This video was made by a Chinese student in Canada. He uploaded it to Youtube after reading news about the riots in Tibet Province of China. Everyone is welcomed to discuss with solid logic argumentation.
I will tell you my opinion as an ordinary Chinese. I regard this video as truth.
193 responses so far ↓
1 Anil // Mar 16, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Excellent video! Though I do wish the Chinese government were a little less hard on tibetan culture.
2 QianMinjie // Mar 16, 2008 at 7:56 pm
This blog is great.
Thank you for spending your time clarifying the real image of china.
3 KS // Mar 17, 2008 at 9:04 am
Great work! Greatly appreciate.
I think it’s time to wipe out Tibet from Chinese map and territory. Change the name back to our chinese name. Tibet is the name called by British. Why are we still using this name.
4 Shaan // Mar 17, 2008 at 9:34 am
Oops, better not put your videos on youtube or link to videos there–your government has decided to block the site. Is that freedom of speech?
5 Shaan // Mar 17, 2008 at 9:35 am
Oops, better not post or link to videos on youtube–your government has decided to blog that site. Is this freedom of speech?
6 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 9:58 am
“Tibet has been part of China for thousands of years”
“1271-1368″
Am I the only one watching this? clearly 1271 was not, in fact, thousands of years ago. In any case, the longevity of Chinese rule is not really relevant; after all, Portuguese Africa has been a “part of Portugal” in some respect since the 1500s, and yet the CCP was in front of those nations claiming that decolonisation was essential. Funny that, eh?
“Once you guys fuck out of the Americas..” etc,
No, that would be contrary to democratic principles and plausability, but we did force the Afrikaners to cede control of their government to that country’s black population despite the fact that they had a presence there for 300 years. DEMOCRACY, have you heard of it?
“1903 AD, slaves etc.”
All very true, but China was also a feudal, corrupt, awful place according to the CPP in the 19th century, did that give the UK or anyone else the right to take parts over in the name of “enlighetened governance? Clearly not, as the CCP would doubtless agree.
“CIA, etc.”
LOL The CCP used to get truckloads of money from the Kremlin, does that make them evil toadies? Not according to the CCP and many Chinese. People take what money is coming to them, and whatever it source, when they are under colonisation.
“All the money we gave them, etc”
This argument is very familiar, I can still here the voice of Europeans in Africa, talking about the schools, hospitals, etc. they built for the ungrateful “blecks”. They had a point of course, but the international community (and especially China) thought this was an invalid excuse. funny how hypocrisy bites you on the arse.
“Britain, Scotland, NI, etc”
If the majority of NI demands it, the UK would be quite happy for it to be returned to Ireland. Scotland too is planning a referendum on independence, something it would be great to see China consider. Quebec, they had a referendum, it failed. Also, the difference is that the West is not practicing colonialism today, and has opposed it form the last few decades. DEMOCRACY, do you know it?
This video NEEDS MOAR LOGIC. And spelling.
7 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 10:04 am
Most hilarious thing is that this pro-China vid can’t even be seen thanks to your communist overlords, because they might also see the other videos that run countrary to their “correct” opinions which they might feel like revising.
tl;dr This vid is a waste of time, as it can be seen through by anyone outside China, and can’t be seen by anyone inside, lol
8 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 10:06 am
“This video NEEDS MOAR… spelling”
My misspelling here is deliberate, before anyone jumps on it! xD
9 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:02 am
This video aims to educate those ignorant and has no respect. Though it is a pity that youtube has been blocked , other wise our whole population can give you a clearer opinion on how silly, biased some west media are.
I don’t care spelling, if you can speak and writing Chinese, like I do. I will be very surprised if you could make yourself understood on simple greeting terms.
10 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:04 am
Random Guy, You look really smart ass, because you deliberately spell wrong a word, and tell us that. We are very grateful for that.
11 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:25 am
Mind addressing some of the points I made?
我會/不會說國語是別的話題, 你要專心一點.
12 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:30 am
Random guy,
you can’t represent the identity you are not, so I am not interested to argue against your illusions.
13 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:31 am
>you can’t represent the identity you are not
English please.
14 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:33 am
“I am unable/unwilling to argue against your well-argued criticisms.”
Fixed it for you.
15 motherland // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:33 am
Hahahahaahaaaa!!! Your video is very funny. Is it supposed to be a comedy video?
Even funnier:
No one in China can watch the video because the government has banned YouTube!
That is HILARIOUS!
But seriously, I hope the Tibetan people AND the Chinese people one day have freedom of speech and basic human rights.
16 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:37 am
what ever
17 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:38 am
Basic human rights mean? (I am listening)
Tell me about it.
18 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:48 am
human rights are existing when the people are alive. When people have died, just like iraq people, there are not human rights for them.
We chinese people, are still alive, so one day we will have a chance to prove that we are better than other.
19 motherland // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I don’t think the people of any nation are better than the people of any other nation. We are all human beings.
I’ll give you the definition from wikipedia (is that banned too?):
Human rights refers to “the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled.”[1]
Examples of rights and freedoms which are often thought of as human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of expression, and equality before the law; and social, cultural and economic rights, including the right to participate in culture, the right to work, and the right to education.
“ All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. ”
—Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
20 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Now educate me, how China does not have basic human rights?
Iraq may have well improved on human rights issues while under US administration.
21 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:22 pm
>Iraq may have well improved on human rights issues while under US administration.
This is a red herring. It is ironic though, isn’t it, that Americans are free to protest their governments’ policy in Iraq, even to publicly voice support for the Iraqis resisting US forces (Code Pink activists for example), while Chinese are forbidden even to view foreign media that doesn’t support their version of events.
22 motherland // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Ok you asked… Some things to consider (again cut and pasted from wikipedia):
# Capital punishment: The inconsistent and sometimes corrupt nature of the legal system in mainland China brings into question the fair application of capital punishment there.
# Ethnic minorities: Complaints of “apartheid” toward Tibetans.
# Political freedom: The PRC is known for its intolerance of organized dissent towards the government. Dissident groups are routinely arrested and imprisoned, often for long periods of time and without trial. Incidents of torture, forced confessions and forced labour are widely reported. Freedom of assembly and association are extremely limited in many cases. The Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989, the estimated death toll of which ranges from about 200 to 10,000 depending on sources.
# Freedom of speech: There is heavy government involvement in the media, with many of the largest media organizations being run by the government. Anything remotely questioning the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China is banned from use in publications and blocked on the Internet.
# Freedom of movement: Urban dwellers enjoy a range of social, economic and cultural benefits while peasants, the majority of the Chinese population, are treated as second-class citizens.
# Religious freedom: Members of the Communist Party have to be atheists according to the Party’s constitution. As Party membership is required for many high level careers, being openly religious can limit one’s economic prospects.
# One-Child Policy: Critics argue that it contributes to forced abortions, human rights violations, female infanticide, abandonment and sex selective abortions. These are believed to be relatively commonplace in some areas of the country.
# Privacy: Internet forums are strictly monitored, as is international postal mail (this is sometimes inexplicably “delayed” or simply “disappears”) and e-mail.
# Torture: In 2005 Manfred Nowak visited China as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture. After spending two weeks there, he concluded that torture remained “widespread”. He also complained of Chinese officials interfering with his research, including intimidating people he sought to interview.
23 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Chinese are not physically forbidden to view Foreingn media. There is something called satellite tv. people can watch CNN and a few west channels.
24 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:28 pm
# One-Child Policy: Critics argue that it contributes to forced abortions, human rights violations, female infanticide, abandonment and sex selective abortions. These are believed to be relatively commonplace in some areas of the country.
For starters, this is not true
25 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:32 pm
# Freedom of movement: Urban dwellers enjoy a range of social, economic and cultural benefits while peasants, the majority of the Chinese population, are treated as second-class citizens.
That is distorted. Major populations are poor, partly because our nation have been robbed of our treasure and land by foreign bandits in 19th century. The country’s development is delayed and badly influenced by two world wars.
26 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:36 pm
-Combobreaker-
Nice to see you engaging in discussion with us, but I would have appreciated you discussing my 9:58 am comments too, please. It’s your blog, and you can do what you like, but “I am not interested to argue against your illusions” is a bit of a silly comeback.
27 Uker // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Random guy,
You are very kind to laugh and insult in the first place.
28 John // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Re: Random guy’s comments:
Your comparison with European-ruled parts of Africa rings true. Tibet very much resembles South Africa during the apartheid era (and no, I’m not just saying that for propaganda purposes). Many of the arguments used by Pretoria to justify white supremacy in South Africa were very similar to those used today by the Communist Party to justify apartheid.
The National Party noted, correctly, that black South Africans were wealthier than the citizens of neighbouring countries. They also noted, correctly, that blacks in the precolonial period did not have democracy, freedom, the right to an education, or any of the admitted benefits of white rule. The West at the time did not dispute South Africa’s successes; it merely argued that the supression of indigeous people by aliens could not and would not be justified. The CCP at the time (correctly) agreed.
It is not that Westerners today discount the progress that has been brought to a feudal society like Tibet’s by the communist government; it is merely that the right to self-determination is greater than all the others, including education and development. The CCP was one of the most forthright in denouncing white supremacy in South Africa, despite the progress achieved there under the National party; why the double standard when it comes to Tibet?
29 John // Mar 17, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Correction: “Many of the arguments used by Pretoria to justify white supremacy in South Africa were very similar to those used today by the Communist Party to justify Chinese rule in Tibet”
30 Frikkie Botha // Mar 17, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Ja, Tibet is just like SA boet, only difference is we were shooting to stop hordes of blacks desperate to get into SA from foreign black dictatorships (supported by China btw), while Tibetans are being shot by the PLA for trying to get out, like in East Germany!
The world is full of irony
hehehe
31 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 1:53 pm
To John,
I spent sometime reading South Africa’s history on wiki and find that I disagree Tibet resembles South Africa.
The national party, mainly white, came into power in 1948, implementing apartheid. It led a white only referendum to vote them out of commonweath in 1961. In 1991, national Party step down and in 1994, New South Africa was returned to black population.
What happened between 1961 and 1991 is important. Apartheid sharpen racial hatred, and triggered sabotage activities like bombing, strike, riots. International society ban economic trade with then South Africa.
So I reckon, South Africa came back under black administration, is because white government could not manage any more.
I understand that then black south africans lived terrible life, and rated as lower class. They rebel against white government, not on a logic that white government appreciate black’s right, and let it happen.
Tibetans are not separated from other national groups. Tibetans are not suppressed by the government. locals are very friendly to travellers from all over the world. If Tibet has been in a tense situation with government, they had thousands chances to tell before last week. Why they didn’t tell?
32 random guy // Mar 17, 2008 at 1:59 pm
>triggered sabotage activities like bombing, strike, riots.
I see riots in Tibet.
>So I reckon, South Africa came back under black administration, is because white government could not manage any more.
Because the blacks decided they weren’t going to put up with it any more.
>I understand that then black south africans lived terrible life, and rated as lower class.
Oh, undoubtably. As do Tibetans in today’s China.
>Tibetans are not separated from other national groups.
Oh, you’re right, they aren’t. That’s because the Chinese government knows that the Han race is a majority in the country as a whole, and that the wiser strategy is to breed *out* the Tibetans, while in South Africa, the whites formed a dwindling minority, and therefore it was in the interests of the government to keep the races apart to slow this process.
>If Tibet has been in a tense situation with government, they had thousands chances to tell before last week.
They did try. No amount of government spin can change the fact that there were attempts at peaceful protests for months, up to and including last week, which were put down with brutality, after which riots broke out.
33 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“Oh, you’re right, they aren’t. That’s because the Chinese government knows that the Han race is a majority in the country as a whole, and that the wiser strategy is to breed *out* the Tibetans, while in South Africa, the whites formed a dwindling minority, and therefore it was in the interests of the government to keep the races apart to slow this process.”
Government limit immigration to Tibet, concerning to protect locals from competition and interference.
34 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 2:06 pm
“They did try. No amount of government spin can change the fact that there were attempts at peaceful protests for months, up to and including last week, which were put down with brutality, after which riots broke out.”
If you see with your eyes in where it happened,or if you are tibetan, or you lived in tibet for a long time, or you have tibet friends, relatives, i mean real not imaginary, I will believe your point.
35 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm
“Oh, undoubtably. As do Tibetans in today’s China”
Han Chinese can have only one child. Tibetans can have more than one.
Tibetans have lower university admission requirements.
Tibetan males can carry knife to themselves as their tradition is respected. Han Chinese would be considered suspect and dangerous if carrying a knife all the time.
36 admin // Mar 17, 2008 at 2:24 pm
to motherland
# Capital punishment: The inconsistent and sometimes corrupt nature of the legal system in mainland China brings into question the fair application of capital punishment there.
I do support capital punishment. Most of chinese do support capital punishment. Sometimes, we think the punishment should be more strict. Because at the moment, there are too many crimes. By the way, our government have tried to decrease the number of the capital punishment and let only the highest count have right to issue the decision on every case of capital punishment.
# Ethnic minorities: Complaints of “apartheid” toward Tibetans.
Where do the complaints come from? Most of them come from the so-called “exile government of tibet”. They never been china. The purpose of their existing is to overthrow the government. They received money from other coutries to take tibet from china. What are you expecting they say?
By my knowledge, tibetan chinese have more right than han chinese. They do not have limit on the number of children. They can carry on knives everywhere. They do not need high score to go good universities.
We don’t let han chinese in you say “apartheid”. We let han chinese in you say “cultural aggression”. What are we supposed to do?
# Political freedom: The PRC is known for its intolerance of organized dissent towards the government. Dissident groups are routinely arrested and imprisoned, often for long periods of time and without trial. Incidents of torture, forced confessions and forced labour are widely reported. Freedom of assembly and association are extremely limited in many cases. The Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989, the estimated death toll of which ranges from about 200 to 10,000 depending on sources.
You keep saying the sources. What are the sources. I admit china should let people speak freely, but there shoul be a process. Step by step.
About the Tiananmen Square, I do agree with government to suppress. It is good to China and chinese people. I do not agree with shooting people with real bullets. Some softer methods should be used.
Please don’t always magnify number. Use your brain. If it is true that 10,000 people have been killed, that means 10,000 families lose their relatives. Do yo really think the incident could be supressed in a few days? There will be a persistent riot from these families, jus like what happens in Iraq.
# Freedom of speech: There is heavy government involvement in the media, with many of the largest media organizations being run by the government. Anything remotely questioning the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China is banned from use in publications and blocked on the Internet.
I have said there will be a process. Don’t expect
reach this aim in one move. Especilly in china, china and chinese have their own culture and history. People will find their own way to success.
# Freedom of movement: Urban dwellers enjoy a range of social, economic and cultural benefits while peasants, the majority of the Chinese population, are treated as second-class citizens.
That issue is everywhere in the world. Not just in China. Do you really think in the western countries, all white people do respect all black people?
# Religious freedom: Members of the Communist Party have to be atheists according to the Party’s constitution. As Party membership is required for many high level careers, being openly religious can limit one’s economic prospects.
There are 50,000,000 communists in china, do you really think they don’t have their own religions?
# One-Child Policy: Critics argue that it contributes to forced abortions, human rights violations, female infanticide, abandonment and sex selective abortions. These are believed to be relatively commonplace in some areas of the country.
I would like to have two children. I will fight for it. When most people want and fight for it, I think the government will do some change.
Don’t blame the government for female infanticide and sex selective abortions. The government do not ask them to do it.
# Privacy: Internet forums are strictly monitored, as is international postal mail (this is sometimes inexplicably “delayed” or simply “disappears”) and e-mail.
Every country does the same things. Our government may do it over. Need change.
# Torture: In 2005 Manfred Nowak visited China as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture. After spending two weeks there, he concluded that torture remained “widespread”. He also complained of Chinese officials interfering with his research, including intimidating people he sought to interview.
Torture is everywhere in the world. If it is true in china, China need to correct it. Other countries should do same thing. Don’t just blame china.
Finally, I would like to say that if you really care about china and chinese, go to china and stay with ordinary chinese poeple for a few years. You will feel that there maybe a lot of issues in china, but chinese are more happy than before, have more rights than before. And china is undergoing in a right direction.
37 Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 6:20 pm
@Shaan, random guy, and motherland - you morons ever heard of a proxy-server? With it, according to the latest estimates, 200 million Chinese have completely unrestricted access to every on-line information source in the world. Furthermore, China is not the Soviet Union. There is no Iron Curtain, and millions have access to foreign news that filters across it’s borders, and millions more receive foreign news from their friends and relatives in the Chinese diaspora.
38 Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 9:57 pm
@random guy - for someone complaining of logic, you show an astounding lack of it.
The longevity of Chinese rule is very relevant. By your logic, the former colonies of Siberia, Sicily, South India, South China, Cornwall, Western and Southern Mexico have the right to break away from their respective nations. Notice the pattern here that is not evident in Africa and South America? All of the former are territorial expansions of adjacent lands and all had deep cultural, trade and diplomatic ties for centuries with their conquerers before annexation. Just like Tibet and China. By contrast, Portuguese Africa and South Africa are not adjacent by land to Portugal or the UK no matter how you slice it. And none of them, had deep ties to each other. Finally, Israel’s root claim to legitimacy is based on a thousand years of ownership three thousand years ago that they then abandoned for the next two thousand years! How does that one work out?!?!
I propose China gives up Tibet as soon as the US gives up Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. And as soon as Denmark gives up Greenland, Russia gives up Chechnya and Siberia, and the Jews give up Israel. Oh and I loved how the UK clung onto Hong Kong for decades after it became politically incorrect and only gave it up after being forced to by treaty.
Now I do agree that distinct cultures/ethnicities have the right to self-determination. But it’s all or nothing: Blacks, Native Americans, Inuit, Hawaiians, and Puerto Rico do have the right to secede from the US. The Confederacy also had the right during the civil war. (Your “contrary to democratic principles and plausability” is hypocritical hogwash.) So do the Basques, Chechens, and Palestinians. But by that statement you have to realize what would happen. The US would lose half it’s territory, Canada 90% of it. China would likewise lose 50%, Russia 75% (guesstimate) and
Brazil 66%. India would be fragmented into 200 nations, Africa and South America into literally hundreds if not thousands of micro-nations. Do you see why the governments in power would not want this happen?
Oh, and I love your selective memory on Northern Ireland. Where is your self-determination and DEMOCRACY for the catholics in NI? And what was the response of the UK to the revolt there? Oh that’s right, they sent in the Army in full force to crackdown on the dissenters. Just like China!
39 Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Finally, I think you all are missing the most vital point of all for China regarding Tibet. And that is NATIONAL SECURITY. For two centuries, foreign powers have been trying to carve up and destroy China. This has naturally resulted in an aggressive Chinese defense posture. The CIA backed insurrection of the 50’s only made things worse. (Interesting sidenote, to this day Tibetan activists are funded by, originally the CIA, and later by shadowy American government front groups) The difference of course, “random guy” is that the CIA was actively instigating violence in Tibet, while Russian support was helping the entire country of China develop and grow - two very different aims. Tibet acts as a perfect buffer zone against a hostile India (who China has fought many wars with). A major reason why foreigners have difficulty entering Tibet is because half its major secret military installations are located there. Likewise, Xinjiang (where the other half of the military installations are) is a major buffer zone from attacks from the south, west and north.
40 Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I think many of you don’t realize the enormous challenges that poorer countries with huge populations like India and China face. These are extremely complicated problems that smaller countries hardly face. And unfortunately many of these problems require draconian solutions. Tibet and Xinjiang contain most of China’s natural resources. Without these resources and without the one-child policy, China would now be a third-world nation of 2 billion starving people with zero chance of ever developing. Even India has forced sterilization programs and cracked down on protesters. They were the ones remember who arrested the peaceful Tibetan protesters on their way to Tibet. And India is a free Democracy!
Don’t get me wrong, I too wish the Chinese government were less oppressive to both the Tibetans and the Uighurs. But from the CCP’s standpoint, the wellbeing of 1.2 billion is worth the suffering of 15 million. When you’re dealing with those kinds of numbers, basic necessities take far higher priority than advanced niceties.
41 Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Regarding human rights I’ll make this brief as I’m running out of steam
Many of you seem to this blanket all-or-nothing approach without realizing there can be various levels of each.
Torture: how about China gives up torture when the US does?
Privacy rights: Ditto
Oppression of minorities: Ditto
Freedom of Movement: Huh? Is China the Soviet Union? All Chinese are free to move wherever they want. I never had a problem wandering China alone, without a guide and even without an itinerary. Nobody ever asked me for my “papers”. What about all the millions who joined the Diaspora? They didn’t seem to have a problem leaving!
Freedom of speech: This has gotten better. Many Chinese now freely criticize the government on corruption for example.
Freedom of Assembly: Only anti-government protests are not allowed. Anti-American protests after the embassy bombing were perfectly fine for example.
Religious Freedom: I’m actually against this. The last thing I want is millions of more people engaging in psychotic delusions. However, it should be noted that Muslims in China are left relatively alone. Buddhists may practice if they cooperate with the government. Christians currently number approx. 54 million and growing. Some oppression! Falun Gong is a cult and should be banned.
Political freedom and freedom of assembly: Westerners have a very one-sided view of the Tianammen Square protests. In truth, many high-ranking Communist Party officials publicly sided with the protesters. Several newspaper articles were also sympathetic. Within the Politburo, opinions were split for days on whether to crack down or not.
Again, I fully agree that the Chinese government is a repressive regime that needs to do better on human rights. However, it is not the 100% evil monster that many seem to think. Instead, it is a much more nuanced government than Westerners give it credit for.
42 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 12:08 am
I’m getting tired and will provide references tomorrow although much is from wikipedia.
@all - I spent way too much time on this and so I’m not going to spoon feed you anymore. Stop being so lazy, pick up a decent Chinese history book and read it! Also, an excellent way to learn more about current China is to do what I did. Go and spend a month in China. Do it alone without any friends or a guide, without even an itinerary! Just wander all over the place and meet as many people as you can. I guarantee you’ll be surprised at how different the real China is from the official western view.
43 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 12:10 am
oops i forgot. my ex-wife’s parents had no problem breaking the one-child rule. They just paid the extra yearly fine for having a second child.
44 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 12:28 am
@Admin/Uker - One last thing, don’t waste too much time trying to explain things, you’re just wasting your time! Many of these commenters are too blinded by hatred and bigotry to ever see reason. And don’t let them piss you off either. Many of them are so angry and hateful because they are jealous and fearful of China’s rising power. For Americans, it is not easy to soon go from the Number 1 power all the way down to number 4. The American government and media ’s attacks on China to try to to weaken it and keep it from being a superpower, have the corresponding effect on American public opinon.
45 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:20 am
First off, I live and work in China, but I’m not Chinese. I have, however, been here for half a decade, immersed in the culture and society…but am not making any claims with this information.
There are many good points and discussions on this board, I like it in fact, the topics are ripe for heavy opinions and it seems there are some feisty posters. I’ll start with a few quick interjections:
RE: “The Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989, the estimated death toll of which ranges from about 200 to 10,000 depending on sources.
You keep saying the sources. What are the sources.” — He didn’t cite a specific source, however, if you wikipedia this topic (through proxy since China blocked it) you’ll see that the Chinese gov’t claims in the realm of 200, while the Chinese Student Union (or some similarly named body representing students in China, from memory) claims much more, maybe as many as 10,000. Foreign media oft reported the numbers in the middle, between700 and 1500 or something, again, this is all from memory, and none of it can truly be verified.
A lot of posts are being made on what is fact, what is fiction. As the above information above clearly shows, each side will pick the “extreme” version of events which end up showing them in more favor. The real truth, however, generally lies somewhere in the middle.
To reach this truth we must each research the information available from all sources and make a judgement for ourselves..there’s no other real solution, especially regarding history (including yesterday’s events) that we did not personally take part in.
Thanks.
46 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:41 am
Second interjection:
“Finally, I would like to say that if you really care about china and chinese, go to china and stay with ordinary chinese poeple for a few years. You will feel that there maybe a lot of issues in china, but chinese are more happy than before, have more rights than before. And china is undergoing in a right direction.”
I was interested. I shouldn’t say was - I still am, and I enjoy my lifestyle and choices in staying here. However, you have to understand many arguments for freedoms or rights are not made on behalf of the minority: educated, good job, or child of government/recently successful businessperson. The arguments are made for the minorities. The oppressed. The peasants as you put it - the ones left out in the cold. You speak good English - likely come from what a western society would consider middle-class or higher by our standards family. Your views will not line up with the 700,000,000 peasants who make less money in a year than your father spent on a new cellphone for your good grades. The arguments are for the families being forced out of their homes to pave way for the “modern development” - they’re often compensated mind you, with nicer apartments elsewhere, but the fact is there is a strong drive for progress and nothing (including people’s rights) will stand in the way of that Force.
It may be necessary of course, for the good of the country long-term, but there is still some bloody hands and I believe one major reason people look upon the responses by the “elite” to these issues with dismay is because the issues are so downplayed or brushed off rather than acknowledged and discussed openly. You can’t deny there is a strong will to ignore and hide anything negative in the mindset of most people in PRC - at least - the tens of thousands I’ve interacted with over the years.
As to the “more happy than before” - it’s really impossible to judge. How can you judge happiness before relative to now, and how can you group all minorities into this statement when they are not allowed to criticize the government? Of course ‘they’ may ’seem’ happier, because as you’ve mentioned they can’t criticize the government’s actions (legally).
47 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:48 am
3rd interjection: @Anil
RE: “With it, according to the latest estimates, 200 million Chinese have completely unrestricted access to every on-line information source in the world.”
I’m not sure why you felt the need to be insulting to the other poster in your arrogant post I’ll title “Duh, Like, Everyone Proxies, Geez”.
First of all, Anil: 1) having access 2) having interest 3) having knowledge of search and use 4) and having knowledge to proxy 5) having English communication level capable of searching and understanding foreign media sources
are all statements which are both ambiguous and vastly different in meaning. Lets just *start* with: How many of those 200 million do you think read/write fluently? Average? As an Employer in China who strongly seeks individuals with VERY STRONG English skill, and deals directly with major recruiting drives at top universities, I can tell you that the number is going to be much lower than your blanket estimate. I wont go further. Thanks for that, though.
48 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:59 am
4th interjection:
@Anil:
RE: “(Interesting sidenote, to this day Tibetan activists are funded by, originally the CIA, and later by shadowy American government front groups) The difference of course, “random guy” is that the CIA was actively instigating violence in Tibet, while Russian support was helping the entire country of China develop and grow - two very different aims.”
I love your insight to the “shadowy American government front groups” and CIA, oh, and “Russian support group” intentions, surely you were a consultant in their boardrooms as they cooked up Schemes… I bet you also know who shot Kennedy! (Interesting sidenote, to this day I can’t believe it’s not butter!)
49 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:02 am
5th interjection: (titled wtf, it’s too easy)
@Anil
RE: “Anil // Mar 17, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I think many of you don’t realize the enormous challenges that poorer countries with huge populations like India and China face. These are extremely complicated problems that smaller countries hardly face.”
AND YOU DO? Your arrogance is absolutely ridiculous. It’s way too easy to rip apart. I don’t even want to go further on this, and will stop replying to Anil posts. Thanks.
50 Uker // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:39 am
Hi, Rick
I can agree on one thing you mentioned : the real truth lies in the middle.
Speak of the disadvantaged farming population, I can not represent all, but I do have close family in disadvantaged areas. My grandparents, my mother’s brothers’ family live there.
They are still poor compared to city middle class and higher. But present average city dwellers , as some may claim to compare with, are not better off, because many have been laid off just 10 years or so before retirement.
It is only fair to look on agricultural population issue by comparing their life 20 years before with present. My mother’s 5 brothers,who needed constant helps in last 2 decades, have built their own 3 storey house, while my parents spent all their life savings on a small two bedroom 8 -year old flat.
51 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:58 am
Anil is surely right on the comment: “I think many of you don’t realize the enormous challenges that poorer countries with huge populations like India and China face. These are extremely complicated problems that smaller countries hardly face.”
The priority for Chinese government is to feed, house and educate our huge population.
No one can satisfy everybody; So it is with the situation of China.
52 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:19 am
@Uker: I agree with you that happiness is not found in monetary riches. Wealth is also not specifically found in city centers. I’m not arguing against that, in fact, I have spent time with some people (some great people) who live in very poor areas of Sichuan where I live, and greatly respect the difficulties they have faced over their lives. The tragedy I’m pointing out is less about their poverty, but more about the exploitation of their poverty especially by Chinese companies. This visualization of “the rich life” of few, brought on by exploitation of many, will eventually cause enormous social and socioeconomic problems for China. The “lower-class” wont bear the brunt of the work for the least monetary compensation forever.
Another note on this: have you considered why China has a huge land-based military, but not much (relatively) in terms of airforce, anti-aircraft, or navy military? I believe it is not as much for self-defense as it is for quelling the potential huge rebellious uprisings that the country may face if the poor/uneducated are brought to light on their true power over the economy and the progress of the nation.
53 Rick in China // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:27 am
@Admin:
RE: “The priority for Chinese government is to feed, house and educate our huge population.”
Really? As an agricultural nation, I haven’t seen many people without food or homes, Admin. In fact I don’t know anyone (especially poor farmers) who are actually starving, the poverty lies less in the absolute core necessities for living as it does in the foundations for living *well* and *comfortably*.
If Education was truly a priority, there wouldn’t be such a shortage on both schools and qualified teachers with enormous class sizes. There wouldn’t be such an enormous pressure from parents on children to get into the select few “good” schools.
There would be fewer O license plated Audis and Benzes, fewer parked at KTV prostitution palaces, and more public libraries.
PS: About an earlier post, I’d like to add that I did not mean to imply only Chinese companies exploit the poor/migrant workers here, not at all, but there is a common standpoint that foreign companies by in large have much better working conditions, health standards, training & benefits, and pay. This is not to say all do.
54 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:37 am
Rick, regarding better pay in Foreign companies, that is true. However, you probably can not boast west companies are totally law-abiding and democracy followers. Because I know they use loopholes and skip responsibilites whenever possible. Though, I personally would recommend to work in a west company.
I never say China has no problems. What I argue is you can not force west standards and expectation on China.
Only after 50 years or longer development, can China catch up with the present west standard. Respect the truth that a baby does not grow up over night, please.
55 MC // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:43 am
Who ever said Tibet should be whipped out. go to hell. tibet has a right to be independent. China is being brutal and they should disarm, they protested peacefully, and they were shot anyway
56 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:49 am
Rick, on your comment, “Really? As an agricultural nation, I haven’t seen many people without food or homes, Admin. In fact I don’t know anyone (especially poor farmers) who are actually starving, the poverty lies less in the absolute core necessities for living as it does in the foundations for living *well* and *comfortably*.”
That’s great you did not see any one starving. isn’t it an accomplishment by government?
Living well and comfortably, is everyone’s dream. I want to be better than I am now, does that mean I am supressed and exploitated.
I personally agree agricultural population’s benefit should be a priority in the next decade.
As far as I know, they benefit from many policies, for example free education and exemption of agricultural tax.
Like I said earlier, comparing with whom matters. If I compare my life to any millionair in China, I live a miserable life.
And you do not understand Chinese culture if you took every complaining as a big deal. Some means true, some means a moaning.
Like a true rich man, you can say he is mean, moans more than a laid-off city woker.
If you ask me whether there is hatred beteen rich and poor, I do not deny. But can you force the government help the poor by imprison the rich, or give state money to the poor? This will be rebrand China as red terrorist country, unfair and sick economy devoloping mode.
57 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:54 am
MC, When a british cop shot a innocent brazilian, should they disarm as well?
If Tibetan Chinese protestant shoot at Chinese, torch their house and shop, hang up a Chinese in public, torch a human alive, ah, you tell me This Is a Peaceful rally Anyway. lol
58 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 7:16 am
@ Rich in China
“Another note on this: have you considered why China has a huge land-based military, but not much (relatively) in terms of airforce, anti-aircraft, or navy military? I believe it is not as much for self-defense as it is for quelling the potential huge rebellious uprisings that the country may face if the poor/uneducated are brought to light on their true power over the economy and the progress of the nation.”
I think I can answer your question, here. I really considered it. Before I answer it, could I first remind you that China is the country with the largest population. The cheapest resource in China is people. Do you have any idea how much airforce cost? China was a poor country. It didn’t have enough money to support expensive airforce and navy military. The chinese previous generals thought they were very good at land warfares.
BTW, the chinese new military is changing, it pays more attention on the airforce and navy. You keep saying China’s menace to the world due to China developing the navi and airforce. Don’t you notice that. What do you want us to do? Develop or not develop airforce and navy.
And please do use the percentage instead of the absolute number, when you say China has too many this or that. Remember china has 1,300,000,000 people.
59 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 7:39 am
@ MC
Another thing I need to point out is that you misunderstood what KS said. He mean the word “Tibet” should be changed to Xi Zang (i.e. 西藏).
60 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 1:30 pm
@Rick in China - Simple, I answer insults with insults, arrogance with arrogance. Or maybe you didn’t notice all the hostility of previous posters in the last two posts? It’s only natural to become angry and attack back when someone attacks. It’s called being human. Or should I just repress my emotions like a robot? Extreme bias I counter with extreme bias since as you say the truth lies in the middle. I may be wrong, but I don’t believe that simply calmly explaining the middle position would convince those with extreme bias - they would only meet you halfway.
“With it, according to the latest estimates, 200 million Chinese have completely unrestricted access to every on-line information source in the world.” - Huh, strange do you see anywhere in that sentence where I claim people 2) having interest 3) having knowledge of search and use 4) and having knowledge to proxy 5) having English communication level. No, all I stated was a simple fact - 200 million do have un-restricted access - whether they have the knowledge/interest to take advantage of it is up to them. And yes the number is approximately 200 million - Though I lopped off 10 million since the source is based off CINIC reports. Here’s my source: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20080119/china-internet-users.htm
CIA and American interference in Tibet is a well-known fact as cited in numerous sources. My primary source is http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html (a very fair, balanced, comprehensive, and interesting article on the whole Tibetan situation in my opinion) Oh but you’re probably right, a Yale educated professor of Political Science doesn’t know what he’s talking about. As for Russian support of China, all information that I’m aware of speaks of a constructive, positive influence. Yes, I realize that Russian and Chinese advisors had major disagreements on how best to restructure and develop China. But as far I know, that was an understandable difference on the Soviet industrial model versus a Chinese agricultural model and I discern no duplicitous intent there. If you, on the other hand, have any evidence of nefarious Russian intentions (pre-Sino-Soviet split), please share it!
Finally, on your last response I love how you first complain of my insults and then gradually sink lower and lower in to derisive insults yourself. Hypocrite much? If “it’s way too easy to rip apart” as you claim, where is the rebuttal? Oh that’s right there is none! Instead, you childishly use a flippant denial because simple logic and basic facts escape you. How mature of you! You are right, I do not possess extensive knowledge on foreign affairs or countries. (Unless you count 20 years of living and traveling in various countries and years of reading history books and perusing foreign newspapers, which I certainly don’t) But one doesn’t need extensive knowledge to grasp basic facts and simple logic. Do you honestly believe that the reason why Scandinavian countries consistently rank near or at the top of many country comparisons is because of some super-magic government formula? Do you really not see that a significant factor in their success, is that their tiny populations make governance far less complicated? Or is it just a coincidence? How about the US? Logically, since it the richest nation with the most powerful economy it should be #1 in all comparisons, no? So why is it consistently ranked near the middle or even bottom of all Western nations in many comparisons? Sources (to name just two): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSCE_countries_statistics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index#Complete_list_of_countries
Do you really think it has nothing to do with the sheer size of the USA (in population and area)? It’s highly individualistic, ethnically and culturally diverse population? Do you truly believe the USA is as easy to manage as Iceland??? India too has a highly individualistic, ethnically and culturally diverse population - even worse than the USA! (Second only to the entire continent of Africa in fact.) It has 23 major languages, 1,652 dialects, more than 2000 ethnicities, and more religions with sizable numbers of practitioners than any other country. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India#Subdivisions
(The situation was even worse in the beginning, when most Indians were illiterate and Hindi was nowhere near as widespread as it is today.)
On top of that, most Indians barely obey the law over there. “Pay my taxes? Ah maybe next year!” Runover and kill a Dalit with your car? No problem, just pay the cop $200 and it never happened. No money? No problem, just sell your kid into sex-slavery! But let me guess, in your mind, none of these extreme factors could have any possible influence on the slow development of India! Can you honestly say that China’s one-child policy didn’t benefit the Chinese nation as a whole (ie on a macro-scale) in the long term? What about Brazil with the most racially-diverse populace, huge, virtually unmanageable rainforest, and hundreds of indigenous tribes? Or Indonesia with it’s chain of many islands? The list goes on and on. And you claim that none of these factors hinder development to a greater extent than any medium-sized nation! Who are you trying to kid? If you honestly believe this, then state your evidence! It’s that simple.
Frankly, I’m disappointed that someone who claims to have years of living in China doesn’t seem to appreciate the immense variables involved and seems to thinks it’s ok to boil China down to simple stereo-types.
You can continue with your derision and condescension and we can keep trading ad hominem attacks or we can have a reasoned discussion and hopefully learn something. The choice is yours. But if you choose the latter, come prepared with facts, logic, evidence and REASON or you will be the one who is ignored as the mentally-deficient, immature hypocrite that you seem to be.
(Sorry couldn’t resist that last dig :p )
61 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Huh. Don’t know if my last post went through. If not I can try posting it again if anyone wants (it was a point by point rebuttal to Rick in China) Anyway, I think all you “Free Tibet” supporters need to realize something. No government has formally recognized Tibetan sovereignty. I wonder why that is? Could it be because the Tibetans don’t have a case?
For a comprehensive, balanced view of Tibet I highly recommend Michael Parenti’s article as linked to in a previous comment.
62 randon guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:12 pm
@Anil:
Whether or not the CIA is supporting the cause of Tibetan independence has no relevance as to the legitimacy of the cause itself. Certainly European colonialists in Africa frequently portrayed the African independence movements as a “communist plot” on the basis that many independence movements at the time recieved support from the Kremlin and Peking. The fact is though, that self-determination for all peoples is a universal human right; and for China to deny that which it loudly protested to Europe for denying its’ African colonies is the height of hypocrisy.
63 randon guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:15 pm
@ Anil:
200 million do *not* have unfettered access to the internet: having used Chinese 網吧 on a number of occasions, I can tell you that Google cache, mainstream news sites like the BBC, and even occasionally Hotmail all suffered disruption. You are either living in fantasyland or are on Peking’s payroll.
64 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Randon Guy,
Tibet Province, the Zang national group enjoy high autonomy.
Exile Tibetan government in India wants indepence, and that is not the intention of every Zang Chinese.
Exile Tibetans are good at manipulating global sypathy, for their own goal to be king or nobles whatever.
Tibet, Xizang autonomy region, is part of China, which has been recognized as the only truth by many major powers in the international community.
65 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Randon guy,
do not accuse anyone on what payrole, that shows your weakness on this debate.
66 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm
RE: “The priority for Chinese government is to feed, house and educate our huge population.”
“Really? As an agricultural nation, I haven’t seen many people without food or homes, Admin. In fact I don’t know anyone (especially poor farmers) who are actually starving, the poverty lies less in the absolute core necessities for living as it does in the foundations for living *well* and *comfortably*.”
I think it depends on your standards of poverty and whether you’re really looking for it. Very few New Yorkers pay attention to the homeless of New York City for example. After some time, it seems like people just get used to them and stop seeing it as a problem. The homeless become “invisible”. On my visit to Beijing, Turpan, and Urumqi I saw plenty of homeless, near-homeless and hungry people. Maybe because I was specifically looking for them. One couple I stayed with in Urumqi lived in a single tiny room without running water or heat. Their toddler died because they had no money for the treatment of his illness. They shared a communal kitchen and living room with approx. 10 other people. Their bathroom was an open cow pasture down a dirt road a block away. They used the public baths 10 blocks away to wash. And this was in the city not in a rural area! One night I went to a telephone booth and there was a homeless woman bedded down for the night in there. I gave her a loaf of bread and she was really happy. She may not have been starving but she was hungry. In Turpan, there was a man living in a tent on the sidewalk. Was he homeless or not? Did the couple have the basic necessities of life or not? All depends on your definition. In India, you’re not homeless if you have a tent. You’re not even poor if you lack water, electricity, and sanitation. Many Indians get by on one simple meal per day. Are they starving? No. Are they hungry? Maybe. Are they nutritional deficient? Yes! By contrast, in Western countries you’re extremely poor under those conditions.
I realize this is all anecdotal and may not be generally representative, but here’s some cherry-picking to make my point worse
The story of Ma Yan - a girl who had to starve herself for 15 days so she could afford a pen for school.
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/04/19/005503.php
This one had a bunch of pictures of extremely poor kids in, I think, Gansu but I don’t speak Mandarin so maybe aren’t as bad as they seem.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070709112128/http://i.mop.com/zhoujian1960_06_02/blog/2007/03/07/3484459.html
Or maybe my definition of really poor is just off
67 random guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Foreign satellite TV certainly is restricted in China (or at least was when I was there in 2003). In any case there have been frequent reports of CNN and BBC going dead in China whenever the word “Tibet” is mentioned. Combine that with the refusal of the Chinese government to give foreign media access to Tibet, and one can’t help but marvel at China’s fear of its’ own people hearing the other side of the story on one hand, and their fear of what the foreign media might uncover in Tibet on the other.
68 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Random guy,
It is true government restrict media coverage on Tibet.
Perhaps you do not know, any patriotic posts like this vedio, and any angry comments against Tiebtan exile government , were also deleted, in last 2 or 3 days.
69 random guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 4:59 pm
@admin,
You mean to say that videos of this kind have been deleted from Chinese video sites?
70 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I mean, restriction on media coverage do not pick favorable news and ban unliked ones.
71 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:31 pm
@randon guy -
I never said that the CIA’s support of the cause of Tibetan independence has no relevance as to the legitimacy of the cause itself. My assertion was that the CIA’s involvement has contributed to China’s aggressive posture on national security. I do agree by the standard of self-determination that China’s stance on Tibet is hypocritical but then, as I stated above, so are many other countries in respecting the self-determination of their populations. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Using an anonymizing proxy server is *by definition* unfettered Internet access and thus 200 million *do* have open internet access if they wish it. Geez, did you even bother to read my posts or do you just enjoy spouting your mouth off?
72 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:41 pm
@random guy - according to the article I cited above (the Michael Parenti one), “Admin” is correct in saying that not every Tibetan wants independence. In fact, initially the situation was the opposite. Only over the years, have more and more Tibetans wanted independence.
73 random guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:50 pm
@ Anil,
We’re all living in glass houses and we’re all throwing stones, in the West and in China. Where does it leave us?
74 random guy // Mar 18, 2008 at 5:52 pm
@ Anil,
I read your bit about proxies; nevertheless, it is illegal, and although not difficult, is beyond the capability of your casual internet user. Bottom line: if censorship didn’t help the CCP ensure that their POV became the mainstream view in China, they wouldn’t do it.
75 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 6:16 pm
@random guy - Hopefully, it leaves us in an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding and not an atmosphere of hostility and vitriol.
I agree with you on censorship and on the casual internet user. But many of these users use internet cafes and proxies are not above the realm of cafe admins in my opinion. I think you underestimate the technical prowess of many techies in China. Chinese hackers just recently hacked into the Pentagon remember?
76 Jason // Mar 18, 2008 at 8:15 pm
It is unkown what happened in Tibet. Admin carries on as if there is factual reporting regarding what took place there over the last few days. The only fact is that your country is fearful of the truth and can be seen clearly by the fact that there is a media blackout on the issue. For all we know, the Chinese forces right now are torturing 10,000 Tibetans in a display of barbaric brutality. There is no freedom to know the truth….
And as for the Brazilian shot in Britan, the beauty of the system is there was an investigation, the press had free access to all the information, the whole world remained completely informed of the turn of events and the investigation that followed. It is all on the public record. The only thing on the public record regarding Tibet is your inane ramblings.
77 Anil // Mar 18, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Now I’m all worked up over this Tibet issue! Apologies for the long rantings, but I’m having trouble letting it go.
I completely understand why many of you have doubts of the Chinese Media, but how about the Western Media?
Sources:
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Violent-Protests-Tibet/ss/events/wl/031408tibetriots;_ylt=Ap1tD3i.4kfT1KWAJY_LFn2QOrgF#photoViewer=/080319/photos_wl/2008_03_18t102812_450×293_us_china_tibet
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/14/tibet.timeline/index.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080319/wl_afp/chinaunresttibetrights_080319011622;_ylt=AnE1QF0uoXMEEwP_aDeMiskE1vAI
Let’s start with the pictures starting at #5 captioned “Tibetan exiles burn the Chinese national flag and an effigy of Chinese President Hu Jintao during a protest in New Delhi March 18, 2008″ Funny how burning flags and effigies is “peaceful” when the Tibetans do it, but “hateful” when the Iranians do it, huh? Oh, I love how burning the American flag in the US was almost banned in 2006 - the Constitutional Amendment passing in the House and then failing in the Senate by just one single, solitary vote. Gotta love our “freedom of expression”!
Now the timeline: This “information comes from the Tibetan Center for Human Rights and Democracy, run by exiles in India, and the International Campaign for Tibet, which has offices in Washington, Amsterdam, Berlin and Brussels.” - Obviously a front for the Chinese Government!
Let’s see: I see peaceful protests leading to arrests by some police forces and continued permission of the protests by other police forces . 17 people are reportedly beaten. While some police crackdown others politely tell the protesters to please stop protesting. When all that doesn’t work, police fire tear gas into the crowds. Finally, after some more arrests and non-arrests the peaceful Tibetans begin a full-scale riot. Total detainees and possible torture victims according to this article: 934 by my admittedly bad math. I realize these numbers could vary drastically due to lack of information and verifiability, but considering these
are pro-Tibetan sources who do seem to have numerous inside contacts, I have difficulty believing 934 will suddenly blossom into 10,000. Or am I just selectively reading it wrong? What I see is peaceful protests turned into violent riots by Buddhists (the laymen not the monks) who eventually had no problem violating two significant parts of the Noble Eightfold Path. (From the subcategory on Morality no less!) I fully understand that we are all only human and could easily become resentful and angry after decades of oppression. Then again most of us don’t claim to be (or are claimed for us) “peaceful, innocent and pure” Buddhists. Oh, and by the way for the Americans, remember the RNC convention of 2004? Thousands gathered there to peacefully protest too. What was the official response? A massive crackdown by riot police resulting in 1806 arrests, illegal detentions, illegal fingerprinting and questions of civil rights abuses!
Finally the last article, notice how the de-facto leader of the Tibetans, the Dalai Lama, strongly opposes the violence? Notice how even he doesn’t support a “Free Tibet” but advocates a “third way”? Notice how “he spurned calls by some Tibetan exiles for an international boycott of the Olympics.
‘The Olympic games do not take place in Lhasa — the Olympic Games take place in Beijing. It is illogical to blame millions of Chinese,’ he said.”
But let me guess, clearly THE DALAI LAMA IS WRONG AND YOU ARE RIGHT!!!11!!
78 admin // Mar 18, 2008 at 11:47 pm
@Jason
“It is unkown what happened in Tibet.”
If you deny the fact that there was riot in Tibet province and some tibetan chineses were burning house and killing people, I have no comments. All of the footage online and even on the western media have prove it. That is the only fact that is proven by video and accepted by all people.
“The only fact is that your country is fearful of the truth and can be seen clearly by the fact that there is a media blackout on the issue. For all we know, the Chinese forces right now are torturing 10,000 Tibetans in a display of barbaric brutality.”
If you want to make a point, please give your evidence. Don’t say it is impossible. Because people can always use mobile phone take videos and use internet to transfer it. Don’t say china block all the internet. If you don’t have methods to send information, how did you get “torturing 10,000 Tibetans in a display of barbaric brutality”. By imaging? Why don’t you say all tibetan chinese have ben excused？ It will be more terrible.
All your speculation on the behaviour of blocking medias into tibet is based on a simple logic - China is a evil country. Anything that it do not let people know is dirty secret. If you think on the other side, you may get a different conclution - the reason why Chinese government do not want its people know what is going on, is to protect tibetan chineses in all the country against the revenge from hun or other chinese? Even this conclution probly may be wrong, but have you ever thought of it? You probly not, becasue in your mind, “evil communists” only do bad things. A very good example is the iraq. The western media keep saying that Iraq hid some secrets and even Weapons of Mass Destruction. What happens next? America and UK killed near 1 million iraq people to prove there are not this kind of weapons. Do you want to do same thing to China? That may probly be your real purpose.
“And as for the Brazilian shot in Britan, the beauty of the system is there was an investigation, the press had free access to all the information, the whole world remained completely informed of the turn of events and the investigation that followed. It is all on the public record. The only thing on the public record regarding Tibet is your inane ramblings.”
I admited I shouldn’t choose Brazilian case. Because, he was not a rioter, he was only a color people with a muslim-like face. And he was not attacking peoples and burning houses, he was only runing and he can not hear the voice from the police. What did he get? A real bullet. What did he lose? Life. What is the result of the invesigation?I don’t know. What I know is that British government will not be blamed by other using the words “genocide of Brazilian” for this incident. What were the tibetan chinese doing? They were killing and burning. What did chinese government do? it asked its soldiers and polices to restraint because of a tupid reason - Olympics 2008. What are all the western people doing? Boycott Olympics 2008. What is the western media saying? from “some sources”, … from “some source”…, from “some source”….et al.Where are these sources? The media always trust the enemy’s enemies as reliable sources of enemy’s situation. LOL.
79 Jason // Mar 19, 2008 at 12:23 am
Admin, again you resort to ramblings. “China is an evil country” has come from your lips. Perhaps there are those that think it. But the reality is that the people as a whole can not be blamed for the actions of their leaders. This applys across the board, be it in China, America or anywhere. The difference though, between say China and America is fundemental. In China, we dont know if the people are pleased with the actions of their leaders. Firstly, the peopole do not have access to the information. And secondly, they are not free to chose who leads them. Conversly, in the USA, at the end of this year, the people will have a chance to express whether or not they are outraged with the actions of the Bush admiinistration. Im not sure about you Admin, but i know which system id choose to be under. Perhaps you prefer the system by which your leaders make the decision on your behalf and ask you to follow the party line. That is fine, and we will have to agree that you prefer the sytem you are under, and I prefer the system where i will get the chance to vote for what i believe is the right way.
As for Tibet, you leaders exposed their hand long ago. They go as far as to kidnap the Panchen Lama, who was at the time and may well be the worlds youngest political prisoner. The aim is to wait till the Dalai Lama passes away, instal your own Dalai Lama and hope the whole problem goes away. Although it is morally bankrupt this idea, it will probably play out like that.
As far as boycotting the Olympic games, ill expose my hand here. If it were up to me, there would be no trade with China at all. It is an oppressive state that has scant regard for human rights. Animals have absolutely no protection or welfare. And basically, if the rest of the world adopted Chinas approach to live, we would be living in an Orwellian nightmare. Do you have access to the writings of Orwell in your country? I didnt think so.
80 Rick in China // Mar 19, 2008 at 2:44 am
@Admin:
First, thank you for the responses and thoughts.
RE: “You keep saying China’s menace to the world due to China developing the navi and airforce.”
I didn’t say this. I never said this. I believe every country should have the right to develop a reasonable army, airforce, and navy. I don’t think it’s a “menace to the world”, either, I live here, and I like it here.
I was simply pointing out that the Army is *huge* and the reason why I believe it’s huge. If you’ll remember times like TAMGX (89) DXP actually had to call in outside land army to suppress the protests, because local army wasn’t complying with the offense on people from their own provinces. Now, I noticed, people in the military I know in Sichuan (CD has a Big military presence as you must know) are often not from here, and often the ones from here are sent to other places. This may be coincidence, but, I think not, that’s just my opinion.
RE: “And please do use the percentage instead of the absolute number, when you say China has too many this or that. Remember china has 1,300,000,000 people.”
I wasn’t saying it had too many as much as it had a much larger than - it was a size comparison between Army:Navy:Airforce. That’s all. And you are correct about the cheap labour issue and fact it is much easier to develop a land force here than others requiring armaments like tanks or jets. I’m not arguing that point either.
81 Rick in China // Mar 19, 2008 at 3:05 am
@ Anil:
RE: “No, all I stated was a simple fact - 200 million do have un-restricted access”
Yes, you did state a fact. I am not disputing your source, or the total number of approximate internet users in China. You said that they do have un-restricted access WITH A PROXY. But the implication there, with your wording, is that 200 million people are accessing foreign media. That implication is _very wrong_. That is why I mentioned all of the other factors, which turn your 200 million into a fraction of a fraction of that number. That’s the topic that was at hand - how many are receiving foreign media, not how many could - with all ideal circumstance and education - possibly access it.
RE:”CIA and American interference in Tibet is a well-known fact as cited in numerous sources.”
Numerous sources. Did you read his notes? It’s hearsay. It’s opinion. It’s indication.
There are opinions and indications of conspiracy theories on 9/11 by very well educated individuals, do you believe all those as fact or theory? If it’s a theory, state it as such. If it’s a fact, state it as such, and cite your source. Stating theory as fact shows ignorance to possibility and truth, nothing more. This makes people not want to carry on discussions, leading to…
RE: “Finally, on your last response I love how you first complain of my insults and then gradually sink lower and lower in to derisive insults yourself. Hypocrite much? If “it’s way too easy to rip apart””
You’re right. I shouldn’t have ended with a sarcastic tone. That was my bad, and I apologize .
That being said, sometimes it’s easier to stop addressing a rant than continue dismantling it, you disagree? I guess everyone has the right to be a completionist, but I try to recognize futility when it smacks me in the (eyes). I’ll try to hold my (fingers) next time, and keep my responses to-the-point.
RE: “But let me guess, in your mind, none of these extreme factors could have any possible influence on the slow development of India!”
Although the obfuscation of your actual point through posting seemingly relevant exact figures from wikipedia, it doesn’t support your case. Sure, size, diversity, and management have correlation, I agree with that. That is hardly the end-all or even most significant factor in development, human or economic. By your “logic”, Cuba should be on top of the world. You mention “slow development” of India - slow? Relative to WHAT? How long do you think the *economy*, *society*, or *human rights* have been developing in other parts of the world? Years? Tens of years? Hundreds of years? How do you create distinction between a “new start” and “new end”? The end of a gov’t regime? Your argument is missing so many anchors required to make it fly, so I’ll leave it at this. I’d like to add - my point was NOT that size and diversity aren’t contributors to issues, I was addressing your arrogant assumption that only you truly understood the problems brought on by those issues.
82 Rick in China // Mar 19, 2008 at 3:08 am
@Anil:
RE: “I think all you “Free Tibet” supporters need to realize something. No government has formally recognized Tibetan sovereignty. I wonder why that is? Could it be because the Tibetans don’t have a case?”
Serious negative impact with their major supplier of..well, everything manufactured. Cheap labour. Emerging market. The business behind the government ($$$) would never let all of that profit be put on the line for the freedom of a few people in a distant land that offers them nothing but a few handicrafts and hiking guides.
83 admin // Mar 19, 2008 at 6:01 am
Jason,
In your eyes, I am abosutely brainwashed. If not, can’t I represent one of the people who support China government on Tibet issue?
You can boycott anything, stop tradding with China, that s your right. Please start with stripping yourself anything made in China, and stop buying anything made in China.
you mentioned animal right. You probably can not understand, people in some places live worse than dogs and cats in west. Animal rights vs people rights? ha ?
And you need respect differnt diets resulted from culture difference. It could be ignorant and arrogant to name the difference as brutal.
I do not read orwellian. We do not read English works too much, not out of suppression. Do you read Lu Xun, also a famous writer?
84 Jason // Mar 19, 2008 at 7:06 am
” Do you read Lu Xun”. No i havnt read him, nor have i heard of him BUT, if someone recomended him to me, I would be free to choose whether or not i want to read him. George Orwel is banned in China. You can not read him. And if you chose to take a chance and obtain a copy of his works in your country, you would be risking your liberty. That is the point. Again, you lack the freedom to decide what to read. It is unbelivable that in the year 2008, a country that likes to pretend it is advanced is afraid of people reading books. From where i sit, it is just unimaginable.
As for humans living worse than animals in your country, i am very sorry for this. But it is very common under totalitarian rule that huge numbers of the population are completely oppressed. You cant have it both ways. You defend the ways of your country, yet want to complain about the conditions of the people.
As for treating animals badly, perhaps it is culture, but very poorly evolved cultural habits that have a place somewhere in the dark ages. As long as we as humans are unable to be kind to the most helpless around us, we will continue to manifest a world full of hatered, fear and loathing. It is all up to us. Not sure if you think we are anywhere near a utopian state, but from where i sit, i dont see it.
As for brainwashing, we are all victim of it to some degree or another. But my brainwashed state at least gives me the feeling that i have the freedom to determine my own fate. If i wanted to be a black, christian cross dressing tibetan monk, i would be free to do it and to stand on my soap box and preach my believes to those willing to listen. You over there in China do not have freedom to determine your own fate unless it is within the boundaries permissable by the party. And within that, no one in China is allowed to have a photo of the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama is one of the most revered leaders on the planet. He is recognised as a peace loving human who sets a standard many aspire to follow, be them christian, athiest, buddhist, jew, etc. But in China, he is considered a threat to peace. I mean, that makes my head spin. The Dalai Lama, a threat to peace. And the party never gives up on spinning this. But no one is buying what they are selling. No one except for the people in your country who dont have access to all the facts. So your fellow countryman can not be blamed for their ignorance. I feel sorry for the state of affairs in your country, just as i feel sorry for the people of North Korea, just as i feel sorry for the people of Mynamar, just as i feel sorry for any people who are not free to determine their own destinies. And most of all, i feel sorry for the Tibetans. They lost their right to determination at the hands of a most brutal regime.
85 Ben // Mar 19, 2008 at 10:25 am
Jason, thanks for your funny review.
I feel very regretted for your self-central idea.
I suggest you had better not judge China or Chinese lives from a higher point before you really have known China.
Truth can not be buried or cooked forever, do you agree with me? Even under the brutal adminitration of Qin Empirer, when knowledgeable person got buried or prisoned nearly as a whole, many facts in that time got passed onto people nowadays….
My point is , China is an open country now, people have been widely and deeply informed about what you know, what you can imagine.
86 Ben // Mar 19, 2008 at 10:39 am
To Jason,By the way, to learn the way Of Chinese thinking, please read the following books first, only a very small portion of Chinese population ever have finished reading them.
Daxue (The Great Learning)
Lunyu (The Analects)
Zhongyong (The Doctrine of the Mean)
Mengzi (The Mencius)
China, as an old country, be open-minded to any comment, even critics; for a simple reason, Chinese culture is much longer…….
This is what I keep talking to my foreign friends every time when I was having dinner with them in their own countries.
87 Jason // Mar 19, 2008 at 7:21 pm
BEN
“My point is , China is an open country now”.
That is a complete lie. Are you delusional? Can I travel to Tibet right now with a camera? Can i look up Free Tibet on the internet in China? Is it safe to talk on Messenger about your feeling regarding Tibet, especially if you are sympathetic to the people of Tibet? Can Bjork get on stage in China and say “free Tibet?”. Can a musician from abroad play any song he wants to in a concert in China without first submitting his song choice to “the party” for scrutiny???? Your country is as free and open as a free and open totalitarian state can be. Oh, and as for the books you recommend, i am FREE to read them if i like, you on the other hand are NOT free to read the books i would recommend to you.
88 Rick in China // Mar 19, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Ben:
“China, as an old country, be open-minded to any comment, even critics; for a simple reason, Chinese culture is much longer…….
This is what I keep talking to my foreign friends every time when I was having dinner with them in their own countries.”
I strongly disagree with this. You mention “very few chinese have read” and that is very true. Most, including very well educated Chinese who work in my company and have discussions with me often, don’t even know where 孔子 was born! Let alone his world-known analects. You do realize that all of these books you recommend preach principals only _partially_ and very partially followed by today’s society, and those are generally generic ‘golden rule’ style philosophies pretty much every state in the world recognizes. I find it absurd that people here often spit out names and make claims of “you can’t possibly understand unless you understand this!” when they don’t themselves understand OR live by those beliefs in practice.
I haven’t read The Great Learning or Doctrine of the Mean, but have read a lot of other great works, as part of my initial interest in this country. I’m expecting a response titled “You can’t possibly understand because you’re not Chinese!”.
89 Anil // Mar 19, 2008 at 11:46 pm
@Rick in China - I think you are reading way too many implications into my intended literal statements. Perhaps I should have said “200 million do have un-restricted access if *they wish it*” but I didn’t. So how about “300 million Americans do have un-restricted access to the Internet” See? It’s just a simple statement of fact. I say nothing about how many have computers, how many have the knowledge or interest, how many can afford it etc. But Americans can go to libraries, internet cafes, or even their friends houses for access. Indeed, just like China, in terms of real use the American number is whittled down to approx. 100 milion. But my point was indeed exactly the opposite of what you claim: how many *could* access foreign media not how many *are*. And I may be wrong but I thought the topic was Chinese censorship of the media. Even if the Chinese had free, unrestricted access to uncensored TV news, this says nothing about how many would actually watch it, or how many actually own a TV etc. And the complaints of previous commenters (esp. on the previous blog post) was a blanket statement on how the Chinese *do not* have *access* to uncensored media, and I simply tried to point out that some indeed *do*.
RE:”CIA and American interference in Tibet is a well-known fact as cited in numerous sources.”
‘Numerous sources. Did you read his notes? It’s hearsay. It’s opinion. It’s indication.’
Ok you don’t like his sources, how about these:
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2775497&date=19981003
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2965303&date=19990608
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD61538F931A35753C1A96E958260&sec=&spon=
Notice the sources for these articles? The Dalai Lama’s offical administration, several CIA members, and numerous Tibetans resisters - all directly and personally involved. Facts spoken directly from the horse’s mouth! Or are these sources dubious too, speaking nothing but hearsay, opinion, and indication?!?
“This makes people not want to carry on discussions, leading to…”
Again with the condescending dismissal! Why are you so quick to dismiss other’s views and ridicule them? Are you here to only discuss things that support your own point of view regardless of evidence to the contrary or are you here to have a genuine dialog to discuss issues with an open mind and maybe learn something new?
“That being said, sometimes it’s easier to stop addressing a rant than continue dismantling it, you disagree? I guess everyone has the right to be a completionist, but I try to recognize futility when it smacks me in the (eyes).”
I want to let this one go since you apologized, but I’d just like point out something. Yes, I disagree. First you falsely assume that a rebuttal would be futile. Based on what exactly? A few insults while ignoring the majority of my comments that, I feel, show a willingness to discuss things? Yes, it’s easier for *you* to dismiss a rant rather than addressing it. But who made the effort, even if he was wrong, to discuss things and who did not? If someone says something that you think is wrong, which response helps foster greater understanding: providing a response that explains why you thinks it’s wrong or completely ignoring the statements and letting that person continue to wallow in his own ignorance?
“I think many of you don’t realize the enormous challenges that poorer countries with huge populations like India and China face. These are extremely complicated problems that smaller countries hardly face.”
Hmmm…notice the “I think”? It’s an opinion not a declarative. Maybe it was wrong of me to make an assumption of other commenters knowledge or lack thereof, but they certainly didn’t negate my assumption by making simplistic blanket statements that ignored variables and nuance that do significantly alter the respective situations. Also notice I said “many of you” which is hardly a claim that “I am the only one who understands these issues”. And I like how you turned two generalities on enormous challenges and complicated problems into a claim of “truly understanding” but I’ll chalk that one up to your wonderful ability to vault into vast flights of fanciful implications based off of nothing more than a simple word or phrase.
I’m sorry, but I fail to see how simply listing factors that may have influenced development obfuscates my case and fails to support it. I never said that