[Sunday Times]Tibetan monks beaten as police halt dissent

I think this was talked over and over again. My position is Tibetan culture needs to be preserved, so do other Chinese cultures. However, the destruction was done during Culture Revolution, when the whole Chinese culture was destructed. It was painful, terribly wrong, and the damage will last a lot longer in the country, people, and culture. However, that wasn't done aiming at Tibetan culture, but it was rather anti-culture and anti-humanity as a whole.

Tibetan culture was demaged by some Han-Chinese, some native Tibetan-Chinese during CR; however, it wasn't crushed by China. Lots of work has been done to restore the culture, in Tibet and other parts of China. Do they have absolute freedom? No, same as other Chinese, there isn't even a free election. Comparing with 20, 40 years ago, Tibetans do have a lot more social freedom and religious freedom. I wish there could be more, but the so-called "free Tibet" by former slave owners isn't going to get them more freedom.

Prior to CCP, Tibetans might have more "freedom" to follow DL, but did they really have religious freedom to convert to Christian or Muslims? That's not freedom, that was force-feed rule of belief. Except for that freedom, what else are those Tibetans not better off today? Of course, I don't include those slave owners, they are not better off.

Do Tibetans really have to give up their religious belief to exchange for better life and non-slave status? No, they don't. They don't have as much political and religious freedom as Americans do, neither do other Chinese people. But does that translate to genocide accusation and claim of "free Tibet"?

If you believe living a poor life as a slave, keeping themselves as some exotic sightseeing attractions to foreign travelers is Tibet culture, that's quite ignorant.

Tibet culture will be preserved and restored, and Tibetans will improve their living standard, continuously.

 

Chinese people knows its injustice. Common Chinese people feel that their lives and country was a hell of a lot better than any time in it's recent history (~200). Therefore, they feel an obligation to defend parts of the system that's injust, because no one has provided them with a better alternative than the system overall. And don't say democracy (atleast right now) because they see India and Russia and feel they are a heck of a lot better than those two country, and that any revolutionary change in the government doesn't sound appealing right now.

I think the Chinese want (and will get reforms), but they will want do it in a graduay manner that sustain the current stability. All these arguments are moot since people are coming from different points of view. Most people from the U.S. haven't lived, heard about, or witness first-hand some of the stuff that happened in the past few generations in China, vice-versa. People are starting of from different spectrums of life. I would say the Americans are more Kantian while the Chinese or more Lockean right now. Just a difference in philosophy.

 

who are you now? Reggie Bush?

wow, you walked through a neighborhood! what does that prove? oh so you notice the poor African Americans, guess what? there are rich African Americans. There are poor people of all types and rich people of all types.
Diversity, is it new to you?

Next time you go to USC say hello to Young MC and bust a move.

 

I totally believe Chinese people know its injustice.


I just believe some paranoid and hypersensitive posters are too afraid to admit that and want to turn the whole idea into a pointless debate.

I know for sure that a couple people here are NOT REPRESENTATIVE of an entire population. I believe EVERYONE is their OWN PERSON.

Some people here are Chinese, some are BORG. its the BORG that are just mindless slaves to the government.

People in China know if Yao misses a shot, its on HIM. BORG believes its TMAC's fault.

 

I've asked this earlier, but got no response. So I want to ask again... Why is this even a topic?

Everything seems simple to me. From a power standpoint, China >>>>>>>>(add another 500 '>') Tibet. And technically, Tibet is part of China. So even if China decides to eradicate Tibet culture or kill some of its citizens... well, so what?

The main point is that none of this really affects the US. This did not happen in the Americas, which is geographically close to the US. This did not happen in the Middle East, where the US gets its oil from. So why does it matter what China does to Tibet? It's not as if anyone in the US cares how women are treated in the Middle East, or any of the atrocities commited everyday in Africa.

 

Once again, even those who defend China are not Borgs. They just see the current government in China as the best of choice as of right now. They are also seeing the good that the current Chinese administration is doing. They get defensive because they see the current Chinese government almost in a savior role from the dark pasts (ok, I'm exaggerating a little here I know) and improving every day life for most Chinese. Just like you defend Vernon and Calvin despite their off the court issues, they're gonna defend China despite the many blimishes.

 

all of those things mentioned , people care about.
however this is just clutchfan members. clutchfans is just a part of the world. however, clutchfans seem to like Tibetans. Maybe the Dalia Lama and Hakeem shared some good times reminiscing on when Dream schooled David Robinson or when Kenny Smith hit 7 3pointers to win Orlando.

That's my guess.

 

China has the abillity to eradicate Tibetans, doesn't make it morally right. People are going to criticize actions on a message board, that's what people do in the political section of a board.
It doesn't have anything to do with the U.S., but because this is the D&D, and people like to debate and discuss these things, people have views and they will share them. That's how you learn what some people are thinking and perhaps expand your horizons.


Also as a side note, just do a search of the board from the last six months, there's posts on Womens rights and African atrocities. The women one usually gets longer as you have people defending it as their way of life and culture (kind of ironic as the U.S. is the one seen to push western ideals and eraticating conservative muslim culture) and you get D&D. No one really defends or argues about African atrocities and it usually dies pretty quick (which is sad).

 

but I'm not talking about China! I'm talking about recognizing what is happening as a individual.

dude A gets attacked by dude B. dude A did nothing wrong, didn't start no beef with dude B.

Dude B is WRONG.

its VERY VERY SIMPLE. Some people turned this thing into history of the world part 5.

this crap could happen in the US, Mexico, Slovenia...

What if Boki Nachbar won the Nobel Peace Prize and some gold chain from the US??

Then a bunch of BOKI FANS come to celebrate by dancing. And then Slovenia 5.0 beats them down like what Carlos Boozer did to Yao?

That SH$T is WRONG!!!

SEE.

 

How many time did you defend Kenny Smith lately The dude is a traitor to Clutch City, just admit it.

 

dude when the Rockets got the new crappy uniforms. Drexler and Dream were BORG, saying how nice they were.

You know that Dream and Clyde thought that were ugly too, but they were too afraid to anger the mother Les Alexander and the fashion designers at Kmart.

Barkley said they were straight up the ugliest uniforms ever.
Barkley was James T Kirk.

 

well, maybe it's time you bark at something else, coz i've made it clear that beating peaceful protesters is wrong in any where.

I regret to have lowered myself down to your level, but I thought you wouldn't get the message otherwise.

Of course I'm not China. I am GOD, and you are one of the primary examples of the flaws in my creation.

 

Kenny beat Steve Kerr on TNT wearing a ROCKETS UNIFORM. that shows that Rockets > Bulls.

Man, the Rockets getting beat down by Utah was the ugliest series in Rockets history. Kenny was being BORG by not saying what wimps we were in the 4th quarter.

YAO was a TIBETAN MONK and Carlos Boozer was CHINA in game 7.

sorry, I need to get that ugly game out of my system. let the season start please.

 

your posts make as much sense as the WMDs that America found in Iraq.

Oh, I get it, you are an ignorant moron and you are proud of it.

Ha ha, knock yourself out.

 

dude you'd be booed off Showtime at the Apollo so fast with your whack responses.

my level? please, at least reach Tatoo's level first, cause I'm Mr Rork.

 

you aren't even in the same class as me in post on clutchfans.
i'm Will Smith and you are Erkel.
except Erkel is funnier than you.

 

What is culture? You keep talking about culture like it's something sacred that nobody is allowed to change. I think culture is just part of human society and it should change and evolve as human society progresses. Preserving a culture for the pure sake of preserving it is just pointless.

There are plenty of things in the Chinese culture that I cannot wait to get rid of and a lot of dark aspects of Chinese culture have already been destroyed and I'm very happy about it -- for example, foot-binding, the oppression of women, and the hierarchy of social classes.

Deep down, culture is the way of life, and the way people think, and there is no reason why both cannot evolve for the better. It's irrational to resist any change to a way of life or philosophy just for the sake of preservation.

There is no doubt that the Chinese policies are changing the culture of Tibet, but why is that necessarily a bad thing? I'd totally agree that forcing people to give up their religion is as wrong as it gets, and in principle China should not forbid the worship of the Dalai Lama in Tibet. However, it's not like China is shutting down every single lama temple and imprisoning every single Tibetan lama and nun. As I said before, millions of dollars are spent every year on rebuilding and renovating lama temples and palaces, and all Tibetans are free to engage in religious activities unrelated to Dalai Lama. So, you cannot really argue that the Chinese are actively destroying the religion part of Tibetan culture with force.

Before 1951, the usual way of life for an ordinary Tibetan was to live a very harsh life that normally ended at the age of 30, now they get to live a less harsh life and die at the age of 60. Do you not see this as an improvement?

I see your point and it does make a little sense, with the exception that China is not bringing countless Chinese to Tibet, there are still far more Tibetans in Tibet than non-Tibetans. I actually like the idea of letting people work out their own problems at their own pace, but unfortunately the reality doesn't work like that. Things rarely get better by themselves without outside influence, and very few people/countries can resist the urge to tell other people/countries what to do -- just look how much America is interfering with China and the middle east.

You make it sound like the rest of China is exactly the same, but it's not. Regional customs and dialects are well preserved and widely practiced all over China, and there is no reason why Tibet cannot keep its unique culture and religion well being part of China. What "a lot of people think" is not necessarily the truth.

 

I reckon Faux news should hire you to replace Bill O'Reilly, coz the resonance of ignorance between you and the other single-brain-celled Americans would be so disgusting that nobody would want to share the radio wave with you.

No, you are a parasite living in Jar Jar Bink's left toe.

 

Of course, everyone cares about these to a certain extent. But enough to have all these articles written? And such heated discussions in a forum? I can't think of any other similar situation that gets so much continous coverage. It's would be like coverage of the Kansas City Royals AA team in the chronicle sports section or something.

I hate to say it, but I don't think people are "learning" anything on this thread, besides a bunch of stereotypes.

And discussing moral issues is always a slippery slope. Because let's face it. None of us are truly moral. If we are, we'd be tree-hugging vegetarians who ride bikes to work. So trying to declare moral superiority only pisses people off who see them as hypocrites. This doesn't just apply to this thread, but everything in general.

Maybe it's just me, because I've always loved the US because America can say and do any sort of BS and get away with it. When I learned in school about other countries cutting down rainforests to support the Americans' way of life, I was glad that we're the people benefiting from other people's miseries, and not the other way around. Since the world is unfair anyway, might as well be on the "good side" of the unfairness.

That's true. Never thought about the fact that there's no disagreements results in people no longer caring. I've always thought that if America and especially Europe were truly "humanitarian", they'd find a way to help those in Africa, because there are some truly horrible things going on there.

 

It's because of the popularity of the Dalai Lama in the west. When you try to compare DL/China and Saddam/US, people won't get the connection. I don't.