailed without trial???
  47. My little introduction to Tibet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I am from a small town, South India. It was like any other small town, full of one kind of people. Also, small town in India means a few hundred thousand people. Any outsider is immediately recognized, stared at, passed comments on etc. The economy was lackluster and most people didnt know places beyond a 100 km of the town.

        One fine day, I was walking home from school. I was about 12 yrs old. We didnt have to worry about pervs in this town, so this was absolutely safe.

          On a sidewalk (or foot path as we called it), there were these curious-looking people - a complete family or two - sitting down and hawking what looked like very attractive carpets and rugs.
    They wore strange clothes and it was a sight I have not seen before. It just stayed in my memory.
    They kind of looked like the people from the far east that I have seen on TV, but this is the first time I am seeing anyone with Mongoloid features.

    I saw them day after day, at the same spot, their lives spread out on the side walk. They cooked there, their kids played around there and the infants were in cloth cribs that hung from tree branches. I presumed they slept at the same spot as well.

    The small town being the small town it is, the sidewalks had open drains on the far side and it was generally not a nice place to be hanging out all the time. It was sordid to live there. There are homeless in India who do this, but to see very strange people come to my non-descript small town and live there on a sidewalk was something else. It stayed with me.

    Years later, I realized that these people were Tibetan refugees, who left their homes because of Chinese aggression. India provided them a safe haven and they have joined the vast under-class of India, doing things they probably never did in Tibet. I felt truly sorry for them. Being poor is one thing.

    Being poor in a strange place is something else. These people didnt have any rights and honestly, it doesnt look like there is anyone who would care for them. I hope they find peace someday.

    And Down With China.

  48. What the CCP isn't telling the Chinese population by Anonymous+Bullard · · Score: 4, Informative
    It is very sad that some Han Chinese settlers were targeted by some angry and frustrated Tibetan youth against the wishes of the Tibetan exiled government. Just try to have a little understanding for the Tibetans who've lived under murderous and pervasive Chinese repression since the 1950s.


    What would the Chinese people be doing today if they'd been under constant genocidal foreign rule for two or three generations, under daily humiliation, millenia of their invaluable cultural heritage destroyed, their own language, religion, identity and history all but banned and twisted to serve the occupiers, their homeland flooded with ever greater numbers of aliens who consider themselves culturally and racially superior...?

    The Han Chinese hate even the partial and relatively brief Japanese invasion in the 1930s and the trade imperialism by the Western colonial powers as absolute evils so why can't they possibly understand why the totally non-Chinese people of Tibet are desperate for their own freedom from colonial brutality under China?

    But importantly, what the CCP proparanda machine isn't telling to the Chinese people is that the riots in Lhasa on the 14th of March started only after several days of *peaceful* demonstrations (starting on March 10th, the day of Tibetan Uprising in 1959) during which the Chinese paramilitary (PAP) violently beat and imprisoned a number of Tibetan monks. Monks are revered in Tibet as if they were one's family members, which they often are!

    Also, there has been dozens of large demonstrations (in chinese) all over Tibet (more than half of which was annexed into neighbouring Chinese provinces in the 1960s by the Chinese communists!) consisting of tens of thousands of Tibetans. All have been violently suppressed by the PAP, with hundreds of Tibetans dead (nearly 200 confirmed), hundreds more wounded or badly injured without medical care and several thousand Tibetans detained in the not-very-pleasant Chinese jails where abuse and torture in endemic, especially for the Tibetans.

    These demonstration against Chinese misrule are still flaring up daily with the same results.

    So yes, it is very sad that some young Tibetans' emotions boiled over and some Hans were attacked and some died while hiding inside the Chinese-owned buildings, but please, please try to also look at these issues from the Tibetans' perspective.

    Yes, the western media also made some mistakes in labelling a few photos (though do realize that the Nepalese police were indeed beating and jailing Tibetans there at China's behest and for no other reason), but don't you think that the security cam footage from Lhasa, repeated ad nauseaum by the CCTV, was extremely selectively screened for propaganda purposes, and not just by mistake? The Chinese security apparatus has surveillance cameras at absolutely every part of Lhasa.

    If the CCP has nothing to hide, why did they evict all foreigners and journalists from all Tibetan areas? Why are they promising massive 100,000 yuan (or well over $1000) reward for anyone who may have filmed the demonstrations and especially the bloody crackdowns that inevitably followed? Why is the CCP confiscating Tibetans' mobile phones, cameras and computers? Why does the CCP refuse even international (UN) observers and medical groups entry into Tibet?

    "Free Tibet" is about Tibetans ruling themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.

    --

    Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?

  49. Re:Uh.. by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I guess what they really want is everyone to live a year without China. I have to wonder how many consumer items that all those protesters use every day come from China. It's hard for their government to take our protests seriously when we are handing them our money as fast as we can.

    --
    We are all just people.
  50. Re:West media's bias got cut big time this time by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    Those "innocent" people are invaders, colonists sent to undermine Tibetan culture. The same thing happened to Russians in the Baltic states, and for the same reasons. The chinese aren't welcome there, they should just leave. If they came as friends, it would be one thing, but they are invaders, the smiling faces empowered by the Butchers of Beijing.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  51. Re:Uh.. by g0bshiTe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!
  52. Re:Uh.. by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Too bad it conflicts with the US way of policing the world.

    It also conflicts with one of the supposed strengths of capitalism, that consumers can be informed of the ethics of the companies they do business with. Now Americans are shitty shitty capitalists, we protest the sweatshops but we still buy the shoes. But the basic idea still stands, if China wants to isolate it's ethics then they need to be isolated in every other way as well, economically, scientifically, and politically. If they don't want to meet human rights standards, then they don't need to have a seat on the UN security council or the right to trade with the other nations of the UN. Not being allowed to participate ,let alone host, the Olympics should be a minor fraction of their exclusion if they don't want to bring their governance up to modern standards.

    --
    We are all just people.
  53. Re:Uh.. by oldhack · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If Japan had been willing to compete on the economic stage instead of trying to conquer her way to economic independence...

    I'll be the last one to defend Japan, but why should Japan refrain from "conquering her way" into power when all the others had been and were still doing it?

    The Europeans colonized huge chunks of Africa and Asia and leverage them for economic military gains. The US, while not on the same scale, took on territories and interest in Latin America and Pacific/Asia. Japan, trying to keep up with the West, saw they needed to do the same, around its neighborhood, coming into conflict with the European and American interest in the region. The way things were developing, the US-Japan blowup was going to happen regardless of Nanking massacre/China, and your complaint about lack of Chinese gratitude on this point seems rather overblown to me.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  54. True by fliptout · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A few points from a Westerner who has lived in China.

    1. Must supporting Tibet and the Olympics be mutually exclusive?

    2. Talking to my Chinese friends (I have many), almost none have ever actually seen CNN. They have A. read www.anti-cnn.com or B. read or seen about it in Chinese media.

    3. China is not the last bastion of independent thought, nor is the USA for that matter. Chinese people almost never seek out secondary sources of information, either because of lack of education (cannot read English, etc), Western media is blocked (i've lived there, don't tell me it is not true, though it is accessible if you know where to look), or lack the desire, or discipline, to seek out other perspectives.

    When I lived in Beijing from 2004-2006, I got the general feeling that Chinese were enamored with Tibet and thought they were doing no wrong when they brought development to Tibet. So naturally, Chinese think they are in the right. By human nature, people will believe what they want to believe, and furthermore, people develop strong convictions based on little or no information.

    Another thing is that the Chinese have demonized the Dalai Lama, which is somewhat absurd. They cannot in any demonstrable way connect him to the violence. Furthermore, the Dalai Lama is a wily politician who has forged relationships with powerful people in the West, whereas the Chinese have little guanxi outside their own nation, save countries they are pouring money into.

    Like I tell my Chinese friends, if I want to know what bad things Taiwan has done this week, I'll read Xin Hua or People's Daily. They are at least as crappy as CNN, though they are a different kind of poison than CNN.

    One lesson China should be taking from this, and I have seen no evidence of this so far, is that they really need to do a better job of Public Relations. Frequently my Chinese friends, try to make the argument that Bush would not let Texas separate from the USA (I am from Texas), just as China would not let Tibet separate. To which I reply, Texas was already an independent nation, and if you really want a compelling argument, read about the American Civil War on Wikipedia (har har).

    I have a fair number of friends from Taiwan as well, and I have guaged their reaction to be a combination of A. Apathy, because Taiwan has been going through this sort of nonsense for a long time, and they are sick of it B. Not agreeing with violence from either party C. Some empathy for the Tibetans, because the Olympics presents them with a rare opportunity to gain media attention.

    So, what to take from all this. I'm not quite certain, because I do not have all the information. I am sympathetic to both sides. Living in China was the happiest part of my life.

    My feeling is, if China wants to be a great nation, they need to act like a great nation, not whine on anti-cnn online forums.

    --
    A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
  55. Re:Uh.. by samwhite_y · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, I have been trying to find documented evidence of the claims you make.

    Have monks and nuns been tortured? How many? Have locals been "displaced"? Have they been forced to move from where they were living before? How many? How valuable was the land that they lived on?

    The problem I am having is that one side claims that these things are happening, the other side claims that they are not. Some times they agree that the thing happens but disagree on numbers by many orders of magnitude (ex: one side says 100s killed the other side says 100,000s killed when China invaded Tibet).

    I am struggling to find clear documented evidence of these great "human rights" abuses. Of course, I am also finding no evidence that such things did not occur.

    I cannot get factual answers to the following:

    1. How many native Tibetans have advanced degrees?
    2. What percentage of the bureaucracy in Tibet has native Tibetans in it?
    3. What is the ratio of Tibetans to non Tibetans?
    4. What geographic region is precisely the one being argued out about? It seems that there are edge case territories in the boundary that change the counting system when they are included or excluded.
    5. Who exactly is participating in the turmoil in Tibet? Are normal everyday Tibetan citizens engaged in this? Again I get two sides claiming different facts.
    6. What precise religious rights were taken away from native Tibetans?
    7. What percentage of native Tibetans see the Dalai Lama as a great religious figure?

    Every fact I have seen claimed seems to have no really strong foundation when you go inspect the original materials. If anybody can provide better sources of information, that would be great.

    The problem of course is that China is in the best position to have accurate answers to these questions. But there is not a single example in history (counter examples are welcome) of self-appointed leaders (of reasonably large countries) ever providing non propaganda versions of information to others.

  56. West is appalled to futile suffering by microbox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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

    Westerners just can't grapple with the reality that the Chinese government would participate in such embarrassing lies and historical revisionism. At least in the west we are cynical about what the establishment feeds us.

    Why is that important?

    When Ghandi was campaigning for independence, he and the Indian people were subject to many brutal and unfair things by the British government. So Ghandi's side of the story was heard, and eventually a peaceful rationale solution came about.

    When the people in Tibet complain *peacefully*, they are confronted with the gun, and then the Chinese government attempts to resolve the situation by managing perception. It's no wonder that the peaceful demonstrations turned violet.

    When you tell a lie, you must keep lying to preserve that lie. I think the chinese government has told so many lies that they don't know which direction is up. It's too bad to see so many people suffering because of a lack of straight-forward honesty.

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
  57. Re:Nationalist propaganda works by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is no difference between patriotism and nationalism. As George Bernard Shaw said, "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."

    And at least this American believes that patriotism is a huge problem. Unbridled patriotism; the thought that our country is the best and freest and can do no wrong is what got us into the Iraq war. As my sig says, patriotism is no different than racism, and should be fought just as vigorously.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  58. Re:Uh.. by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't have it in a nice easy to read Power Point slide with fully itemized and cross-referenced figures for you. Nobody does.

    The best single thing I've ever seen is a documentary film called Cry of the Snow Lion. A lot of film which was smuggled out of Tibet which the Chinese government would rather never happened.

    But, there are likely a lot of news footage and the like from when it all happened.

    Some of your questions are strange -- how many Tibetans with advanced degrees for instance. They were largely an agrarian/livestock based culture, so not a whole lot of universities except the monasteries. Some of them just sound like they're designed so they either can't be discredited or to show how much life has been improved by the presence of the Chinese -- there was no bureaucracy for them to participate in before the Chinese came, the monks were the government. The Dalai Lama was the head honcho. Who knows what a couple of generations under Chinese rule have done to peoples opinions and the like.

    Most of the entire Tibetan Plateau was devoid of Han Chinese, and the Chinese government has been moving large quantities their people into the region, building railroads, and generally making their presence known. Tibetans are ethnically and linguistically different from Chinese, and they've become a largely marginalized minority.

    A google search might not readily turn it up, and I certainly can't give you numbers or statistics. But, I will say that a tremendous amount of this is documented historical fact, and the fact that several 10's of thousands of people walked over the Himalayas (not exactly a walk in the park) to escape wasn't so they could perpetrate a big historical fraud on the rest of us and claim all of this when they could have stayed home and had tea.

    Most countries have a population of Tibetan immigrants who have been trickling out for the last five decades to escape the oppression. I won't even try to provide you corroborating evidence here. I've been satisfied with the evidence provided to me, but I'm hardly a store house of it.

    People have been protesting and railing about this for a very long time. It's not like these are new or extra-ordinary claims being made.

    Cheers

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  59. Re:What the CCP isn't telling the Chinese populati by hackingbear · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While we can't rely on what the Chinese government tells us, it is just as risky relying on what the Tibetan-in-exile tells us. For one, the Tibetan movements are backed by some influence like the CIA behind the back which, of course, would be very interested in having the US to deploy missiles over in Tibet.

    The Chinese government have acknowledged atrocities occurred in the 1960's and 70's but those were due to Mao's Cultural Revolution which affected all of China and not just Tibet. In the current times, the Chinese government or Han Chinese probably eradicate Tibetan culture/language/religion probably no more effective than the mainstream Americans eradicating the culture/language/religion of American Indian.

  60. Re:let me guess, you are a "liberal", huh? by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All governments use propaganda- communists use it no more than other kinds. Bought any freedom fries lately?

    As for 9/11- the most horrific attack against civilians? Please. It doesn't rate in the top 100, it probably barely makes the top thousand. I can think of a dozen worse ones in this century alone, starting with the rape of Nanking, the firebombing of Dresden, and two nuclear bombs dropped by the US.

    As for America being attacked for being successful- nope. We were attacked for being arrogant and controlling. We were the ones who created Bin Laden. We funded his fight in Afghanistan. We took out government after government in the middle east. Our policies make the rich rulers there fabulously wealthy, while everyone else lies in squalor. Those are the reasons we were attacked. And of course, rather than fix anything we're making the problem worse as usual.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  61. Re:Uh.. by jACL · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sounds like another form of Godwin's law:

    As nationalism increases, the probability of being pissed off at the French approaches one.

    --
    "It remains to be seen if the human brain is powerful enough to solve the problems it has created." Dr. Richard Wallace
  62. Britain invaded China to force opium trade by Geof · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When we closed our doors to the world, you forced them open with drugs and guns.

    The major source of opiates, the drug of choice for centuries in China, is your neighbor Afghanistan. Don't blame us for that.

    Talk about ignorance. The behavior of the British in China was flat-out evil. From Wikipedia:

    Britain had a large trade deficit with China and had to pay for these goods with silver. Britain began exporting opium to China from British India in the 18th century to counter its deficit.

    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.

  63. Re: Neutral statistics by lumierang · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here is one of the deepest discussion on Tibet I have seen which include many reference including statistics from academic source which may relate to your questions.
    http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073&sid=ce0b20590dd445725153c83b5ef21c7f

  64. Re:some words from a Chinese American by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    When you read fictitious Chinese "history" on Tibet and then come here and regurgitate and expect those of us who are reasonably read to buy it, I can only assume you're either a moron or are insulting our intelligence.

    At any rate, China has no more business ruling Tibet than Austria would Hungary. Trying to justify it with made-up stories about the state of the Tibetan people, particularly when it's China that's importing Han colonists to eventually wipe out a separate Tibetan people and culture is the worst kind of bullshit apologetics you can ask for.

    Go back to plugging yourself into the cowardly monsters that run China. I suppose that makes you feel better. Open discourse where I can declare my government wrong and wicked, and even have a chance of casting a free ballot in a meaningful general election means my society trumps yours. Want to be as good as mine, then rise up with your billion+ countrymen and throw the Communists out, and if you're happy with the Communists, then so be it, but don't try to pass off some crap that the Murderous Cowards of Beijing have made up.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  65. Re:Uh.. by samsamsamj · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd appreciate very mcuh if you could just spend a few minutes read through the following PBS post by M.A.Jones. I couldn't have done a better job summarizing all these: http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=68073

  66. Nationalist: sure. Valid? Not so much. by quixote9 · · Score: 2

    Sampling Chinese blog and media views on Tibet would be like sampling US blogs and media just after the Iraq War started. It was all pretty rah-rah and gung-ho then. The Chinese are no different.

    That doesn't make it right to colonize a whole people with a different language, a different alphabet, different customs, and a different religion.

    Interesting factoid: there's oil in Tibet and lots of valuable minerals.

  67. The Chinese view by ebonum · · Score: 2, Informative

    What scares me is more than one western educated Chinese has told me things like this:

    "Don't believe what ever Dalailama said in the western world!! He
    kills, tortures the ppl in Tibet in the way that no human can bear.

    For his birthday, he requires ppl to give him human Eyeballs, skin,
    hands as a gift! He treats all the ppl there as slave!

    The only reason why he wants Tibet to be independed is bcs he wants
    that power back! And he is supported by the western extreme...He was
    abandoned from China bcs the goverment and the ppl there can't bear
    his cruelty!

    "Free" Tibet back the murder??
    Don't be fooled by him!!!!
    He kills without thinking!!!!!"

    They fully believe it is true and have websites with pictures to prove it. I live in China. I want to see Chinese think for themselves. But when this type of mis-information is take as truth, I'm at a complete loss. Well educated Chinese will argue these points as if they where defending their family's honor.