Shocking New Video Out of Tibet: Beating and Killing of Tibetans by China

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Its going to take time, and its going to take patience and I hope at least those who are in power realize that there is a difference between trying to solve the problem, and whatever the hell jammies said.

Let me decomplexify it for you: The Chinese government is on the wrong side of history. It is rife with corruption, incompetent, and should be censured by the free press and private citizens of other countries as they see fit without the nay-saying of apologists for a morally indefensible regime. Other governments should also hold China accountable to its agreed international covenants, instead of throwing over principle in favour of cheap, shoddy goods.

Your claim they will go insular again if pushed or embarassed is ridiculous, as they have no choice but to open up, or be left behind economically, technologically and militarily; just like what happened the last time a Chinese government tried to shut out the "barbarians". Even the kleptocrats in Beijing know that going back to the bad old days of Maoism is not an option - they need to be part of the global economy or the newly affluent and powerful middle classes will turn hostile, an event which they are no more likely to survive than the Soviets did their revolution of the dissatisfied.

In short, what you think you "know" about China is coloured heavily by your anthropomorphosis of the whole citizenry as a sulky teenager that doesn't like to be told what it can and can't do. My "idealized political theories" at least take into account that the Chinese people cannot be so casually simplified into some kind of collective soul under the beneficent control of the Central Commitee.

Lastly, the common person in China is not going to force their government to change unless they first understand that it needs changing, to which sharp criticism and uncomfortable facts seem far more suited to accomplish than high-fives and walking softly. No one - and I include governments West in this - is above criticism, and especial sensitivity to criticism is all the more reason to point out flaws.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by jammies

In short, what you think you "know" about China is coloured heavily by your anthropomorphosis of their collective will as a sulky teenager that doesn't like to be told what it can and can't do. My "idealized political theories" at least take into account that the Chinese people cannot be so casually simplified into some kind of collective soul under the beneficent control of the Central Commitee.

Lets just say my uncle is one of the advisors to a a few of the politicians in China (due to his status as a former Dean and CEO of a company that is based out of China, but often interacts with a few US universities... he is now semi-retired, but the university and the company he started up still keeps him on part time as an advisor)... who told me quite a bit about what it takes to change a regime. (Alot of his work involves changing policies when he was a Dean)

I have some other relationships with people (family friends/family) who are former/retired corporate executives of businesses who had to deal a lot with China over the past 15 years for them to open up as well. (Macau projects, Hong Kong projects, etc... a lot since the handover to China) Although they have not really said as much to me about it, but have touched on it from time to time. (I don't have that same close relationship with all of them, so they arn't going to say everything)

Yes, they must be a sulky teenager too.

Seriously jammies, what do you think is going to happen when you try and force China's hand? what possibly gives you the idea they'll fold up tent and conform to all of the "better" traditions within 1 year?

Technologically, China is pretty solid. Almost every single high-tech company has their foot in the door in China somehow, and they are stealing market share, fast. Memory is slowly slipping away from the USA, the biggest chip producer is in China and the biggest chip maker is international. (who knows what would happen if the doors started to close) I could go on, but there's very little the USA really holds in terms of creating value as far as technology goes. Sandia and Lawrence Livermore might have some expensive toys, but anyone in high tech knows the designs and fabs are leaving the West. Quite a few design houses and fabs in Shanghai, IT in India obviously. Korea has really grown fast, I wonder who they would rather do business with?

Economically... Hiliary just said a few days ago, the USA needs China to keep bailing them out. China has also been buying up major assets the past few months and are positioning themselves very well (major companies/assets/resources of oil, minerals, metals in Iran, Brazil, Russia, Venezuela, Australia, France the past few months)

Military - I have no idea.

In short, its not about "high fives and walking softly" its about not trying to change an entire countries customs in a short period of time. This is a country with a long and proud history, the harder you push, the harder they will push back. Anyone who knows anything about how China has progressed the past 15 years - numourous CPers in China have verified this - knows China has rapidly changed in many, many ways. Customs, environmental concerns, openness to new ideas (a HUGE HUGE deal if you went to Beijing 10 years ago, and now), look at cities who see lots of movement of people vs those that don't... you see vast differences. There are very few countries, if any, that have seen customs change as fast as China - and things have continued to improve as well. When rejects start to try and make waves because they want things done now, China will push back. We've seen that as well.

Changing over a country and people's customs/beliefs will take a lot of time... I think you just don't understand that.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Yes, they must be a sulky teenager too.

I'm not questioning your qualifications, I'm questioning your logic. You cannot infer how a nation will behave as if it is a monolithic entity that has "feelings" like pride and embarrassment.

It is a technique that gets misapplied all the time, and basing arguments upon it is not convincing.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by jammies

I'm not questioning your qualifications, I'm questioning your logic. You cannot infer how a nation will behave as if it is a monolithic entity that has "feelings" like pride and embarrassment.

It is a technique that gets misapplied all the time, and basing arguments upon it is not convincing.

This is a opinion of a ADVISOR TO CHINESE POLITICIANS... who said much of this.

Granted, he wasn't human rights or anything (science, actually) but he worked alot on the politics side of science.

Ideas flowing into China the past 15 years is what has helped it change so fast. As opportunities go to China, China has become more willing to open up and accept the new ideas that are coming into the country, and as a result, ALOT has changed (specifically Beijing and Shanghai, the rest... not so much). As much as you are ignorant to it, movement of people and ideas (relocation, business, or just paying the country a visit) has caused lots to change and improve in China. The hope is as these liberal ideas flow in China, that hopefully somehow, Tibet-China can work this out constructively. I don't see this ever working out violently - at least, not working out for Tibet. (A real shame, cause there are a few legendary mountain climbs I want to do in Tibet without getting assaulted by a Tibetian, or harassed by a China policeman, again.)

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Changing over a country and people's customs/beliefs will take a lot of time... I think you just don't understand that.

Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. The China of 1955, for example, was a far different place than the China of 1945.

Not all change is gradual and China is especially vulnerable right now to sudden and potentially catastrophic change. Historically, repressive regimes often fail right after a period of economic expansion and the loosening of government control is followed by an economic check and tightening of control again; it seems that once you give people a taste of progress, they are much less likely to accept privation again. With the world economy almost certain to cause economic hardship in the Chinese economy, I wouldn't be too sure that gradualism is going to win out.

The West has already made the mistake once of supporting a corrupt and supposedly "modernizing" regime in China when Chiang Kai'shek was our ally in WWII against the Japanese and into the post-war period against the Communists. Back then there was the same idea that it wouldn't do to criticize the Nationalists too much because they might repudiate the alliance; in the end they would have been far better off destroying Chiang's "face" as he needed the Allies far more than they needed him.

Is the same excessive regard for Chinese sensibilities happening again? I think so, and I also think that foreign policy based on morality, while painful in the short term in relationships like this, in the long term is in the West's best interests as it removes the stain of hypocrisy that causes both nations and their citizens to distrust us.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by jammies

Is the same excessive regard for Chinese sensibilities happening again? I think so, and I also think that foreign policy based on morality, while painful in the short term in relationships like this, in the long term is in the West's best interests as it removes the stain of hypocrisy that causes both nations and their citizens to distrust us.

You might want to tell Hillary, she's still trying to sell US debt to China.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...022200468.html

"Our economies are so intertwined," she said. "The Chinese know that in order to start exporting again to its biggest market . . . the United States has to take some drastic measures with the stimulus package. We have to incur more debt."

"The Chinese are recognizing our interconnection," Clinton added. "We are truly going to rise or fall together. By continuing to support American Treasury instruments, the Chinese are recognizing" that interconnection.

Yes I realize this goes against what I said about China closing its doors. And you are right that now that many of the younger generation have gotten a "taste" that when the Chinese government tries to push back, they will see resistance from the younger generation. All in all, not alot will go well and nothing will get solved IMO by trying to guilt/embarrass them.

As I said - what is happening now, the rate things are changing in China, is a GOOD thing. We are seeing FAST progress that not many other countries have seen. Politically, the West is putting a lot of pressure on China to clean up its act, I think things are going in the right direction; I think more times then not, rapid change does not go well. What I don't want to see is a step back, because idiotic radicals decide to step in and what China=USA overnight. Thats not going to happen. At the rate China has improved in many different aspects, they will get to human rights very soon (not just Tibet... as I said, that video is nothing compared to some of the stuff I've seen actually being in China, not to downplay the nature the crimes in TangerZ video).

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

This is a opinion of a ADVISOR TO CHINESE POLITICIANS... who said much of this.

I don't care who said it. Nations are not persons and do not have emotions. Your uncle can legitimately claim the politicians he worked with might react with anger and embarrassment to criticism of the Chinese government, but inferring that therefore such criticism will definitely move the nation to shut down outside influence is a very dubious extrapolation from that knowledge.

Questioning the elite is always going to make them angry, and they are always going to overreact to any criticism. When indulging that anger goes against their self-interest, though, the sound and fury usually really does mean nothing. In this case, the Chinese have the very relevant and close example of North Korea to show them what happens to a society that tries to go it alone and shut out all foreign influence, and I wouldn't bet any but the most rabid military men in China want to emulate that.

[Phanuthier]

I think this is venturing off topic, and neither of us are changing each others minds. I guess my experiances, and people I know's experiances differ from your ideology of changing a powerful regime.

You might have better luck with Darfur though

[HOZ]

Ah....the Chinese...

wonderful people.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

I think this is venturing off topic, and neither of us are changing each others minds.

No one ever changes anyone's mind in these arguments; you're arguing for the audience that might not have a strong opinion yet.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Thor

Penn and Teller educate you:

Penn and Teller are d*cks. Well, Penn is.. maybe Teller just has poor choices in friends.

Take a look at that scale in the video. Telling us that the Tibetans are better off under Chinese rule than they would be with Dalia Lama. I have heard the current Dalia Lama speak (once live, many others on TV or Youtube) and you would have a hard time convincing me that he would be for gouging peoples eyes out as P & T, whose own brand of bullsh*t is far riper than anything they dig up, suggest that he would.

I realize that the Dalia Lama is the head of a religious group and therefore, in your eyes, evil. But that, my friend, is also bullsh*t. There are good religious people and bad religious people. And just because there have been evil dalia lama's does not mean that they are all abusive bloodhungry monsters.

[Vulcan]

I think I learned a little from this thread, thanks everybody.

[TangerZ]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Sadly Tibet's never been a state so China has full control over them just like any other country has over any of its own regions. Most civilized countries treat their regions fairly but China chooses not to. Unfortunately that's their right.

Extreme case but if Canada refused to let Quebec speak french, or practice its religion, or make it own laws and beat up every Quebecker that pissed off Harper... there's nothing Quebec or the world could do about it.

Let me first say, I like your posts Girlysports (always some cool things, and sometimes with Asian oddthings lol), and even the quoted one above, but there's just one small inaccuracy I wanted to respond to. At the same time, it's not a response to you, so much as it is just some information I wanted to throw out there, as a lot of people are just learning about Tibet, as the last poster exemplified.I am referring to the part about Tibet being a state. So please ignore me Girlysports, it's just something so that I can create awareness.

Tibet was one of the largest empires in all of Asia prior to the 7th Century. At one point the Tibetan empire actually occupied parts of China, including the capital. Chinese historians themselves do not contend this as well, they only dispute when it became a part of China. Tibetans believe it did in 1949, as by and large there were no Chinese that were actually living in Tibet until the late 40's when the Communists came with settlers, and China disagrees saying Tibet became Chinese in the 13th Century. In fact, in front of the main cathedral in Tibet stands a signed peace treaty between Tibet and China from the 7th Century. It was also errected on a stone pillar along the demarcated borders of Tibet and China. It first lists out the borders amongst other specifics, and then states Tibetans should live happily in Tibet and Chinese live happily in China and never shall the two be at war. This was signed by the Chinese Emperor and the Tibetan warring King. After this point however, the Tibetan Empire dissintegrated as Buddhism had arrived to Tibet. Although systems of inequality did exist, by and the large the Buddhist philosophy prevaded every little aspect of daily life. When I mean daily things, it would be like a Tibetan looking at the ground while he walks so as not to step on any bugs etc. At any rate, the mentality changed, and by the time of the 13th Dalai Lama, Tibet was so preoccupied with isolating itself as a form of protecting Buddhism. Hence, the reason for the Shangrila myths in the Western world (although Tibet really is a beautiful place), and the reason Tibetans can list off the foreigners in Tibet without referring to a book, AND the reason Tibetans and Chinese never lived together throughout history (notwithstanding border areas on the plateau in what is called "Greater Tibet", such as Chengdu, Kangding, Tongren and Xining). So for Tibetans, whether or not it was Chinese by official proclamation meant nothing, since in Tibet, only Tibetans lived there. It was an ethnically homogenous society. By the same token, we had our own flag, language, postal system, currency (we have wads of this in our house, I can scan them if you guys are interested in viewing them, the banknotes are huge), national anthem, small army etc. When the Communists came to power is when Chinese actually came to Tibet, this was in 1949 as Mao wanted to make good on the ground reality part of their centuries long official claim which extended to Tibet, because the Mongol Kublai Kham tookover China and since the Mongol Empire had influence(in Asian history called Priest-Patron relationship) in Tibet, through this way Tibet became China. At the time of the takeover of Tibet, it was at least a defacto-independent nation. By design Tibet was not taking part in the world affairs, due to it's isolationist policy (which did them in, in the end), and for this reason added to China's importance, was not recognized as a country. For those foreigners who came to Tibet at the time, almost all 100% agree about Tibet's defacto-independence status, including the International Commission of Jurists (independent international lawyers group see a 1960's report they did). Britain, which had the closest relations to Tibet in the Western world, never did recognize Tibet as part of China, wording the relationship as one of suzereignty. Although China's empire includes, inner mongolia and eastern Turkestan, the Communists made sure that Tibet was the only area of China that had to sign an official document at the time of conquest, to state it's inclusion in China. This was known as the 17 point Peace Plan, which was signed under duress, and denotes Tibet's distinct and special status within China. If it were part of China like the other areas, and not independently working, there would be no need for such an agreement, as was the case with other parts liberated by China.

There's a lot of other great posts and discussions going on in here, and I'd love to reply to them all just so that people are getting the full spectrum of information if they are just reading, but I'm afraid it's going to be one small essay after another. I better just get away from this keyboard. One small, small thing before I stop, I was so glad to see Devil's advocates post, in response to Thor. I responded at length in a previous topic to Thor about this (there's no question Tibet was not perfect, but this shouldn't be justification for alien rule), but I will keep it brief. A segment of Chinese are alleging that the Dalai Lama (14th and current one) is responsible for attrocities in Tibet under the so called feudal theocracy. They fail to see that there were 13 other Dalai Lama's and regents. The current Dalai Lama, did not actually rule Tibet until just before the Chinese came. He reluctantly accepted the leadership at age 16 (he wanted to wait until 18 when all other Dalai Lama's were given full temporal powers), as it was thrust upon him by those corrupted few who were abandoning leadership when news of China's imminent invasion was coming. Immediately he created land and tax reforms, but alas it was too late. Once coming to exile in 1960, he created a democratic government in exile, and myself amongst other Tibetans in Calgary vote for our own Prime Minister and member of parliament. His Holiness promotes the abolition of his own political status, saying he only wishes to be a monk, and wants to even dissolve the Dalai Lama institution based on what the people's wishes are. The government in exile will also dissolve immediately upon reaching an agreement with China to resolve the Tibetan situation. He has reiterated on countless occasions he does not want any political role in Tibet post-resolution, but China still claims that he will take Tibet backward and him and the monks want to re-establish the feudal theocracy (try reading Xinhua or the Tibet daily 3 times a day). Additionally, he places Tibet, third on the order of his life priorities. Not surprisingly, his first priority is to serve humanity he says. So you know, it is difficult for China to find a better guy to negotiate with, there is a reason so many Tibetans in Tibet have called out his name asking for his return in their protests, and almost every single Tibetan I know (including many in Tibet) have or would give up their life for him in a heartbeat, some because of religion, some due to what he means to Tibet, and a lot just because of the human being that he is, Tibetans would never have died for Mao.

The Canadian government recently declassified documents regarding Tibet at the time of the Chinese takeover (a series of letters, faxes fromthe 50's and 60's etc. stating that Tibet was basically independent, but for Canada Tibet relations it can't be stated officially), and it is an interesting read, here's the link in pdf format:

http://www.tibet.ca/_media/PDF/secre...tibet_file.pdf

[Vulcan]

Thanks TangerZ, I was 99% sure that Tibet had been and was an independent state when China invaded. Interesting that some think it wasn't. To tell the truth, the government of China scares me and it's good to hear that it seems to be progressing towards a more free and open society.

In Tibet's case and other situations around the world, I don't see why it's such a hard concept to understand, to allow people the right to self determination.

[Bagor]

South Africa has denied the Dalai Lama a visa to attend a peace conference linked to the 2010 Football World Cup, which the country is hosting. Archbishop Desmond Tutu has pulled out of the meeting in protest and branded the decision "disgraceful".
A government spokesman has denied suggestions that the ban was a result of Chinese pressure.......

.....Speculation has also been rife that South Africa does not want to jeopardise its bilateral relations with China, one of its major trading partners. "We are shamelessly succumbing to Chinese pressure," Archbishop Tutu was quoted as telling the Sunday Independent. "I feel deeply distressed and ashamed."
A spokesperson for the Dalai Lama told AFP news agency he was "very disappointed" by the decision, also accusing South Africa of caving into "intense pressure" from Chinese authorities.
South Africa is China's largest trading partner in Africa, with 2008 trade standing at 100bn rand ($10bn; £7bn).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7958881.stm

Their excuse is laughable, and this from a government that welcomed boycotts of SA sporting teams and encouraged awareness when apartheid was an issue.

"at this time the whole world will be focused on the country as hosts of the 2010 World Cup. We want the focus to remain on South Africa.
"A visit now by the Dalai Lama would move the focus from South Africa onto issues in Tibet."

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Penn and Teller are d*cks. Well, Penn is.. maybe Teller just has poor choices in friends.

Take a look at that scale in the video. Telling us that the Tibetans are better off under Chinese rule than they would be with Dalia Lama. I have heard the current Dalia Lama speak (once live, many others on TV or Youtube) and you would have a hard time convincing me that he would be for gouging peoples eyes out as P & T, whose own brand of bullsh*t is far riper than anything they dig up, suggest that he would.

I realize that the Dalia Lama is the head of a religious group and therefore, in your eyes, evil. But that, my friend, is also bullsh*t. There are good religious people and bad religious people. And just because there have been evil dalia lama's does not mean that they are all abusive bloodhungry monsters.

Penn and Teller should run an episode of Bullsh*t on their own show. I am not an expert on this matter so I won't dive into it. However, they do an episode on the animal rights movement and the main source of their eveidence against it is from a front organization for the dairy, restaraunt and cattle industry called "Center for Consumer Freedom" to make people think it has consumer's interests in mind. In fact every corporation who gives money to CCF has been the target of an animal rights protest.

[T@T]

They removed the vid from youtube so I'm not very shocked at all.

[Vulcan]

Well I guess one good thing about this latest situation is that diplomacy at the barrel of a gun is being replaced by diplomacy at the depth of the wallet.

It will be interesting how this plays out with China and USA relations now that the USA is dependent on China for their dollar.