quote:

---

...
The relationship between China proper and Tibet was long and tortuous.
One of the earliest Chinese-Tibetan contacts occurred during the Tang Dynasty
(618–907) in the seventh century when King Songtsen Gampo unified
Tibet and received a Chinese princess as a bride. Both China and Tibet were
under the rule of the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty in the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries. The Ming Dynasty (1368–1644), despite conferring many
honorary titles on prominent members of the Tibetan elite, made no substantial
effort to extend Chinese administrative control to Tibetan territory. Not
until the Qing or Manchu Dynasty (1644–1911) did the imperial court in
Beijing exert more formal control over Tibet, especially after the Qian Long
Emperor (c. 1735–1795) stationed two Qing imperial envoys (amban), with
the protection of Qing garrisons, in Lhasa. In addition, the Qing, through
political and military maneuvering, brought several Tibetan-inhabited border areas
under the jurisdiction of Sichuan and Yunnan Provinces, thus creating a distinction between “Political Tibet” and “Ethnographic Tibet.”

In general, the Qing policy toward Tibet significantly strengthened the connections
between China proper and Tibet and reinforced the Chinese conviction that Tibet was part of China.
Entering the nineteenth century, with the decline of
the Qing in the wake of the Western incursions into China, the authority of
the Qing-appointed ambans gradually waned, and Tibet increasingly became
autonomous, reducing Chinese hegemony over Tibet to nothing more than a
symbol.
The 1911 revolution destroyed the Qing Dynasty and led to the establishment
of the Republic of China (ROC). Throughout the Republican period
(1911–1949), the successive governments were too weak and too busy
with more urgent matters to pay attention to the Tibet issue. As a result, until
1949, when the CCP defeated the Nationalists in the civil war and planned to
send troops to “liberate” Tibet, the “Land of Snows” enjoyed the status of a de
facto independent polity. However, no ROC government had ever given up
China’s claim of sovereignty over Tibet, and the government in Lhasa made
no real effort to turn Tibet’s de facto independence into a de jure status that
would be recognized by the international community.
...
PLA commanders noted that “Tibet is located in China’s southwest border area, neighboring India, Nepal, and Bhutan and serving as China’s strategic gate in the southwest direction. . . . Both the British and the U.S. imperialists have long cast greedy eyes on Tibet, so Tibet’s position in [China’s] national defense is extremely important.”16 Mao echoed these sentiments, arguing that “although Tibet does not have a large population, its international [strategic] position is extremely important. Therefore, we must occupy it and transform it into a people’s democratic Tibet.”
...
The Tibetan government had no means of military resistance, and its appeals
for help to the international community—including the United Nations,
the United States, India, and Britain—failed to elicit any response.28
Consequently, the Tibetans had no choice but to send a delegation to Beijing
in the spring of 1951.

---

quote:

---

While the scale of the protests and the temper of the reaction by Chinese authorities remain to be seen, the outbreak of violence was an ominous sign for Tibet, where resentment against Chinese rule has been simmering for years. An already tense situation has been exacerbated by China's sensitivity about its human rights image ahead of the staging of the Olympic Games in Beijing in August. Some observers argue that what appeared to be carefully planned and executed protests — the first on such a scale in nearly two decades — were likely deliberately timed to take advantage of the media attention focused on the upcoming Games.

The demonstrations began on March 9 when hundreds of monks from three large monasteries on the outskirts of the city, Drepung, Sera and Ganden, attempted to enter Lhasa to commemorate an uprising against Chinese rule in 1959 that was ruthlessly suppressed with hundreds of protesters reportedly killed. The Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, was forced to flee Lhasa for refuge in India, where he has lived in exile ever since. (Chinese troops occupied Tibet in 1949 when the Communists finally claimed victory in the country's prolonged civil war).

The anniversary protests had passed peacefully — until now. "The Chinese response had been extraordinarily restrained, which is amazing," says Robert Barnett, professor of Contemporary Tibetan Studies at Columbia University. Barnett and others say that paramilitary police blocked at least three attempts by monks from each of the three monasteries to enter the capital. Later the monasteries were surrounded by armed police. Some monks responded in one monastery by reportedly going on hunger strike while there were reports of attempted suicides at another.

That pattern of protest was a repeat of the last time Lhasa saw large-scale anti-Beijing demonstrations in March 1989, an escalating series of clashes that ended with troops killing scores of protesters and the declaration of martial law.

The Chinese administration of Tibet in the last two years or so has been particularly harsh and provocative, says Barnett, who attributes the tone to the Communist Party Secretary for Tibet, Zhang Qingli. "He is the Rottweiler of the Chinese establishment and has been extremely provocative. He even said once that the Communist Party was Buddha, not the Dalai Lama."

Other observers pointed to the opening of a new train line linking Beijing with Lhasa in July 2006 as a turning point. Whereas previously the only access to Lhasa had been through a bone-shaking, two day bus ride or an exorbitant plane ride, the cheaply priced train has doubled the number of tourists entering Tibet and made access much easier for tens of thousands of Chinese seeking to cash in on a local economy juiced by billions of dollars of investment from Beijing. Chinese already outnumber ethnic Tibetans in Lhasa, and many Tibetans felt that they might end up as strangers in their own country, a fate suffered by Mongolians in Chinese-administered Inner Mongolia.

---

quote:

---

IN LHASA’S old Tibetan quarter the authorities reasserted control on Sunday March 16th after two days of anti-Chinese rioting. Helmeted troops with rifles are patrolling the narrow alleyways, firing the occasional round. Frightened residents are staying at home. Some are too fearful even to emerge onto rooftops because of the risk of being shot.

So far, in this part of the city, the security forces appear to have acted with relative restraint. There are persistent but unsubstantiated reports of Tibetans killed by security forces during the rioting on Friday and Saturday. The Dalai Lama, Tibet’s exiled spiritual leader, has spoken of unconfirmed reports of up to 100 deaths. But there are no convincing accounts of the kind of bloodshed involved in the crushing of the Tiananmen Square protests in Beijing in 1989 or in the suppression of the last serious outbreak of anti-Chinese unrest in Tibet earlier that year. With the approach of a deadline on Monday for rioters to surrender themselves, however, some residents fear that widespread and indiscriminate arrests will follow.

After hours of rioting on March 14th, a ring of troops was deployed around the large Tibetan quarter during the night. The next day some residents continued to attack the few Chinese-owned businesses still left intact. Your correspondent saw a group smashing the shutter of one shop and, in another alley, throwing looted goods into a huge fire. Smoke billowed up from an area where the city’s main mosque is located. Many ethnic Chinese in this part of Lhasa belong to the Hui, a Muslim minority, whose members control much of the city’s meat trade.

But as the security forces (in this area it appears they are mainly members of the paramilitary People’s Armed Police, a riot-control unit) continued to step up their presence, the rioting receded. At first some residents threw stones at those troops who were not armed with rifles, retreating rapidly when occasional tear-gas shells were fired. Later on Saturday, troops with rifles began moving into the alleyways, shooting single shots from time to time. Some traversed the rooftops of the densely packed, flat-roofed houses. One briefly appeared on the roof of your correspondent’s hotel, terrifying a Tibetan and two Westerners cowering below the parapet.

During the night, many residents took to the rooftops as rumours swept the area that Huis were preparing a revenge attack on Tibetan premises following the burning around the mosque (it is not clear whether the building itself was damaged). Some prepared stones to throw at any attackers. Tension subsided as fresh rumours spread that the military had cordoned off the Hui quarter.
...

---

quote:

---

...
The Chinese strategy, of course, has made it harder for the Dalai Lama to restrain the anger of the Tibetans. Empty-handed after years of compromise, the Tibetan leader was left with nothing to dissuade the radicals who preferred violence.

Some observers are now predicting a long-term intifada, with stone-throwing Tibetan rebels making sporadic gestures of defiance against a heavily armed military machine. If this happens, however, China has plenty of its own tactics to wield against the demonstrators.

While deploying its paramilitary forces in Lhasa to regain control of the streets, China is also exploiting the rebellion for propaganda purposes, using pictures of the shop-burning rioters as proof that the Dalai Lama condones violence.
...
A military crackdown would undermine all of this. But even though China cares deeply about its international image, it won't bow to political pressure if it feels that its national interest is at stake.

If Beijing believes that the Tibetan prairie fire could spark uprisings in other ethnic regions, or if it sees the Tibetan issue as a co-ordinated effort to destroy the Olympics, the military option still exists. China could react with the same harshness that Mr. Hu demonstrated in 1989.
...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by twinky:
I don't think it's wise to treat it as an internal political matter given that the legitimacy of the occupation is in dispute. [Added: This post is addressed to Blayne Bradley/"Sid Meier".]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
It can easily do both, the domestic politics of Taiwan make this easy right now their parliament is Pro-Unification majority no independece measure would succeed, their President has been repeatedly pressured by the US to tone it down, the domestic politics of Taiwan make pressuring it to keep quiet really easy.

---

quote:

---

for forgetting that the KMT still feels that Tibet is an inalienable part of China as well people wanting independence only make up 10% of the population and current opinion polling as the KMT polling ahead in the double digits, also people here have repetedly said that they believe that Tibetans are not Han Chinese, why would the KMT have to care about what goes on in Tibet? It is not a Taiwanese issue, Taiwanese issues today are the general welfare of the people, the economy, and keeping the status quo ante, they won't beat down Taiwan because Taiwan won't do anything to harm their business interests in the mainland.

---

quote:

---

UK boycotting? Ha! They were one of the first countries to recognize the PRC and whove generally been the most supportive of Beijing.

---

quote:

---

Your making too many assumptions, and also making too much of the situation, obsevers have said in the above that the authorities have been very restrained and that the riots are already subsiding the "extreme" situations being described won't happen.

---

quote:

---

But the authorities are trying their best to give the outside world an impression of normality. Unlike their response to a big outbreak of anti-Chinese unrest in 1989, this time they have not declared martial law, nor even announced any curfew or measures to expel foreigners

---

quote:

---

But as the security forces (in this area it appears they are mainly members of the paramilitary People’s Armed Police, a riot-control unit) continued to step up their presence, the rioting receded. At first some residents threw stones at those troops who were not armed with rifles, retreating rapidly when occasional tear-gas shells were fired.

---

quote:

---

The British expedition to Tibet in 1903 and 1904 was actually an armed invasion of Tibet by British Indian forces, seeking to prevent the Russian Empire from interfering in Tibetan affairs and thus gaining a foothold in one of the buffer states surrounding British India, under similar reasoning which had led British forces into Afghanistan twenty years before. Whilst British forces were remarkably successful in achieving their aims militarily, politically the invasion was very unpopular back in Britain, where it was virtually disowned post-war. The effects on Tibet, despite higher casualties and some economic disruption, were also not significant, and any changes were not long retained.

---

quote:

---

there is no denying that Tibet is at this moment an inaliable part of China and its national security.

---

Oddly, it seems that this is exactly what at least some of the rioters involved are denying.

quote:

---

people here have repetedly said here that they believe that Tibetans are not Han Chinese, why would the KMT have to care about what goes on in Tibet? You can't have it both ways saying that Tibetans dont count as Zhonguo Minzu and say they're Chinese at the same time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomDavidson:

quote:

---

there is no denying that Tibet is at this moment an inaliable part of China and its national security.

---

Oddly, it seems that this is exactly what at least some of the rioters involved are denying.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aspectre:
* The military dictatorship's choice of "Myanmar" is as irrelevant as calling the UK "Hogwarts".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lisa:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomDavidson:

quote:

---

there is no denying that Tibet is at this moment an inaliable part of China and its national security.

---

Oddly, it seems that this is exactly what at least some of the rioters involved are denying.

---

Um, Tom, I think you must be mistaken. He said, "There's no denying". So clearly, none of the rioters can be denying it. Sheesh.

---

quote:

---

Tibet was never a British Coloney, that is a factual error on your part.

---

quote:

---

I think it is better clarified as "it is undeniable that Tibet is now and forever a part of China with no chance of independence due its strategic circumstances inregards to the national security needs of China"

---

quote:

---

n the modern usage, colony is generally distinguished from overseas possession. In the former case, the local population, or at least the part of it not coming from the "metropolitan" (controlling) country, does not enjoy full citizenship rights. The political process is generally restricted, especially excluding questions of independence. In this case, there are settlers from a dominating foreign country, or countries, and often the property of indigenous peoples is seized, to provide the settlers with land. Foreign mores, religions and/or legal systems are imposed. In some cases, the local population is held for unfree labour, is submitted to brutal force, or even to pfor legal independence movements to form; should they gain a majority in the oversea possession, the question of independence may be brought, for instance, to referendum. However, in some cases, settlers have come to outnumber indigenous people in overseas possessions, and it is possible for colonies to become overseas possessions, against the wishes of indigenous peoples. This often results in ongoing and long-lasting independence struggles by the descendants of the original inhabitants.

---

quote:

---

Also your definition of Colony (which I am to ask what is your source that the Qings paid the British money

---

quote:

---

The KMT is the PRO Unification Party "Pan-Blue", along with the Peoples First Party, the Pro independence parties or "Pan Green" are the Democratic Progressive party and the Taiwan Solidarity Union.

---

quote:

---

The British in no way tried to settle Tibet with settlers, even if what you say is absolutely true it does not equal (!=) definition of what a COLONY is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
Aha the video is your source, lol. Okay the event your thinking of is the British military expedition to Tibet, which in no way made it a "colony" by any acceptable scholarly definition of the term.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:

quote:

---

Also your definition of Colony (which I am to ask what is your source that the Qings paid the British money

---

C.A. Bell's, "Tibet: Past and Present."

quote:

---

The KMT is the PRO Unification Party "Pan-Blue", along with the Peoples First Party, the Pro independence parties or "Pan Green" are the Democratic Progressive party and the Taiwan Solidarity Union.

---

OK so when I say there are pro independence elements in Taiwan who would give up economic prosperity in exchange for sovereignty I am not talking about just the KMT. Chen Shui Bian, though he is on the way out, is not from the KMT and has been very pro independence.

quote:

---

The British in no way tried to settle Tibet with settlers, even if what you say is absolutely true it does not equal (!=) definition of what a COLONY is.

---

Britain did not send truck loads of settlers to India either, it sent mostly government officials. Malaysia and Singapore even more so.

Settlers are not required for colonial status though they are often a feature of colonies.

---

quote:

---

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/colony

col·o·ny /ˈkɒləni/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kol-uh-nee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -nies.
1. a group of people who leave their native country to form in a new land a settlement subject to, or connected with, the parent nation.
2. the country or district settled or colonized: Many Western nations are former European colonies.
3. any people or territory separated from but subject to a ruling power.
4. the Colonies, those British colonies that formed the original 13 states of the United States: New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.
5. a number of people coming from the same country, or speaking the same language, residing in a foreign country or city, or a particular section of it; enclave: the Polish colony in Israel; the American colony in Paris.
6. any group of individuals having similar interests, occupations, etc., usually living in a particular locality; community: a colony of artists.
7. the district, quarter, or dwellings inhabited by any such number or group: The Greek island is now an artists' colony.
8. an aggregation of bacteria growing together as the descendants of a single cell.
9. Ecology. a group of organisms of the same kind living or growing in close association.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I honestly can't figure out how you can manage to be racist on behalf of a race that isn't your own.

---

quote:

---

And so what if Chen is Pro Independence? What point are you trying to get to? I am saying that the Pro Unification parties are in power with a parliamentary majority, and those same parties are polling in the double digits in the presidential election the Pro Independence parties are out the door and will be sitting on the backburner for the next 4 years.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
I fail to see how I am being racist, I said that the electorate of Taiwan don't care about what happens in Tibet its not a Taiwanese issue. If you equate that with racism then you have issues.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:

quote:

---

And so what if Chen is Pro Independence? What point are you trying to get to? I am saying that the Pro Unification parties are in power with a parliamentary majority, and those same parties are polling in the double digits in the presidential election the Pro Independence parties are out the door and will be sitting on the backburner for the next 4 years.

---

So 8 years ago when the pro independence party won the general elections that was a mandate of independence from Beijing but with the recent switch of political party dominance suddenly Taiwanese people suddenly care nothing for their sovereignty? Or for the next 4 years it will never come up ever?

Your original post in response to me was about the KMT and how they also agree with you that Tibet is part of China. Also I am not sure why you think the KMT = Pro Beijing party, as your post stated that in opinion polls they are in the double digits ahead of the pro independents.

Also apparently you live in a world that when it comes to China and it's environs, only the official position of the Chinese government is the truth. Sorta like when Deng Xiao Ping said Chairman Mao was 30% wrong and 70% right he was literally right 70% of the time and wrong 30% of the time. But when Mao was in power those same decisions were at that time 100% right.

And if the Tibetans are so irreversibly Chinese, it seems strange that the government would have to move Han Chinese en mass to Tibet in order to bring it in line. It's like having a child that wants to run away from an abusive father, and the father follows the child wherever he goes and fathers additional children through any woman the rebellious child meets, thus making any descendants the rebel child has part of the father's family and irrevocably so.

---

quote:

---

So 8 years ago when the pro independence party won the general elections that was a mandate of independence from Beijing but with the recent switch of political party dominance suddenly Taiwanese people suddenly care nothing for their sovereignty? Or for the next 4 years it will never come up ever?

---

quote:

---

Your original post in response to me was about the KMT and how they also agree with you that Tibet is part of China. Also I am not sure why you think the KMT = Pro Beijing party, as your post stated that in opinion polls they are in the double digits ahead of the pro independents.

---

quote:

---

Also apparently you live in a world that when it comes to China and it's environs, only the official position of the Chinese government is the truth. Sorta like when Deng Xiao Ping said Chairman Mao was 30% wrong and 70% right he was literally right 70% of the time and wrong 30% of the time. But when Mao was in power those same decisions were at that time 100% right.

---

quote:

---

And if the Tibetans are so irreversibly Chinese, it seems strange that the government would have to move Han Chinese en mass to Tibet in order to bring it in line. It's like having a child that wants to run away from an abusive father, and the father follows the child wherever he goes and fathers additional children through any woman the rebellious child meets, thus making any descendants the rebel child has part of the father's family and irrevocably so.

---

quote:

---

f a worst case scenario takes place with Tibetan protests escalating, and the measures used to crush them following suit, I could easily see one country such as the UK boycotting the Olympics in Beijing. The pro beijing element in Taiwan would have to then address the attrocities being committed against fellow Chinese men and women

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Threads:
Or the URL button in the "Add Reply" form

---

Indeed. That doesn't work for about 10% of complex links, though.

Thank you, Tom.
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Are there likely to be many press outlets that are scolding Israel for its treatment of the settlements issue who would not also scold China for its settlements in Tibet?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
...
And if the Tibetans are so irreversibly Chinese, it seems strange that the government would have to move Han Chinese en mass to Tibet in order to bring it in line.

---

quote:

---

Chinese already outnumber ethnic Tibetans in Lhasa, and many Tibetans felt that they might end up as strangers in their own country, a fate suffered by Mongolians in Chinese-administered Inner Mongolia.

---

quote:

---

After hours of rioting on March 14th, a ring of troops was deployed around the large Tibetan quarter during the night. The next day some residents continued to attack the few Chinese-owned businesses still left intact. Your correspondent saw a group smashing the shutter of one shop and, in another alley, throwing looted goods into a huge fire. Smoke billowed up from an area where the city’s main mosque is located. Many ethnic Chinese in this part of Lhasa belong to the Hui, a Muslim minority, whose members control much of the city’s meat trade.
...
During the night, many residents took to the rooftops as rumours swept the area that Huis were preparing a revenge attack on Tibetan premises following the burning around the mosque (it is not clear whether the building itself was damaged). ...

---

quote:

---

Some Han Chinese in the city remain nervous. A Han taxi driver (Hans, rather than Tibetans, dominate the taxi business) was reluctant to drive close to the Tibetan quarter despite the intense security. A Han shopkeeper more than a kilometre away from the Tibetan-dominated area said he would remain in Lhasa, his home for the past 20 years, but many other Hans would leave. A Han acquaintance, he said, had been knifed to death during the riots. An exodus of Hans—and a drying up of tourism from other parts of China—would deal a body blow to the city’s economy.

The authorities have set a deadline of midnight on Monday local time for rioters to hand themselves over (if they do so by then apparently they can expect more lenient treatment). This has aroused fears among Tibetans of widespread and indiscriminate arrests in the days to come. Some Tibetans say house-to-house searches and arrests have already started.

But the authorities are trying their best to give the outside world an impression of normality. Unlike their response to a big outbreak of anti-Chinese unrest in 1989, this time they have not declared martial law, nor even announced any curfew or measures to expel foreigners (some are being told by their Chinese travel agencies to leave, however). Your correspondent, the only foreign journalist with official permission to be in Lhasa (which was applied for and granted well before the unrest erupted) is still allowed to remain. But in practice the city’s daily life is being controlled by troops (from elsewhere in China), foreign journalists are being barred from entering and the most repressive measures in 20 years are in force.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
...
Also...has anyone been watching the situation in Szechuan province? Did those protests amount to anything? Are they continuing?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rivka:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Are there likely to be many press outlets that are scolding Israel for its treatment of the settlements issue who would not also scold China for its settlements in Tibet?

---

Past experience indicates that the degree of "scolding" and the prevalence of "spin" language (terrorists -> militants) will be far less when discussing China than when discussing Israel. The BBC is one of the more egregious offenders. (And most Israelis don't listen to NPR.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
I fail to see how I am being racist, I said that the electorate of Taiwan don't care about what happens in Tibet its not a Taiwanese issue. If you equate that with racism then you have issues.

---

quote:

---

I honestly can't figure out how you can manage to be racist on behalf of a race that isn't your own.

quote:

---

Indeed. There are few things weirder than encountering a racist, not of your own race, but of a different race being racist on what "they think is on behalf" of your race.

---

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mucus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
I fail to see how I am being racist, I said that the electorate of Taiwan don't care about what happens in Tibet its not a Taiwanese issue. If you equate that with racism then you have issues.

---

Stick it.

---

quote:

---

Besides you are HUGELY jumping the gun based on your racism: "Love China? Must love the Chinese."
BlayneBradley's support for China is based upon his beliefs about the nature of communism and Communism. And China's controlling&only political party labels itself Communist.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
I assume NPR isn't even available in Israel

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Oh, one other question: is there an international news source that Israelis would generally agree "gets it right?"

---

I am not aware of one.
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Blayne:
*facepalm*
You've outright said that Taiwanese would not care about Tibetans on sole account of the fact that Tibetans are not Han. Period.
Not only would my Taiwanese colleagues be rather surprised by this amazingly broad characterization but the implication that this is actually a good thing ... thats just *facepalm*

BlackBlade:
Sure, "lured" I can live with.
I just have a special objection to "move" (in the prior wording) as if the people involved were cattle.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Blayne, of COURSE everyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Even if they lived there, know people actually experiencing the events, or have an actual education in these matters.


Carry on the good fight!
 

---

Posted by Threads (Member # 10863) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
My support is based on the fact that there is so much sheer sinophobia in online discussions, after doing fact checking and finding that 99% of these are utterly nonesense I choose to take a stand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mucus:
Blayne:
*facepalm*
You've outright said that Taiwanese would not care about Tibetans on sole account of the fact that Tibetans are not Han. Period.
Not only would my Taiwanese colleagues be rather surprised by this amazingly broad characterization but the implication that this is actually a good thing ... thats just *facepalm*

BlackBlade:
Sure, "lured" I can live with.
I just have a special objection to "move" (in the prior wording) as if the people involved were cattle.

---

quote:

---

Does denial of basic civil liberties fall under the 99% "nonsense" or the 1% truth?

---

quote:

---

Then there is a misunderstanding, what I meant to say is "the political status of Tibet is not a primary Taiwanese election issue" there are also people who find fat people sexy I don't understand them either *shrug*.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ketchupqueen:

quote:

---

Then there is a misunderstanding, what I meant to say is "the political status of Tibet is not a primary Taiwanese election issue" there are also people who find fat people sexy I don't understand them either *shrug*.

---

Blayne. Seriously. Did you HAVE TO GO THERE? Do you not understand that that is potentially personally offensive to people you interact with on this forum?

---

Yeah, that is unnessasarily rude.
 

---

Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ketchupqueen:

quote:

---

Then there is a misunderstanding, what I meant to say is "the political status of Tibet is not a primary Taiwanese election issue" there are also people who find fat people sexy I don't understand them either *shrug*.

---

Blayne. Seriously. Did you HAVE TO GO THERE? Do you not understand that that is potentially personally offensive to people you interact with on this forum?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
I started off in Perspectives.com whose idea of a point is "nuke Three Gorges Dam problem solved" and know someone who thinks that for America to insure the 21st century to be an extension of the American century the US needs to pull out of Iraq forget about Iran and invade China "now" before they're "too powerful".

I have consented in the past that there are human rights issues but what people fail to see is that this matter is improving over time, unless your one of those minimalist libertarians who think any form of government control is wrong then its hopeless discussing it.

---

quote:

---

Then there is a misunderstanding, what I meant to say is "the political status of Tibet is not a primary Taiwanese election issue" there are also people who find fat people sexy I don't understand them either *shrug*.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Samprimary:

quote:

---

Then there is a misunderstanding, what I meant to say is "the political status of Tibet is not a primary Taiwanese election issue" there are also people who find fat people sexy I don't understand them either *shrug*.

---

the blayne method: to keep people from focusing on your incoherence, spice up your posts with some blanket offensiveness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sid Meier:
... I'm middle class, family has a home business doing pet cremations and ceramics but we make 18,000$ a year. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Noemon:
18K a year for a family of...what, 5 (you've mentioned both a brother and a sister. Are those your only siblings?)? That sounds to me like it would be below the poverty line.

---

quote:

---

Paradoxically, the power of the Chinese intellectual is amplified by China's repressive political system, where there are no opposition parties, no independent trade unions, no public disagreements between politicians and a media that exists to underpin social control rather than promote political accountability. Intellectual debate in this world can become a surrogate for politics—if only because it is more personal, aggressive and emotive than anything that formal politics can muster. While it is true there is no free discussion about ending the Communist party's rule, independence for Tibet or the events of Tiananmen Square, there is a relatively open debate in leading newspapers and academic journals about China's economic model, how to clean up corruption or deal with foreign policy issues like Japan or North Korea. Although the internet is heavily policed, debate is freer here than in the printed word (although one of the most free-thinking bloggers, Hu Jia, was recently arrested). And behind closed doors, academics and thinkers will often talk freely about even the most sensitive topics, such as political reform. The Chinese like to argue about whether it is the intellectuals that influence decision-makers, or whether groups of decision-makers use pet intellectuals as informal mouthpieces to advance their own views. Either way, these debates have become part of the political process, and are used to put ideas in play and expand the options available to Chinese decision-makers. Intellectuals are, for example, regularly asked to brief the politburo in "study sessions"; they prepare reports that feed into the party's five-year plans; and they advise on the government's white papers.

---

quote:

---

As it creates these zones, Beijing is embarking on a building spree, criss-crossing the African continent with new roads and railways—investing far more than the old colonial powers ever did. Moreover, China's presence is changing the rules of economic development. The IMF and the World Bank used to drive the fear of God into government officials and elected leaders, but today they struggle to be listened to even by the poorest countries of Africa. The IMF spent years negotiating a transparency agreement with the Angolan government only to be told hours before the deal was due to be signed, in March 2004, that the authorities in Luanda were no longer interested in the money: they had secured a $2bn soft loan from China. This tale has been repeated across the continent—from Chad to Nigeria, Sudan to Algeria, Ethiopia and Uganda to Zimbabwe.

---

quote:

---

China is not an intellectually open society. But the emergence of freer political debate, the throng of returning students from the west and huge international events like the Olympics are making it more so. And it is so big, so pragmatic and so desperate to succeed that its leaders are constantly experimenting with new ways of doing things. They used special economic zones to test out a market philosophy. Now they are testing a thousand other ideas—from deliberative democracy to regional alliances. From this laboratory of social experiments, a new world-view is emerging that may in time crystallise into a recognisable Chinese model—an alternative, non-western path for the rest of the world to follow.

---

quote:

---

But I still remember watching a news report in Hong Kong where reporters asked everyday Chinese people what they thought of the events at Tian An Men square, and event that happened merely 18 years ago, and the overwhelming response was along the lines of, "The protestors were enemies to the stability of China, and the government was right to act as they did."

Now perhaps they were simply saying what the government would want to hear so as to avoid repurcussions for saying what they really felt, but even in anonymous polling the answer remains the same. Leaders of the rally have said in interviews that Chinese democratic support since Tian An Men has waned steadily because people are starting to believe the lies they are taught at school, and those who do speak out are still hauled off to reeducation camps or often just disappear completely.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ketchupqueen:
(Sorry that wasn't really relevant. Just brings back a looot of memories.)

---

I think it's awesome that your dad took you out to protest, it's a very important lesson to engage in social activism.

I think I was also 6 maybe 7 years old when the protest happened. I can still remember massive sympathy protests in Hong Kong, in response to the students at Tian An Men. There was an endless sea of people marching through some of the main streets of down town Hong Kong.

They still hold yearly candle light vigels on the anniversary of the government crackdown.
 

---

Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
 
*nods* I remember very clearly being horrified. How we discussed (and even my little brother got involved) what "democracy" meant, why some people didn't have it, and what were and were not acceptable actions of a government, and what happens when power is misused.

We also talked a lot about what we would do if WE were in charge.

That protest and the time surrounding it is one of my most vivid early childhood memories. We asked what we could do, my dad heard about the protest, explained what a "protest" was, and we begged to go. When we got there it was immensely powerful. We listened to speakers, we sang protest songs (we knew all the words to "We Shall Overcome" and "Blowin' in the Wind" already, and learned a few new ones that day), and we were on tv 'cause some news people spotted me standing on the fountain and my (three-year-old) brother on my dad's shoulders. They asked if we knew what was going on and I think they were a little shocked when I gave a succinct summary of the situation and why we were there, and my brother said, "Jesus and Buddha both taught that we should not kill other people. Killing people is wrong." But it made for a good newsbite on the protest.

It really meant something to me to know that even if all you can do is raise your voice to let people know something is wrong, that is an important thing to do. It's a lesson that has stuck with me.
 

---

Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
I assume NPR isn't even available in Israel, or are you saying that they're so anti-Israel that most Israelis would never choose to listen to them?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Mucus: 100 Million out of 6 Billion is alittle over 1.6% of the population.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dantesparadigm:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Mucus: 100 Million out of 6 Billion is alittle over 1.6% of the population.

---

The population if china is about 1.3 billion, world population is 6 billion, that makes it about 6.7 percent.

---

Thanks, I knew something was wrong with my math but for some reason I just couldn't isolate what it was.

Seems obvious why I am retaking algebra right now.

edit: by my calculations its 7.6% of the population is middle class in China then.
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
100 Million out of 6 Billion is alittle over 1.6% of the population.

---

quote:

---

I can't say for certain, but every article I read about economics in Chinese indicates that the rich are getting richer while the poor go nowhere.

---

quote:

---

My posts lately have been similar to how I've talked about the KMT in previous threads. I'm a bit overly pessimistic about China in response to Blayne's fanboism.

---

quote:

---

But I still remember watching a news report in Hong Kong where reporters asked everyday Chinese people what they thought of the events at Tian An Men square, an event that happened merely 18 years ago, and the overwhelming response was along the lines of, "The protestors were enemies to the stability of China, and the government was right to act as they did."

---

I think there's a huge difference between "I think their history classes are awful" and "I think their history classes teach them to disagree with me."

Of course, the REAL disagreement that we (or rather me) have with that statement is not whether the students were a threat to the stability of China, but that we think that what the protesters were protesting is *worthwhile.*

We think that the temporary pain of transitioning to democracy and a less repressive society is "worth it." But thats a disagreement in terms of values and predictions, not in facts.

Of course much of this is again, academic. The number of people that have access to even *this* type of education is increasing rapidly compared to just thirty years ago. They used to burn Western books, instruments, people probably.

Now, they learn about the West. Even the youtube block on news from Tibet is not particularly effective from what I've heard. Even if they get a CCP bias, I think thats a good thing and better than nothing.

Heck, even the basic measure of literacy is at roughly 90% which is miles ahead of 80% illiterate in 1950 and I think thats important not to forget.

quote:

---

Leaders of the rally have said in interviews that Chinese democratic support since Tian An Men has waned steadily because people are starting to believe the lies they are taught at school, and those who do speak out are still hauled off to reeducation camps or often just disappear completely.

---

quote:

---

A Chinese government website set up for the public to complain about corruption crashed within a day of launching under the volume of cases reported.
The website was constructed by the National Bureau of Corruption Prevention to collect information on corrupt activities as part of an ongoing purge by the Beijing authorities.

...

"The enthusiasm that greeted the launch of the website reflects the growing frustration felt by the general public towards corruption at government level," reported the state news agency, Xinhua.

Many of the messages lodged on the website were congratulatory, but nearly as many were from sceptical members of the public who questioned its work.

A comment from Qu Han, who said he was a peasant with no formal schooling, claimed that despite the Communist Party’s slogans against corruption, the problem has become even more widespread.

"Is there any point in setting up this bureau? Unchecked power will of course result in corruption," said another message.

"So long as the system doesn’t change, any [anti-corruption] effort is bound to be quite fruitless."

Another message said: "This will have no effect at all ... we even have to put a question mark next to your own moral standards."

The message concluded: "I don’t expect anything from you." Despite the website urging people to use their real names, most used pseudonyms. Another entry was signed: "Don’t take revenge on me."

---

quote:

---

And most articles I've read indicate that the poor are being raised out of poverty in dramatic numbers while the middle class is growing at very good rate. Indeed, thats part of the reason for the recent boosts in commodity prices, they're attempting to consume in the same way we do with rather predictable results.
In fact, I rather suspect that the first real challenges to the government from the middle class in China will be when the current boom *stops.*

---

quote:

---

Indeed. You have the option of ignoring him.

---

quote:

---

Even the addition of capitalists to the party broadens the scope of the party to include people that very literally are "bourgeoise".
That is, the upper class in China is quickly becoming that spoiled, rich, business-like class that we see in the industrial revolution in Europe which can only lead to change.

In fact, if you read behind the lines, the massive and pervasive discontent with "corruption" in China is really symptomatic of the fact that many people want change.
It is just that with current prosperity, people won't rock the boat if they can just wait for better things.
When good times stop, *then* we will see things get really interesting.

---

quote:

---

BlackBlade have you perhaps read the China oriented Tom Clancy novels? I think that accounts for a good portion of your skewed world view, you say one thing, get corrected and say whats what "I always said along" you said "China had no middle class" now your suddenly saying "well they have a middle class, but its growth is not sustainable *nods*"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Yes people in China want positive change, they want to be progressive. ...

---

I guess this kind of leads into two questions
1) What is the best way to lead China to become a better, more democratic society?
2) What can we (as in the West) do about it?

Both questions are big and interesting enough, that I'll save them (here as a reminder) till I get a good enough time to cover them. (Man this thread is a magnet for my long posts)

Also, IIRC, you lived in Hong Kong more than any other country, not China (at the time anyways). Of course this IM(not-so)HO is better than living in China, but still

Edit to add: Hold on, maybe not.
If you're saying "most of your life" you might have lived through handover. NVM.

[ March 18, 2008, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
 

---

Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
 
BlackBlade your posts however keep showing that you however seem to lack perspective or any real knowledge of the facts on the ground, already people have said "it is a remarkable feat" inregards to their middle class, and if you look at the article I linked nowhere near as "marginal" as you describe it as. Also right now your basing alot of your view on 100 million as being their middle class, please remember that this is even if true 1/3 of the total US population whose middle class is far far far less.

But here we go 5 seconds of google

quote:

---

. A study by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) found the middle class to be 19% of the population in 2003, up from 15% at the end of 1999. Using CASS criteria, in 2003, the middle class included 247 million people out of a population of 1.3 billion. (More recent statistics are not yet available.)

---

quote:

---

It won't keep going at the same rate all the time, but I see no indication China will not continue to significantly increase the size of its middle class for many years to come. It isn't 'sustainable' in the sense that an entire country isn't going to become middle class, but that's true of every country

---

quote:

---

I guess this kind of leads into two questions
1) What is the best way to lead China to become a better, more democratic society?
2) What can we (as in the West) do about it?

---

quote:

---

Interesting how all your points about China's population seem to have been proven wrong.

---

quote:

---

The exiled spiritual leader said Tibetans needed to live side-by-side with Chinese people.

China says 13 people were killed by rioters in Lhasa. Tibetan exiles say 99 have died in clashes with authorities.

Tibetan activists have released images they say support their claim of heavy casualties and Chinese brutality.
...
"Violence is against human nature," the Dalai Lama said. "We must not develop anti-Chinese feelings. Whether we like it or not we have to live side-by-side."

The 72-year-old, who in 1989 was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his consistent opposition to the use of violence, said that even if "1,000 Tibetans sacrificed their life", this would be "not much help".

He reaffirmed that he wanted autonomy for Tibet within China, but not outright independence.

---

quote:

---

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao accused supporters of the Dalai Lama on Tuesday of organizing violent clashes in Tibet in hopes of sabotaging the Beijing Olympics and bolstering their campaign for independence in the Himalayan territory.

The Dalai Lama urged his followers to remain peaceful, saying he would resign as head of the Tibetan government-in-exile if violence got out of control. But he also suggested China may have fomented unrest in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa and nearby provinces to discredit him.

In striking an uncompromising line, Mr. Jiabao underscored the communist leadership's determination to restore order in Tibet and Tibetan areas of neighbouring provinces.

“There is ample fact — and we also have plenty of evidence — proving that this incident was organized, premeditated, masterminded and incited by the Dalai clique,” he told reporters at his annual news conference at the end of China's national legislative session.

...

The Dalai Lama, speaking in Dharmsala, India, seat of his government-in-exile, urged nonviolence.

“I say to China and the Tibetans: Don't commit violence,” he told reporters. He suggested the Chinese themselves may have had a hand in the upheaval to discredit him.

“It's possible some Chinese agents are involved there,” he said. “Sometimes totalitarian regimes are very clever, so it is important to investigate.”

---

quote:

---

If I want to argue with somebody who has no intention of changing their mind I'll find a baby, or a dead man.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Certainly, that's true, but economic prosperity can only continue where political progress takes place. I just feel there are things that are common in the Chinese political scene that have to change in order for societal crisis to be averted.

These are both very interesting questions. I especially liked your statement that while democracy and reform may seem good to our eyes, what would have had to happen to implement those things in the 80s or 90s may have been pricier than the benefits. I'll try to work some of those questions out with you hopefully tonight, but probably later.

Blayne:

quote:

---

Interesting how all your points about China's population seem to have been proven wrong.

---

Interesting that you view everything through the lens of absolute infallibility on your part.

Also learn to actually read what I say as you seemed to have missed, "having virtually no middle class as late as the 70's to having a small but not marginal middle class today."

Now I will admit that I spoke too quickly when I said back on page 1, "...no middle class emerging..." I don't pretend to be all knowing or even the smartest hatracker when it comes to the Chinese, but I've dedicated more time to learning about them than you have. And in all our discussions you have shown a complete unwillingness to reevaluate anything you believe about China. Until that happens I promise I will ignore anything you say about China, Japan, or anything Asian for that matter, as to me it's a big waste of my time. If I want to argue with somebody who has no intention of changing their mind I'll find a baby, or a dead man. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
Next you are also wrong or at least somewhat misleaded on your next count, you assume that I am "ProChina" to the point of agreeing with everything they say or do, I do not ...

---

quote:

---

Next, pluging your fingers in your ears saying "Nyah Nyah Nyah!" Whenever I bring up a valid point is not the way to lead by example on the maturity scale.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ketchupqueen:

quote:

---

If I want to argue with somebody who has no intention of changing their mind I'll find a baby, or a dead man.

---

Wanna borrow a 22 month old? She's real cute-- and real stubborn. Right now you say or do something she doesn't like and she throws herself into a fit screaming "NO NO NO NO NO!"

---

Sure, but she might come back to you screaming, "Bu Yao Bu Yao Bu Yao!!!" Instead of No No No!

Mucus: I was happy to hear that hundreds are turning themselves into the authorities, claiming involvement in the riots.

Happy that this will end the riots. But at the same time saddened that they could not find a more effective way to voice their dissent, and that there does not seem to be as much support as their could have been. I think the Dalai Lhama does have the right idea, independence is virtually impossible right now, but greater autonomy isn't.

How do you feel about some people's notion that the opening Olympic ceremonies should be boycotted? It would be a slap in the face, but would it really accomplish anything?
 

---

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 

quote:

---

Demonstrate this.
Show us four or five decisions that the Chinese government has made in the last thirty years that you disagree with.

In all honesty, demonstrating at least some of proportion would help your reputation in these matters. And I say this while actually being pleasantly surprised by the quality of the article you referred to in the British Prospect.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BlackBlade:
...
Mucus: I was happy to hear that hundreds are turning themselves into the authorities, claiming involvement in the riots.

---

quote:

---

How do you feel about some people's notion that the opening Olympic ceremonies should be boycotted? It would be a slap in the face, but would it really accomplish anything?

---

I'm not sure and I think my own conflict of interest (I would on a personal level prefer the Olympics to be shut down) makes it harder to comment

What I do know is that I prefer symbolic gestures like boycotting the Olympics rather than untargetted and easily misconstrued measures such as trade sanctions.

The key is to use a method of disagreement that allows the more saavy in China to see our disapproval and start to wonder why. On the other hand, we do not want to actually turn more Chinese against us than we actually persuade.
Giving the Chinese government an easy thing to point at and say, "hey the foreigners are really trying to mess with us, and there it is" is just shooting ourselves in the foot. Especially when I think there ARE elements in the US government that often use lame excuses to promote sanctions. (google Hilary Clinton and candlemakers for a particularly dumb example)

Its a tough balance and I'm still pondering the other two questions, which are related.
 

---

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
 
Mucus:

quote:

---

Maybe, I just hope that the CCP will be satisfied making a big propaganda show out of treating them fairly, treating only those guilty of murder harshly and releasing the rest with a slap on the wrist.
I'm not holding out too much hope, but we'll see.

---

quote:

---

Taiwanese stocks rallied Monday, reflecting hopes of closer ties with China, after the landslide weekend election victory of Kuomintang Party presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou, who ended eight years of Democratic Progressive Party rule.

Taiwan's Weighted index soared 4% to 8,862.10 in Taipei trading, taking its gains into a fifth straight session as the election result encouraged investors.

Ma campaigned on closer economic and political ties to mainland China, which long has claimed Taiwan as a territory.

---

link
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
I've been keeping up to date on this issue and I thought I'd share my thoughts and some of what I've been viewing at this juncture.

The basic facts can be found on the Wikipedia pages on the protests in Tibet and the torch protests.
2008 Tibetan unrest
2008 Summer Olympics torch relay

These articles have been surprisingly good at collating various news sources and providing links to them.

As far as basic news sites that would not be found there, I've found a few interesting news links on youtube to the TVB broadcasts in Hong Kong. While technically under the influence of the Chinese government, from indications on Wikipedia and my own personal reading on Xinhua, they are the one of the closest sources to what you can expect for a moderate view of events from within China.

link
Here is a video of what happened when foreign/HK reporters were first let back into Lhasa after the riots. This link is captioned in both Chinese and English.

link
A news report on March 17th shows some footage of riots, some words from the Dali Lama, some footage of what appears to be the HK reporters trying to get around the PAP forces restricting their reporting in Tibet (climbing on roofs?), and some footage of rioting in Paris.
link
A news report on April 10th. This shows coverage of the Olympic flame in San Fransisco, the warehouse incident that was parodied on the Daily Show, some coverage of both pro-China and pro-Tibet protests, some words from white people on both sides, and a confrontation between the two sides.

(these last two links are sound in Cantonese, captioned in Mandarin (I think))

Some other things I've been keeping a tab on is the provocative "Tibet WAS,IS,and ALWAYS WILL BE a part of China" (obviously a silly name based on, well, what I introduced on the first page) Facebook group link

This is a pretty virulent nationalistic group composed on what seems to be mostly FOB Chinese in North America, which is interesting because they are precisely one of the groups that pro-Tibet activists should be trying to reach and convince. I've actually seen a couple friends join this group to my disappointment.

Some highlights are accusations of Western media bias (some founded, some not), a rather ugly thread on harassing some pro-Tibet Chinese girl at Duke University (oy), and a whole lot of paternalistic condescending attitudes about Tibet which almost seem ripped from the attitudes surround Rudyard Kipling's "The White Man's Burden" except this time I guess its a "Yellow Man's Burden."

<vent, aimed at releasing emotion>
Hey, mainlanders. You should know better. C'mon, has invading a place under the pretext of making it better ever worked? You know the Japanese invaded China under the same pretenses. We also have the quagmire that is the US in Iraq.
C'mon. Be better than them!
You know that invading Tibet was an application of Realpolitik. Tibet was s strategic place to take before India got there, it has resources, and space. Grow up and deal, you're doing the same thing we did to the Native Americans so start being mature and deal with the real issues
</vent>

Back to the news. From the TVB broadcasts in Hong Kong, you saw one propaganda victory by the Chinese government, the interviews with ordinary Chinese hurt in the Tibetan riots as Tibetan rioters singled out Han Chinese or burned down their stores/homes with them inside.
There is also one other propaganda victory which is getting coverage on Xinhua news. Thats the story on Jin Jang, a disabled athlete that was attacked by pro-Tibet protesters
Here's some coverage of that story in Canada, I won't subject you to the Xinhua version link

<vent, aimed at releasing emotion>
Yo so-called Pro-Tibetans. You're hurting the cause.
Keep your mind on the end goal: Getting more freedom in Tibet and gaining sympathy for your cause
So how does burning random Chinese people in Tibet, just trying to make a living running shops help your cause? How does trying to steal the (admittedly kitschy (but then again, I'm not fan of the Olympics)) Olympic Torch help? This is grade school stuff, "I'm going to take your ball and go home"?
You have one real chance of making things better in Tibet. Thats gaining the support of the overseas Chinese community, the (surprisingly large) middle-class community in China with access to Western news, and people in China with the power to give you more autonomy and more freedom, ala Hong Kong.
But thats never going to happen as long as the CCP can paint you as violent barbarians and radicals. Don't help them!
</vent>

Continued in the next post...

[ April 12, 2008, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
As you can see, I have a lot of anger at most "sides" in this issue. I won't even subject you to some of the ugly xenophobia that I've seen on some forums or in comment areas of even Canadian news sites.

There is a profound disconnect between some foreigners and Chinese people inside and outside China working for a better China. There is also a polarizing action where all voices speaking with moderation are either painted as "brainwashed" by pro-Tibetan voices that will listen to nothing other than "Free Tibet." This can do nothing other than provoke Chinese FOBs and CBCs to take nothing other than a hardline stance in support of the Chinese government.

I've seen crowds in one of the protests, one side mindlessly shouting "Free Tibet" and "One China" at each other. *facepalm*

The sad part is that in all of the interviews with the Dali Lama, I've only seen him promote greater Chinese autonomy within China. He knows what is realistic and what can be achieved. He probably also knows that these calls for "Free Tibet" will do nothing but polarize potential allies against his cause. He also wants the Olympics to go forward.

I almost get a G'Kar from Babylon 5 vibe from the situation. He's a leader, wiser than his younger followers, that has lost control of their violent impulses. He's become a figurehead almost, with his followers following his "image" rather than his words.

But there are some signs of humor and rationality. Here are two:
Here's a CBS interview, an amusing interview with some pro-Tibet protesters that gently mocks their lack of knowledge about the situation link

Here's a very interesting interview with Xinran Xue, a British-Chinese human rights activist/writer in Britain who makes a few points that have been percolating through my mind. link

1) The CCP didn't really anticipate the number of young Chinese that are supporting them, especially overseas. This has been unprecedented for twenty years since Tienanmen Square
2) This has been in part provoked by the biased media coverage in the West, which makes it very easy for the CCP to paint them as just a biased counterpart to their biased Xinhua rather than an objective news source
3) China has an appalling human rights record, but the Western media is being monitored by Chinese in China, even if they have to get around censorship and if they see that bias as linked to Westernized-democracy, it will be that much harder for human rights activists like herself to effect change, and can be used as a tool by the CCP to slowdown change as they link pro-democracy sentiment with pro-Tibet,anti-China sentiment.

This is particularly interesting since she has been working in the British media for quite some time and attacking the Chinese government for their human rights record on women, having to go to Britain to get her books published. If she considers the Western media as being counter-productive to her cause, than that could be a real problem.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
Bush has said he'd consider boycotting the opening ceremonies of the Olympics.
 

---

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
 
Mucus: Thanks for finding all those links, seeing a broadcast of Hong Kong's TVB Pearl was very nostalgic for me, and in a good way. I would definitely agree that Hong Kong is one of the better places for a more moderate view on Chinese news. I remember about 8 years ago seeing a special they did on how gymnasts in China are trained and the terrible abuse they endure at the hands of their teachers. It's interesting that throughout both pieces the reporters don't comment on anything, they simply film, describe what you are seeing, and take quotes from people.

It is indeed frustrating that some people in the name of a cause you and I might agree with do things that completely ruin the idea. Tibetans burning and killing Han Chinese is cruel and wrong, and if Tibet is built on that foundation I hope it burns to the ground.

On the flip side, that is so like the Chinese government to hire people to go into the monasteries and pretend to be worshipers for news crews and onlookers. Hearing those monks try to sputter out what is happening to them in mandarin which is almost ironic given what they are fighting against really moved me,(I'm preemptively saying that having a unifying language for the Chinese is a good thing.)

As for boycotting the opening ceremonies of the olympics, it's hard for me to come to a stance on the issue. On the one hand it's good for China to see what the first world expects of its' club members. The Olympics are a celebration of athletic prowess and the human spirit, so I suppose when the host country is crushing the spirit of it's people some action is required. But on the other, will such a protest really accomplish anything other then persuading the Chinese that the West has a separate set of rules for white people and yellow people.

In the United States we are close to cracking down and expelling those who immigrate here. We are holding political prisoners of whom some may be innocent, but of which none have been charged or given any sort of time frame for legal recourse.

How can President Bush then refuse to attend the opening ceremonies or even speak out against human rights offenses in China? It just makes us all hypocrites.

I'm not sure what should be done, I just worry that protesting might hurt enough that China gets angry and does something stupid, but not enough that it moves China to fix certain things at home.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
For the sake of wondering, how is expelling illegal immigrants the same thing as violently cracking down on demonstrators and shooting unarmed monks? And for that matter, who are our politican prisoners? Those held at Guantanamo? Now don't get me wrong, I think they should be charged or released as much as the next liberal but, last I checked most of them were captured in fights with the Taliban or in Iraq right? None of them are even US citizens. How are they political prisoners?

Let's not pretend that the US and China are on the same footing. Two things can be bad and wrong and still be nowhere near each other on a value scale of how bad they are.
 

---

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
I think they've done plenty of the former in Vietnam. And oh snap, the other dozen or so nations that have had their democracies overthrown and replaced by pro US Right wing dictatorships and junta.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 
I thought we were talking domestic versus foreign policy. Either way China doesn't have any moral superiority there.
 

---

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
actually it does. Last I checked China didnt care who you were or what your party or government was as long as your government officially abides by the One China policy and would then do business with you as such on those grounds.

As the unofficial member of the non aligned movement I think they have behaved in geopolitical terms in a completely mild manner international since the 50's.
 

---

Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
 

quote:

---

Last I checked China didnt care who you were or what your party or government was as long as your government officially abides by the One China policy and would then do business with you as such on those grounds.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
For the sake of wondering, how is expelling illegal immigrants the same thing as violently cracking down on demonstrators and shooting unarmed monks?

---

quote:

---

...
What I saw was calculated targeted violence against an ethnic group, or I should say two ethnic groups, primarily ethnic Han Chinese living in Lhasa, but also members of the Muslim Hui minority in Lhasa. And the Huis in Lhasa control much of the meat industry in the city. Those two groups were singled out by ethnic Tibetans. They marked those businesses that they knew to be Tibetan owned with white traditional scarves. Those businesses were left intact. Almost every single other across a wide swathe of the city, not only in the old Tibetan quarter, but also beyond it in areas dominated by the ethnic Han Chinese. Almost every other business was either burned, looted, destroyed, smashed into, the property therein hauled out into the streets, piled up, burned. It was an extraordinary outpouring of ethnic violence of a most unpleasant nature to watch, which surprised some Tibetans watching it. So they themselves were taken aback at the extent of what they saw. And it was not just targeted against property either. Of course many ethnic Han Chinese and Huis fled as soon as this broke out. But those who were caught in the early stages of it were themselves targeted. Stones thrown at them. At one point, I saw them throwing stones at a boy of maybe around 10 years old perhaps cycling along the street. I in fact walked out in front of them and said stop. It was a remarkable explosion of simmering ethnic grievances in the city.

Q. Did you see other weapons?

A. I saw them carrying traditional Tibetan swords, I didn't actually see them getting them out and intimidating people with them. But clearly the purpose of carrying them was to scare people. And speaking later to ethnic Han Chinese, that was one point that they frequently drew attention to. That these people were armed and very intimidating.

Q. There was an official response to this. In some reporting, info coming from Tibetan exiles, there was keenness to report it as Tiananmen.

A. Well the Chinese response to this was very interesting. Because you would expect at the first sings of any unrest in Lhasa, which is a city on a knife-edge at the best of times. That the response would be immediate and decisive. That they would cordon off whatever section of the city involved, that they would grab the people involved in the unrest. In fact what we saw, and I was watching it at the earliest stages, was complete inaction on the part of the authorities. It seemed as if they were paralyzed by indecision over how to handle this. The rioting rapidly spread from Beijing Road, this main central thoroughfare of Lhasa, into the narrow alleyways of the old Tibetan quarter. But I didn't see any attempt in those early hours by the authorities to intervene. And I suspect again the Olympics were a factor there. That they were very worried that if they did move in decisively at that early stage of the unrest that bloodshed would ensue in their efforts to control it. And what they did instead was let the rioting run its course and it didn't really finish as far as I saw until the middle of the day on the following day on the Saturday, March the 15th. So in effect what they did was sacrifice the livelihoods of many, many ethnic Han Chinese in the city for the sake of letting the rioters vent their anger. And then being able to move in gradually with troops with rifles that they occasionally let off with single shots, apparently warning shots, in order to scare everybody back into their homes and put an end to this.

...
Q. Did you actually see clashes between security forces and Tibetan protesters?

A. Well what I saw and at this stage, the situation around my hotel which was right in the middle of the old Tibetan quarter, was very tense indeed and quite dangerous so it was difficult for me to freely walk around the streets. But what I saw was small groups of Tibetans, and this was on the second day of the protests, throwing stones towards what I assumed to be, and they were slightly out of vision, members of the security forces. I would hear and indeed smell occasional volleys of Tear gas fired back. There clearly was a small scale clash going on between Tibetans and the security forces. But on the second day things had calmed down generally compared with the huge rioting that was going on...on the Friday. And the authorities were responding to these occasional clashes with Tibetans not by moving forward rapidly with either riot police and truncheons and shields, or indeed troops with rifles. But for a long time, just with occasional, with the very occasional round of tear gas, which would send and I could see this, people scattering back into these very, very, narrow and winding alleyways. What I did not hear was repeated bursts of machine gun fire, I didn't have that same sense of an all out onslaught of massive firepower that I sensed here in Beijing when I was covering the crushing of the Tiananmen Square protests in June, 1989. This was a very different kind of operation, a more calculated one, and I think the effort of the authorities this time was to let people let off steam before establishing a very strong presence with troops, with guns, every few yards, all across the Tibetan quarter. It was only when they felt safe I think that there would not be massive bloodshed, that they actually moved in with that decisive force.
...

---

quote:

---

Let's not pretend that the US and China are on the same footing. Two things can be bad and wrong and still be nowhere near each other on a value scale of how bad they are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
Paramilitary Chinese forces open fire on Tibetan monks and villagers protesting the arrest of two monks for having photos of the Dalai Lama.

---

quote:

---

About 9 p.m., witnesses said, as many as 1,000 paramilitary police, trying to end the protest, opened fire on the crowd. It was not known if the demonstrators had been throwing stones at the police.

Eight people died in the gunfire, a local resident in direct contact with the monastery said.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Samprimary:
Apparently, while you would like for people not to pretend this, defenders of China's actions are required to engage in this gross hypocrisy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
I think you can make a lot of comparisons between that and the Iraq War, but it's shakey ground. One is quite literally a war zone, the other is not.

---

Uh, no its not. The US government has repeatedly said that the Iraq "War" is over. The news briefs from the US that I've seen either refer to the violence as "sectarian conflict" or "ethno-sectarian competition." This is not a war anymore, civil or not. Straight from General Petraeus's mouth
Washington Post link

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
... I fail to see how better equipment and military training deal matter with regards to what you're talking about, especially given since I can think of maybe one My Lai type incident that has happened in Iraq, and those responsible were punished for it if memory serves.

---

Of course they make a difference. Training makes the difference between a nervous trigger-happy recruit and a seasoned recruit thats calm under pressure. Equipment makes the difference between rubber bullets hitting rioters and real bullets.

Everyone credible, the Dali Lama, foreign leaders, BlackBlade and I , so far as admitted that China is never going to realistically leave Tibet in the near future. That means using riot police or paramilitary forces to stop the rioting. And I will note, that according to that report, rioting occurred for *days* before intervention.

The only question now remains, what is an an expected number of deaths when restraining thousands of rioters and what is an unexpected number? What kind of magnitude of difference makes the difference between an official policy of violence and a few bad apples?

100 deaths, unconfirmed, and postulated by the source that is expected to be the most biased is not an unexpectedly high number to me.

Make no mistake, I'm not happy about it. I think the situation is tragic, that is why I specifically brought out those non-biased videos that BlackBlade commented on that show the PRC in a bad light. But there is a difference between a sustained campaign of violence and what is shown in James Miles' reports. There is a difference between a Tiananmen Square level incident for which your current response would be appropriate and something like what is seemingly occurring in Tibet.

[ April 13, 2008, 12:37 AM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
 

---

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
 

quote:

---

For the sake of wondering, how is expelling illegal immigrants the same thing as violently cracking down on demonstrators and shooting unarmed monks?

---

quote:

---

And for that matter, who are our politican prisoners? Those held at Guantanamo? Now don't get me wrong, I think they should be charged or released as much as the next liberal but, last I checked most of them were captured in fights with the Taliban or in Iraq right?

---

quote:

---

Let's not pretend that the US and China are on the same footing. Two things can be bad and wrong and still be nowhere near each other on a value scale of how bad they are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
You said clearly that "The United States has never fired upon protesters" in fact they have, also the post Kent situation is nowhere near as simple as you say it is the Nixon Administration had acted very callously towards the event for quite some time.

Next, you failed to address my other point, the United States in contrast to China has supported numerous right wing coup d'etates in foreign states which had with the US blessing shot protestors, and oppressed various ethnic minorities.

Your making excuses, the fact of the matter is China on the political stage largely did not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations prefering to deal business in a mutually benefitial way and not on a ideological basis, the actions and policies of the United States on the world stage however are self evident as being far far more dasterdly then anything China has ever done.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mucus:
Uh, no its not. The US government has repeatedly said that the Iraq "War" is over. The news briefs from the US that I've seen either refer to the violence as "sectarian conflict" or "ethno-sectarian competition." This is not a war anymore, civil or not. Straight from General Petraeus's mouth

---

quote:

---

Make no mistake, I'm not happy about it. I think the situation is tragic, that is why I specifically brought out those non-biased videos that BlackBlade commented on that show the PRC in a bad light. But there is a difference between a sustained campaign of violence and what is shown in James Miles' reports. There is a difference between a Tiananmen Square level incident for which your current response would be appropriate and something like what is seemingly occurring in Tibet.

---

quote:

---

Many people here seem to think all illegals need to be escorted by National Guard troops back to Mexico. I will change majors if that happens and not a single person is physically molested.

---

quote:

---

Check again, quite a few of them have been released without any formal charges being brought against them. Seems reasonable to believe that if we had captured them all in the act of engaging our troops that we would be hesitant to just let them go.

---

quote:

---

Would you be comfortable with a man formerly convicted of grand larceny telling off a man caught in the same act today?

The situation between the US and China is very delicate. On the one hand we demand that they give their people more rights, but on the other China feels like they have come so far and done so much and they get no credit for it.

Again I don't know if protesting at the Olympics is a good thing or a bad thing.

---

quote:

---

Xinhua did not provide further details of the incident, but Tibetan activists have said at least eight people were killed at a demonstration against Chinese rule near the Kirti monastery in Aba on Sunday.

---

link

Bang, you have a location, you have the source of the information. I'll note throughout the article that the BBC has denoted what IS known and what is suspected.
e.g. "Police 'shot at Tibet protesters'" rather than "Police shot at Tibet protestors" or conversely "Citing police sources, Xinhua said police had opened fire 'in self-defence' during Sunday's unrest in Aba, close to Sichuan's border with Qinghai province."

They don't trust either side unreservedly, and neither should you
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
I may have to steal an idea and start a You're Not Helping" feature

Previously, I mentioned a Chinese-British writer/human rights activist:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mucus:
Here's a very interesting interview with Xinran Xue, a British-Chinese human rights activist/writer in Britain who makes a few points that have been percolating through my mind. link

---

---

quote:

---

Now: I am currently an Assistant Professor at the University of Hong Kong's Journalism and Media Studies Centre, where I teach "new media" - which means a range of things related to the intersection between the Internet and journalism. I blog about my ideas and work at RConversation.com

Prior life as a TV journalist in Asia: I worked my way up from the very bottom of CNN's Beijing bureau, then somehow ended up CNN's Beijing correspondent and Bureau Chief from 1998-2001. After that I moved on to be Tokyo Bureau Chief from 2001-03.

---

quote:

---

It's well known by now that Chinese cyberspace for the past several days has been seething with anger against CNN and most Western media for what many Chinese netizens feel is blatant anti-China bias. If you haven't seen the anti-CNN website check it out. (The Washington post interviewed the site's founder here.)
...
The anger against CNN started after Chinese netizens discovered that CNN.com had cropped out a group of Tibetan rioters, who appear to be beating somebody up, from the original AFP/Getty Images photo.
...
As Roland Soong points out, CNN.com has quietly gone and replaced the photo in the original story with a new version that includes the mob violence in the background. But of course the old version still lives in the Google cache. He writes: "This is a self-inflicted wound. If CNN believed that it was right in the first place, then it should have stuck to that position. Instead, it surrendered quietly. Not only did this not appease the Chinese netizens, it only made it worse."
...
Many of the examples of Western media anti-China bias posted at anti-cnn.com hone in on a series of agency photos that ran in various Western news outlets which were mislabeled as Chinese police arresting Tibetan protesters, when they are actually Nepalese or Indian police arresting exiled Tibetan protesters.
...
YouTube has been unblocked in China, though as the Shanghaiist points out access can be shaky at times. The BBC English-language website is also generally unblocked.

Perhaps the Chinese government is feeling a little less worried lately about losing public support? Perhaps they are less worried that people will turn against the Communist Party after reading something in the Western media, now that it is no longer fashionable in many circles to believe what the Western media reports?

---

quote:

---

Hopefully most of China's netizens will draw the obvious conclusion: that in the end you shouldn't trust any information source - Western or Chinese, professional or amateur, digital or analog - until and unless they have earned your trust.

---

quote:

---

... Lots of Chinese people now view the Western media, human rights groups, and Western leaders' criticisms of their country as part of the Racist Western Conspiracy to Stop China From Being Successful. Many Westerners continue to harbor a wishful missionary fantasy that the Chinese people must naturally welcome outsiders to help "save" them, and that all expressions of the opposite can only be the product of brainwashing and fear. In my experience, the most unsuccessful way to win a person over to one's point of view is to start out by telling him he's brainwashed - second only in effectiveness to telling someone that she is part of a grand conspiracy. But this is how the conversation is currently going. Is this inevitable?

---

quote:

---

It is now almost a universally accepted truth among well-meaning people, on both sides of the debate about Tibet, that the protests in London and Paris this week have backfired, at least in terms of winning round the Chinese people to their cause.

As Roland at ESWN argues, persuasively, the Chinese Communist Party couldn't have arranged a better act of propaganda to unite the nation around its cause than have a pro-Tibet demonstrator try to grapple the torch out of the hands of a one-legged woman athlete in a wheelchair.

(And he means that literally, and he is right: the Party is indeed incapable of organising anything so brilliantly symbolic of all it says about how the rest of the world bullies poor harmless China).
...
From the more rarefied world of the Economist, their blogsite records these anonymous thoughts about how, if anyone thinks that these protests will help bring democracy to China or freedom to Tibet, they are much mistaken. Rather, they have entrenched nationalist feeling, possibly dangerously.

I couldn't have put it better myself, I thought, particularly as I had myself bridled at descriptions of China as totalitarian, including in my own newspaper. I think this is very wrong - China is an authoritarian self-confessed dictatorship, with very nasty dark corners, but to call it totalitarian is an insult to victims of and witnesses to Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China and the Kims' Korea, and I have interviewed a few of all of them in my time.

---

quote:

---

Specifically, you can read the story here of the Chinese paralympian fencer Jin Jing carrying the Olympic torch in Paris. The following includes the photos, the report in <Liberation Daily>, forum posts by eyewitnesses (including the photographer of that famous photo of the assault on Jin Jing) and western media reports. Millions of Chinese readers probably cried their hearts out after reading the stuff. And this public relations show was not even scripted by the Chinese Communists, who are unlikely to ever accomplish this level of success no matter how hard they try. Faced with the beautiful heroine with one leg, how is any liberal dissidence on behalf of Tibet independence going to work inside China? This was a bonanza handed to the Chinese Communists by the pro-Tibet protestors.

---

quote:

---

PEIGEL: Does the government respond to pressure form the outside world?

Liu: Yes. If it didn't, the human rights situation would be much worse.

SPIEGEL: What would happen if the Games were boycotted?

Liu: That wouldn't be a good way to punish China. If the Games fail, human rights will suffer. The government would stop paying any attention to the rest of the world. I personally think: We want the Games and we want human rights to be respected.

---

quote:

---

... Unfortunately, the calls to boycott the Olympics and to label everything about China as evil can only serve to isolate China and the United States from each other. China is not a monolith, and blanket condemnations of China and its people are as simplistic as blaming all Americans for the U.S. human-rights violations at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Such rhetoric, however, is driving many Chinese bloggers into a nationalistic response.

Attitudes such as these hark back to the Cold War days, when the United States and China were completely shut off from each other. A recent survey conducted by the Committee of 100 on American and Chinese attitudes found that both countries have significant fears about the other and believe that news coverage about their country is distorted by the other. It is worth remembering that during the Cold War, fear and ignorance of the "evil enemy other" was used to suppress internal political dissent, in the United States with the McCarthy Red scares and in China, through several of Mao's "anti" campaigns. ...

---

quote:

---

However, Chan insists anyone trying to protest on his watch can expect short shrift, warning: 'Demonstrators better not get anywhere near me.'

And the 54-year-old, speaking at the launch of latest movie Forbidden Kingdom, claimed many of the protestors are simply publicity seekers.

'They are doing it for no reason. They just want to show off on the TV,' he said. 'They know, "if I can get the torch, I can go on the TV for the world news".'

---

quote:

---

Q6. Other people think that the Beijing Olympics is a good opportunity to apply pressure on Beijing to improve human rights conditions in China as well as the Tibet issue. Do you agree?
18.4%: Extremely disagree
51.6%: Disagree
19.5%: Agree
2.0%: Extremely agree
8.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Q7. Some foreign groups are proposing to boycott the Beijing Olympics in order to pressure Beijing to improve human rights conditions in China as well as the Tibet issue. Do you agree?
27.6%: Extremely disagree
59.6%: Disagree
6.7%: Agree
0.8%: Extremely agree
5.4%: Don't know/hard to say

---

Another big story in China is the continuing backlash against both the foreign media and Carrefour as a proxy for the French.

The Carrefour situation is in part a (somewhat unfair) response to the Jin Jing situation and the revelation that the company has donated money to the Dalai Lama.

Nonetheless, grassroots protests around several of their locations have been going on and the intensity, well, somewhat reminds me (and exceeds) of the 'Freedom Fries' craze a few years back. It looks like the French ... are the new French.
The best coverage I have seen of this situation is from the EastSouthWestNorth blog from April 11-20 (although, the situation is ongoing) Here is an example in Hebei.
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20080426_1.htm

Interestingly, the authorities seem to be somewhat discouraging the protests, going to the extreme of parking construction vehicles in front of some stores to block protestors
Some figures have also spoken out against the protests, examples are
The former Chinese ambassador to France
http://www.blackandwhitecat.org/2008/04/28/the-dont-boycott-carrefour-campaign/
a group of Chinese journalists
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200804b.brief.htm#016
, and even a televised debate on the issue. Its all rather amusing.

As of yet, there surprisingly has been no violence, despite one rumour of an isolated incident, circulated by one blog and squashed by the same blog.

The media backlash issue is somewhat more worrisome.
Here is an interesting translated blog from Hong Kong with some points.
http://www.zonaeuropa.com/200804c.brief.htm#011

quote:

---

Last weekend, I spoke to a group of journalism students about the mainland Chinese media operation model and reform. I asked them about their overall impression about China and they said: "one party dictatorship," "rule of law is inadequate," "but the economy is growing rapidly," "Hong Kong relies on mainland China on many things" ... such were their answers. Then I asked the second question: "Where did you get that impression?" They said: "From reading the newspapers and watching television news." My third question was: "Do you watch CCTV or read the mainland newspapers?" Answers: "Very rarely" and "Those are government propaganda." I asked next: "What do you think of the latest popular mainland catchphrase 'Do not be too CNN'?" These students replied: "CNN is biased against China" and "news reporting ought to be objective." These future news workers of Hong Kong remembered the most basic principle of journalism.
...
When China opened up thirty years ago, a countless number of Chinese people reached for VOA and BBC. Through these western media, the Chinese people (especially the young people) expanded their vistas and found out that media were not just propaganda tools but can actually serve as watchdog over the government. As China opened up further and technology improved, the Chinese people came into contact with more western media. Among these, CNN stood out because it had 24/7 news coverage as well as bringing live coverage right from the scene. Through CNN, the common folks as well as national leaders can understand what was happening around the world. CNN made it impossible for the authorities to shut down information. CNN caused the official Chinese media to open up their eyes and imitate how to become quicker and better. Although the mainstream western media are still not freely available inside China, the Internet age has made the names of CNN, BBC, ABC and CBS familiar to the Chinese people. Many people (especially the young people) regard these as important sources for the latest information.

Of course, more and more Chinese people (including journalists) have adopted the value that the media should be watchdogs as opposed to mouthpieces. They agree that news reporting should be fair and objective. But then all of a sudden now, they found out that mainstream western media such as CNN which had embraced freedom of press and objectivity/fairness were in fact cropping/editing news photos, mislabelling photos and making prejudicial commentary. Rather than saying that the Chinese are angry, it is more appropriate to say that they feel cheated.

Actually, there is no such thing as absolute freedom of press in the world and there is no absolutely objective news reporting. Journalists have their unique backgrounds and education which form their ideas and positions. The key is whether a journalist can make a fair and balanced report irrespective of personal position.
...
After "Don't be too CNN" became the most fashionable phrase in China of the moment, do western media such as CNN recognize that the young China people who used to be more receptive to the western viewpoints have now become the major force in opposing the inaccurate western media coverage and any Olympic boycott? This should be something that the western media and certain politicians to think about.

CNN and other western media have 're-educated' the Chinese people. The Chinese people (especially the young people) no longer believe blindly in the western media. That was an unexpected windfall for the Hu Jintao-Wen Jiabao administration and it was definitely not the intention of the western media. ...

---

quote:

---

I am sure it is possible to be cynical, and say it's just playing for time: keep the foreign governments happy, ensure they'll come to the Games ceremonies, fob everyone off with a new round of meaningless talks, and in the meantime keep up the patriotic education in Tibet itself in the vain hope that that'll see the situation all right.

There's a good chance - what, 80, 90 per cent? - that that's exactly what will happen.

But I have been thinking some more about nationalism, and the unity of the Chinese people in the face of western attacks on Beijing over Tibet and on the Olympic torch. As I wrote before, this unity of feeling has led some to say that the pro-Tibet protests backfired.

But as I did then, I wonder.

People have compared the current wave of anti-French (and anti-foreign media) activism to the anti-Japanese protests in 2005: in the same way, the government then seemed to encourage, then cool down, the nationalistic sentiments.

But note: in Japan's case this was followed by a warming of ties. This was helped by a new Japanese prime minister, but it was also fed by Beijing, where the politburo went from being very uptight, cancelling visits, to being bosom buddies of Tokyo (well, almost) in a few months.

I have a pop psychology explanation for the political machinations at work here.

The CCP has a long history of hitting with the right before hitting with the left (or vice versa) - it will feint one way, to satisfy one wing of the party, before actually enacting policies that lean the other way.

...

To my mind, the sudden outburst of nationalism as regards Japan was not particularly dictated by outside events, but was a reflection of the Party wanting to engender a sense of national unity among the people before it led out a new policy. No matter that the new policy seemed to contradict the spirit of the people, the point was that once they had this feeling of solidarity, the people could be sold a new idea by a government behind which they had united.

I do not know if the same thinking is at work here: indeed, the whole idea may be very fanciful. Yet I feel the government is now well set to moderate its policies to the Dalai Lama, and to the Tibetan people more generally, should it choose to do so. It has stirred up some considerable support for itself, as the legitimate embodiment of the Chinese people, along with a sense of "something must be done". Controversially, I would say it has also provoked (and perhaps even this might be a little bit deliberate, at least among some of the more reform-minded people) a genuine sense among many thinking people that beneath the rhetoric previous policies must be admitted to have failed, and that there is more to the Tibet situation than previously met the eye.

The Party is now in a position where it can, if it chooses, move to offer genuine compromise while appearing to be magnanimous.

---

Interesting speculation.

If anyone has questions, or wants more information on particular events mentioned here, I'll try to provide answers or useful links
 

---

Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
 
It's hard to tell if Richard Spencer hit the nail on the head, or if he put the hammer in the hands of the CCP and is holding the nail himself for them to hit.
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
You mean wishful thinking?
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Some fun SMS satire from within China:

quote:

---

Bin Laden says: “China is the only country in the world where you absolutely cannot cause trouble! That’s because al-Qaeda once sent seven terrorists to launch a surprise attack on China, and the result was this:

When the first terrorist went to blow up a grade splitting bridge for road traffic [where one road goes on top and the other below], he got dizzy and fell over;

When the second terrorist went to blow up a bus, he couldn’t get on because it was too crowded;

When the third terrorist went to blow up a supermarket, he found that his remote detonation device had been pick-pocketed;

When the fourth terrorist went to blow a government building, he was beaten madly to pieces by security guards, who exclaimed: “We’ll teach you to demand wages and appeal to the authorities for help!”;

The fifth terrorist successfully blew up a mine and killed and injured several hundred people, yet after his clandestine return to al-Qaeda, not a single news report about the incident appeared in the media for six months, so al-Qaeda punished him for the “crime of spreading lies”;

The sixth terrorist attempted to blow up Guangzhou, yet when he exited the train station, his explosive material was forcibly stolen by the “Galloping Band” (feiche dang) of motorcycle thieves, which left him traumatized for quite some time;

The seventh terrorist went to blow up Tieling - the base of China’s steel industry - yet the sad appeals of Zhao Benshan [famous actor and comedian from northeast China] discouraged him.

Recently, a female terrorist was sent to blow up Henan, but she was hoodwinked and made a prostitute!

On May 1st, don’t go to Carrefour! Let the world know that China can’t be messed with! Happy Holidays!

---

quote:

---

...
More intriguing, however, is the growing popularity of satirical text messages. These texts crystallize the power of the vox populi: the age-old craft of catchy verse, combined with the earthy humor of the disempowered cynic. Two messages circulated widely in recent weeks illustrate this point.

Circulated on May 1st, the first message sets out to prove that “nobody can mess with China”. It concludes with an appeal to boycott Carrefour over the May 1st holidays. Yet the bulk of the text reads more like a scathing satire of Chinese society (original Chinese at bottom of post):

...

It is hard to tell whether the author is truly proud of China and in support of the boycott, or is in fact ridiculing patriotic fervor because it obscures domestic issues, such as poor infrastructure, rampant crime, and strong-armed governance. The satire genre leaves plenty of room for interpretation.

---

quote:

---

In Wenchuan county, one of the most severely affected regions, the Communist Party secretary, Wang Bin, made a widely reported appeal over a satellite telephone for immediate airdrops of food, medicine and tents on Tuesday. He said the aid was needed to care for what he estimated were 30,000 people left homeless by the destruction in Wenchuan town, the county seat. "We are in urgent need of supplies, especially doctors," he said.

Helicopters dispatched to bring help to destroyed villages in the mountainous terrain near the Wolong panda reserve were forced to turn back because of heavy clouds and driving rain, the New China News Agency reported. Similarly, paratroopers who had planned to parachute in called off their mission because of the weather.

...

Premier Wen Jiabao, who was in the region directing rescue efforts, was seen bowing three times in a ritual of respect for the dead before the ruins of the collapsed school in Dujiangyan, the official agency said. Wen declared that the soldiers, police and other rescuers should make clearing roads to reach those pinned under the rubble their top priority.

Wen, who flew in from Beijing soon after the scale of the disaster became known, has been photographed and televised repeatedly directing rescue workers and shouting encouragement to victims. His display of concern, and its wide reporting by the official media, was in marked contrast to the secretive way the Communist Party has handled emergencies in the past.

...

Zhang Jian, director of the committee's project management department, stressed to reporters in the capital that the quake area is a long way from Beijing and would have no effect on the Games.

Still, officials said China is scaling back celebrations along the route of the Olympic torch out of respect for earthquake victims and will observe a minute of silence each morning before the torch relay proceeds.

Donation boxes will also be set up along the relay route to help provide relief for victims of the quake, a statement said.

---

quote:

---

On his race from Beijing to reach the epicentre of the deadliest earthquake to rock China in more than three decades, Mr Wen made sure that his first public comments hinted at the gravity of the tragedy.

The response of China’s rulers highlights the lessons that they have learnt from the mishandling of several crises in the past few years. This time there is little sign, at least so far, of an attempt at a cover-up as there was during the Sars outbreak in 2003, when secrecy triggered rumour and panic. And there has been none of the delay and confusion that drew criticism after the late winter snowstorms brought south China to a halt.

State television has interrupted normal programming to run live updates of the earthquake in southwestern Sichuan province. The usual evening soap operas have been replaced by interviews with residents and survivors.

On the internet, official news agencies have issued report after report to provide the latest death toll. Details of rescue operations, of missing children and damaged hospitals have not been concealed.

...

Mr Wen does not want to see China come in for criticism for its slow or secretive handling of this disaster – criticisms levelled against neighbouring Burma as it struggles to deliver aid to 1.5 million people affected by Cyclone Nargis. Further secrecy about China’s latest challenge, after effectively cutting off restive Tibet from contact with the outside world in the past few weeks, would serve only to fuel controversy.

China’s rulers have on many occasions in the past chosen to hide details of natural disasters, anxious that casualties could be perceived as a sign of failure. But the leadership, aware that its people have access to increasing amounts of information on the internet, is becoming less defensive.

The party knows that the main risks from such a disaster are a tardy response and a cover-up. Leaders with the media-savvy of Mr Wen – who made sure he was photographed poring over papers with his advisers on the flight from Beijing to the scene – differ hugely from the secretive junta in Burma. Mr Wen may be burnishing his image as a man of the people. But past performance would show that he – and several of his Politburo colleagues – care about the sorrows of China’s people. And not only because to care will help them to retain power.

---

quote:

---

Some food for thought for those that may be a little *too* cynical that China is not changing and on the role of international pressure.

---

Who ARE you talking about?
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
Jack Cafferty
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
The ReliefWeb map of the WenchuanEarthquake in Sichuan Province. Note that the initial earthquake propagated northeastward along the fault-line from the epicenter in WenchuanCounty through Beichuan to the aftershock epicenter.
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
You may or may not find this thread interesting.
I kept the (mostly) quake related posts there, while leaving the political post about the quake here.
 

---

Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
 
An interesting interview that touches on some recent Chinese events.

http://www.danwei.org/the_thomas_crampton_channel/hong_kongs_schizophrenic_china.php

I think some of this is also applicable to more affluent/cosmopolitan Chinese citizens on the mainland and to overseas Chinese such as myself.
 

---

Posted by DecayedCordet (Member # 11676) on :
 
I'm taiwanese and that's not racist in any way...even if "taiwanese" were a race (because, well, it's like, a nationality). Taiwan has enough of its own issues (as people stopped caring about it and few countries even recognize it) to be worried about Tibetan affairs. And does anyone think it's a tad worse that China is both funding AND arming the Sudanese in Darfur? that's not getting so much media play. hmmm...I wonder why?
 

---

Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
 
Firstly what 2 soveriegn nations trade to each other is not immediately of note.

Secondly, the situation in Darfur is not black and white.

Thirdly, 87% of Sudans weapons come from Russia with only 8% from China.
 

---