Pro-Tibet protesters scale Golden Gate Bridge in SF

Discuss

121 Responses to “Pro-Tibet protesters scale Golden Gate Bridge in SF”

  1. Foolster41 says:

    Leonhill: I’m sorry I got your name wrong. It was unintentional. (Coincidently Leon means lion.)

    “There are no underground churches in China”. I know for a fact that this is untrue.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_house_church
    http://www.opendoorsuk.org/article_china_truth.php

    I am not against China. I respect their ideology and soveringty. But I do not respect fascism and deniel of human rights. (So Weither it is really a “people’s repulic” is exactly what’s important.)

    Pointing the finger at someone else’s wrong doesn’t make your own countries wrongs disapear.

  2. DGHilton says:

    Free Tibet….from the Buddhist theocracy, where boys as young as 8 are forced into religious subservience and, too often, “passive” sexual partnership with senior monks.

    In the glory days before Chinese re-occupation, Tibet was a paradise: no tv, no radio…no non-Buddhist schools, no hospitals, no postal service, no roads or trains or buses…

  3. leonhill says:

    If you do not know any thing about the history of Tibet, please stop arguing here. Americans!

  4. Antinous says:

    And more hilarious attempts to pretend that genocide tastes like ice cream.

    (Chinese ambassador to the UK) Ms Fu said in the Sunday Telegraph that Tibet is “loved” by the Chinese.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7344895.stm

    Reminds me of Henry V: for I love France so well that I will not part with a village of it; I will have it all mine

  5. leonhill says:

    I don’t know whether you guys know the real dope about so-called free Tibet. the protest launched by Dalailama on March 14th is not a peacefull parade, as he said, but a violent one.

    You guys in American always asking for human rights, however, actually you guys never know what is human rights. Free means you have to do something in a given social frame, rather than doing every thing you like. If you like to be ‘free’, rape, robbing and even terrism are acceptable. You like to have another 9.11? Then just be free.

  6. Takuan says:

    On 7 October 1950, 40,000 Chinese troops under Political Commissar, Wang Qiemi, attacked Eastern Tibet’s provincial capital of Chamdo, from eight directions. The small Tibetan force, consisting of 8,000 troops and militia, were defeated. After two days, Chamdo was taken and Kalon (Minister) Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, the Regional Governor, was captured. Over 4,000 Tibetan fighters were killed.

    The Chinese aggression came as a rude shock to India. In a sharp note to Beijing on 26 October 1950, the Indian Foreign Ministry wrote:

    Now that the invasion of Tibet has been ordered by Chinese government, peaceful negotiations can hardly be synchronized with it and there naturally will be fear on the part of Tibetans that negotiations will be under duress. In the present context of world events, invasion by Chinese troops of Tibet cannot but be regarded as deplorable and in the considered judgement of the Government of India, not in the interest of China or peace.

    A number of countries, including the United States and Britain, expressed their support for the Indian position.

  7. Takuan says:

    Dear Dghilton:

    Mindlessly repeating something does not change it into something worth saying.

  8. Takuan says:

    but leonhill, what would you know about Tibet, you being in China?

  9. Nick D says:

    Foolster41:

    Maybe I misinterpreted your comment. I take your point, but no one was seeing this event as a freedom of speech test case. I didn’t think anyone had mentioned “suppression,” either.

    Several commenters were, however, depicting this as some sort of pointless, attention-getting stunt (see comments 4, 16, 47, etc.). To me, that is just cynical sneering.

    As to the dangerous aspect of it, look at it this way: if they had meekly and politely picketed somewhere, I’m sure they would still have been arrested, as the police in this country have a solid tradition of arresting peaceful demonstrators. So yeah, maybe that would have been dangerous enough.

    But it would have had no value as PR.

    That’s why doing dangerous things like this is smart, in my opinion. Knowing how to do PR for your cause makes you effective – not trendy, shallow, or conniving. Just effective.

  10. Takuan says:

    enough time to chew? open wide, here’s another spoonful

    The Tibetan National Assembly convened an emergency session in November 1950 at which it requested the Dalai Lama, only 16 at that time, to assume full authority as Head of State. The Dalai Lama was then requested to leave Lhasa for Dromo, near the Indian border, so that he would be out of personal danger.At the same time the Tibetan Foreign Office issued the followingstatement:

    Tibet is united as one man behind the Dalai Lama who has taken over full powers. … We have appealed to the world for peaceful intervention in (the face of this) clear case of unprovoked aggression.

    The Tibetan Government also wrote to the Secretary General of the United Nations on 7 November 1950, appealing for the world body’s intervention. The letter said, in part:

    Tibet recognises that it is in no position to resist the Chinese advance. It is thus that it agreed to negotiate on friendly terms with the Chinese Government. …Though there is little hope that a nation dedicated to peace will be able to resist the brutal effort of men trained to war, we understand that the United Nations has decided to stop aggression wherever it takes place.

  11. coldspell says:

    So, leonhill, you are telling us that Freedom is Slavery?

  12. leonhill says:

    Takuan

    Sure, as the protest happened, I was in Lhasa. It was horrible! If they are really peaceful, why do they hit and even kill the common people? If there is any skyscraper, I bet the so-called “peaceful protestors” will damage it, just like in 9.11. Oh, by the way, need none plane.

    Moreover, I just heard that some monasterries attacked the Olympic Games Torch in France. As is know, Olympic Game should not relate to any Political thing! You still remember the Olympic Game during World War II in Germany? What if somebody, who are asking for the free Tibet, crash into the playing ground to bomb players, you still think it is FREE and RIGHT?

    Oh, My Shit!

  13. Foolster41 says:

    Lionhill:
    There is a big difference between America and China in terms of goverment. There are no underground churches in America. Why is that? Most of America’s trouble has been arguablly too much security. You cite abuses like Gitmo, etc. but that’s moslty been only a problem for america for the last 8 years or so. Acording to you America isn’t enough of a police state like China.

    Things like Justice are good things to strive for, but if the Chinese government was really striving to be a good democracy, then why are they still toruring prisoners? Why is there heavy regulation on religion still? You need to open your eyes and see you are being lied to by your government. I’m not very knowlegable about china, but I know people have been there and I have heard the stories of what doesn’t look like a “people’s republic” to me.

  14. laffmakr says:

    Pfft…Turk 184 did it first.

  15. st vincent says:

    anthropop: thank you for saying so!

    FWIW, I get irritated with activism-as-fashion-statement behavior at times, too, but, fortunately, I think there’s a lot more to it this time around.

    Also FWIW, that last line of mine should have read “maybe they’ll give a crap about (insert your town here), too.” Bet y’all figured it out anyway.

  16. chromal says:

    It’s great to see true patriots come forward and do what they can to draw attention to the situation in Tibet. I’m certain, while exporting liberty isn’t necessarily spelled out in our nation’s founding documents, our forefathers would smile at this and other displays if they were still around today.

    I’m eagerly awaiting the Olympic torch’s visit to San Francisco, particularly after the free-thinking people of London and Paris made it clear western democracies shall not tolerate China’s unacceptable behavior.

  17. leonhill says:

    Whatever, Tibet issue is a interior business of China, you do not need to WORRY about the so-called FREE. REMEMBER, China is neither Afghanistan nor Iraque.

    You guys always thinking about business of others rather than yourself. Your American FREE allows a Kerean to Kill 32 common students in Virginia Tech, you still need more free instead of lives?

  18. UnfunnyIsBack says:

    DgHltn

    Y bvsly blv tht prgrssn s msrd by tchnlgcl nd pltcl chng.

    Yr srcsm sms t mply tht lf bfr Chns ccptn ws mpssbl.

    Thy hd thr wn mthdlgy f mntnng sccssfl scty. Jst bcs ppl dsgr wth thr chcs ds nt mn tht thy r msnfrmd r gnrnt.

    Tht knd f thnkng s wht crts fls wrs nd fls ccptn.

    Wh hs csd mr prblms fr th wrld, Tbt r Chn.

  19. leonhill says:

    Coldspell

    Abraham Lincoln help the black people free from Slavery, partially. This is the history of U.S. But I guess you do not know anything about Tibet history. Actually, Chinese re-occupation did the same thing to Tibet as your Lincoln.

    The reason why Dalailama need a FREE TIBET is that he could have many slaves before reoccupation, but NOW, he cannot.

  20. simplehuman says:

    Yay! More meaningless gestures!

    Reading these comments I see so many people just jumping on the “Free Tibet” bandwagon with abandon. It’s not as simple as “China bad/Dalia Lama good” and no matter what Richard Gere, or the Beastie Boys or a bunch of left coasters want to chant or march about, it can’t be reduced to that.

    The Dalia Lama wants to bring back a theocracy. The Chinese government wants to maintain an autocratic communist state. Neither of these options represent Jeffersonian democracy at its finest. It puzzles me to see people of good conscience and education marching in lock step to this simplification of a deeply complicated international issue.

    The “Free Tibet, man” crowd has always struck me as more than a little elitist in it’s assumptions, it’s high-mindedness and general down the nose gaze at the intricacies of the issue. Better to hang banners, chant and knock over olympic torches that try to understand that geopolitics doesn’t come down to good versus evil, and that that kind of reductionism is more at home in the thinking of George Bush and other irrationalists.

  21. Foolster41 says:

    I would caution about seeing this as a freedom of speach case. You dind’t say it explicitly but I thought it mgiht be implied.

    Climbing the golden gate bridge is dangerous, and I see that as reason enough for their arrest (Though they should only get a smaish fine and spend no more than a couple days in jails if at all.).

    While their acitvism and conern about the serious situaiton in Tibet is commendable, there are less dangerous ways of doing it.

  22. Takuan says:

    who knows? Great evil continues to be wrought on the Tibetan people, it seems almost certain they will be wiped out by China. Apart from those that are killed or jailed for ever, the balance will be dispersed like a few drops in an ocean of Han and extinguished that way. Any remaining in Tibet will inexorably forced in to the status of performing animals in reservation/zoos.

    And for what? So the vast natural gifts of Tibet can be torn from the earth, the rivers and sky despoiled with smoke and blackness – all for the sake of desperately sustaining a false dream that every person in China could live at a level beyond the resources of even several planets like this one?

    Any gifts of Tibetan history and culture had best be shepherded up now for safe keeping. The burning is just beginning.

  23. Antinous says:

    You’re in a mood. Don’t forget that Vietnam beat the US. There’s always hope.

  24. muaythai says:

    DgHilton, you obviously don’t tow the white liberal, bay area progressive line- shame on you! You really should be sent to a Chinese Re-Education facility ASAP. Or at least the far east bay.

  25. Takuan says:

    The suppression of Viet Nam collapsed because the American people were not in favour of it – by the end any way. The average Chinese – not all Chinese by any means – but a majority of them subscribe to a world view where any outside the tribe are secondary, lesser and can be destroyed without sin.

    I have asked on many occasions: What does China offer to the world? Fraternity? Democracy? Respect for our common environment? Some valuable spiritual teaching? An socio-economic system that truly benefits all? What?

    What comes after Tibet? Suppose the genocide is finally successful, suppose Taiwan falls without a shot, suppose the Uighurs and other distinct groups under Chinese rule are also finally obliterated. Even throw in few small neighbours like Burma. What next? Will China’s population be suddenly sharply limited? Will growth cease? Will the ravenous demand for resources vanish? What bribes will the rulers of China use on the Chinese people? What bludgeons? What is coming?

  26. Nick D says:

    I haven’t seen so much nonsense and arrogance being spewed out since Bush’s State of the Union address.

    “Can’t these activists think of ways to get out the message that don’t involve screwing with people’s commute?”

    Hmm… can’t imagine why turnout at American polls is so low, and the country’s going to hell.

    If I didn’t know better, I’d say it’s because we’re a nation of fat-asses who don’t want our comfy little lives disrupted by controversy.

    Nah, that can’t be it….

    “It is because protestors are devoid of any power and unmotivated to attain it, so once the idea of boycotting the Olympics came into play, they decided to act on it.”

    Right. I see no motivation displayed here.

    Not like the HEROIC EFFORT! and UNBENDING WILL! it took for you to mock them safely from the comfort of your chair.

    “While their acitvism and conern about the serious situaiton in Tibet is commendable, there are less dangerous ways of doing it.”

    Perhaps a bake sale? How about a knitting circle?

    PS; ever heard of spellchecking? Or would that be too dangerous?

    If you think the Dalai Lama is planning to institute some boy-loving monk-ruled theocracy in Tibet, you probably also think the Surge is working, and that not teaching kids about birth control will control teen pregnancies.

    In other words, you are a credulous bumpkin.

  27. Antinous says:

    Tak-kun,

    This should cheer you up a bit.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7340973.stm

  28. Moon says:

    Who has caused more problems for the world

    George W Bush is not an option???

    Then I’d have to say China, since Tibet hasn’t even existed since 1950 or so.

    If you want to say that China has civil rights violations, fine. You can pick from many. But, let’s not make saints out of these Lamas. Please.

  29. Takuan says:

    ahhhh yes. Good.

    I have not willing/knowingly purchased anything made in China since the latest assault on Tibet began. It’s been easy. Saving money too since virtually no impulse buying of cheap innecessities. (that last word is just to make Teresa wince)

  30. Takuan says:

    quite astonishing how there are so many who were completely silent about Tibet for so long (despite the heinous crimes of the notorious, ultra-violent buddhist monk mafia)and now that Tibet has the smallest chance to lift the boot of oppression from her neck, why,lo and behold: here they are.

  31. Antinous says:

    It’s a good word. You should promulgate it.

    The UN Chief is also not going, due to ‘scheduling conflicts’. A lot of people suddenly have ‘scheduling conflicts’. It’s easy to understand, since the dates for the ceremonies are only known two or three decades in advance.

  32. zzjing says:

    @ #81 by TAKUAN:

    Quote:
    “ I have asked on many occasions: What does China offer to the world? Fraternity? Democracy? Respect for our common environment? Some valuable spiritual teaching? An socio-economic system that truly benefits all? What? ”

    And your answer is? And if you think China has nothing to offer the world, what do you suggest that we do with all these useless Chinese people? Shall we bomb them to oblivion, like the US has done to Iraq? Shall we offer them the gift of democracy, even if we have to kill a few million of them, or a billion? After all, the average Chinese “subscribe to a world view where any outside the tribe are secondary, lesser and can be destroyed without sin”, so they themselves should be destroyed, right? Right???

    Geez, just listen to yourself. The self-righteousness and hypocrisy stink to high heaven. Get a hold on yourself before you fall off your high horse. What a load of horse manure.

  33. Takuan says:

    Why do you refer to the Chinese people as useless? Why do you suggest killing them? As for suggesting they all be destroyed, I must ask where you begin from to get this mindset?

    Do you have any actual answer?

  34. UnfunnyIsBack says:

    Do not be suprised if the US does not intervene.

    Capitalism isn’t complicated. Actually it really has only one fundamental question prior to taking action in foreign affairs.

    How can we capitalize from this?

    Who is more valuable to the US, China or Tibet?

  35. leonhill says:

    Foolster41:

    If you are not very knowlegable about China, we do not have the same precondition of communication. At least,however, I have been in both United States and China for a long time. I admit our government didn’t do a good job in such area as human right, as I said before; and I also do not like many action of our leaders, but this is not related to this so-called Free Tibet issue.

    I admire your American Free and I have some good experience of it. But I still suggest you Americans to open your eyes.

    As is known, America is the most powerful country in the world. But you guys seems to be the people who most need the means of learning more knowledge about other countries. Baseed on the personal experience, in the mind of most American, U.S.A is the world and if they know their own culture, they will certainly know the whole world, just because your super power.

    If you always be a good and free country and nation, why the people in middle east always attack you? Sure, you may accuse them as terrists, but you should first accept them as Human Beings. Nobody like to kill others by bombing herself/himself, but they did! Why? You think your dear so-called God blessed America is really good enough? Absolutly not. Your FREE thought is only available to your own citizens rather than all the human race. You can kill others or even destroy a whole nations if they are not following your ideaology, for instance, Iraque and Afghanistan. You don’t care others’ life! You don’t care others’ sovereignty. The only thing you care is your power.

    Indeed, the two countries I mentioned above also do not did very well in human right, but their people can still live. What about nowadays? You have given them enough FREE or merely more death? OF these the later are the majority.

    Every nation has their own ideology, this is pretty normal. We should first accept this kind of difference and then communicate with each other for some shortages or even faults rather than simply ask others to follow your own ideology.

    IN the case of the March 14th incident, whether “people’s republic” is a real “people’s republic” is not the point. The only thing I know is that Dalailama should not launch a incident to help himself get back the power just by hitting or evern killing common people. This is evil, this is not free, but another form of terrorism.

    My English is not too skillful to express a profound issue like this. Hope you can understand what I said.

    By the way, my name is leonhill rather than lionhill. learn to use ctrl+c & ctrl+v please:-)

  36. Foolster41 says:

    Basicly, what I think Tauken is getting at is, China has lost it’s “divine will”. (Apollogies if I’m using the term wrong, something I picked up from Orson Scott Card’s “Shadow of the Hedgemeon”, which takes a very good look at geo politics and seems very timely.)

    As Abraham Linceon once said of America “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”

    I’m not sure I get what the “nuke ‘em” comment is about. All in all though I don’t think it’s any of the US’s business to intervene directly unless we become allies to the tibet goverment in exile. A stopping of purchase of Chineese goods perhaps as a protest to the attrocities by the Chineese goverment, but that may well end up hurting the people rather than doing any good.

  37. leonhill says:

    There are no underground churches in America but there are many underground communists.Although Communist Party is not a religion, but it doesn’t blong to terrorism. You still think you are free enough. This is a political issue, not relating to freedom.

    If you have any chance to come to China, I’m glad to be your guider to help you open your eyes.

  38. Fnarf says:

    What IS it about Tibet, anyways? It’s the trendiness and media savvy of the Dalai Lama, isn’t it? No one is hanging banners off the bridge in support of free elections in Zimbabwe, or against the public hangings of gay teenagers in Iran. It’s always Tibet. Why is that? Is it the mysticism? Is it the support of cartoons like Bono?

  39. Antinous says:

    Here’s an interesting, if far-fetched, notion. I can’t imagine him eating a corn dog, though.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/m.s.-bellows/activism-you-can-do-send_b_96043.html

  40. Takuan says:

    Take enough time for a calm, reasoned reply.

  41. Antinous says:

    Take enough time for a calm, reasoned reply.

    What fun is that?

    subscribe to a world view where any outside the tribe are secondary, lesser and can be destroyed without sin

    It’s tribalism. You wouldn’t have a problem with Takuan accusing the people of Nazi Germany of engaging in it. Why should China be exempt? Just because it’s the biggest tribe?

  42. Antinous says:

    Looks like Japan is going to refuse to let Chinese security run with the torch.

    http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/news/20080411p2a00m0na016000c.html

  43. UnfunnyIsBack says:

    It is because protestors are devoid of any power and unmotivated to attain it, so once the idea of boycotting the Olympics came into play, they decided to act on it.

    So perhaps we should give Iran the olympics in 2012. Maybe change will come then. (HAH!)

  44. Jake0748 says:

    @82 “so they themselves should be destroyed,” and this is the best part —> “right? Right??”

  45. Takuan says:

    yeah;

    “In a Nutshell: The world’s leaders should pressure China to recognize the legitimacy of the Dalai Lama by saying they’ll only attend the Olympic Ceremonies if China lets him attend as well. We citizens can pressure our leaders to make that happen.”

    The part about America not daring to piss off China because China might wreck the American economic balancing act by calling loans or not loaning: let them. The US is almost certainly heading into depression. Defaulting on China will: Provide a scapegoat for the depression. Get the USA out from under huge debts. Provide excuse to use major weapons and reassert global hegemony. Weaken China to a critical point so the natural dynamic will implode their situation domestically. Re-start the Cold War with Russia (and boom the economy with a new draft and arms race)

    Everybody wins except poor(working )people and the environment.

  46. Foolster41 says:

    Er. My bor just corrected me. “Dinvine mandate” I think is the term. and the book was the sequal “Shadow of the giant” not “shadow the hedgemon”. (Both are excelent though.)

  47. Takuan says:

    maybe because Tibet represents people who quietly try to live their lives, to do no harm and get assaulted and murdered anyway.

    Today, Tibetans. Tomorrow, you.

    And do try to remember that not everyone in Tibet is a monk. The monks are symbolic and are thus used by all sides.

  48. Bionicrat2 says:

    #13…Tibet hasn’t even existed since 1950 or so.

    And did it exit before 1913? That’s the question that sits with many Chinese on one side of a giant canyon while the West occupies the other.

  49. zzjing says:

    @ #85

    There is nothing wrong with pointing out that the average Chinese suffer from tribalism. Hell, we all do, to some degree. What I don’t understand is the paragraph of (rhetorical?) questions I quoted above. What is he trying to say? What is he implying? Maybe I am reading too much into his ramblings, but it was him who appears to be implying that China has nothing to “offer to the world”. I am simply pointing out the absurdity of it all. Go back and read #81 again. What is he suggesting?

    I will give a calm and reasoned reply if I a responding to a calm, reasoned post.

  50. zzjing says:

    @86

    I believe it’s called “sarcasm”.

  51. Chris L says:

    @88

    quote:
    ‘I believe its called forced “sarcasm”.’

    Fixed.

  52. Antinous says:

    What IS it about Tibet, anyways?

    Good lord, do you know how many banners have gone up on that bridge? San Francisco has demonstrations, disruptions, riots all the time. This is national news only because of the Olympics. I might also point out that South Africa was under a huge spotlight for decades before apartheid was ended. People seem to respond more to one group oppressing another than to internal struggles within the group. Plus the inequality of power is so dramatic in Tibet’s case.

  53. anthropop says:

    It’s amazing to me how people in the U.S.allow executions of retarded people, people to serve life in prison for selling a helpful herb that grows from the ground, they also prohibit growing the hemp plant which could single-handidly revitalize the economy, corporate facism in so many ways I won’t begin to name- and then a few trustifarians think it’s cool to rally for Tibet. How ’bout growing a set and attending your city board meeting or better yet running for office.

  54. Takuan says:

    still no answers

  55. cloren says:

    Spirituality and Mysticism aside, I’ve met numberous lamas and tulkus throughout the past few years and can say from experience that no, they may not be saints but they’re more genuinely compassionate and hard working than your average person.

    Tibet’s sovereignty is not the primary cause for concern (that would be like making a case to give Hawaii back it’s sovereignty- it’d be nice, but it’s almost definitely not gonna happen).

    What concerns me is China’s intolerance of Tibetan CULTURE- The native culture and flavor of Tibet is virtually dead- and native Tibetans are not allowed to live the way they wish because of the Chinese government’s actions.

    However; the monks ive met look at this exile as a mixed blessing as Tibetan culture has spread across the world- it’s very prominent in the bay area which is where I’m from and why I’ve had the opportunity to meet so many Tibetans. I see no problem with the demonstration on the bridge. Those who climbed it knew exactly what they were doing and what would happen once they came down.

  56. zzjing says:

    @89

    Very clever, Chris. Good boy.

    @90/83

    Why do you refer to the Chinese people as useless?

    Quote:

    “I have asked on many occasions: What does China offer to the world? Fraternity? Democracy? Respect for our common environment? Some valuable spiritual teaching? An socio-economic system that truly benefits all? What?”

    It appears to me that you are the one who was implying the Chinese are useless.

    Why do you suggest killing them? As for suggesting they all be destroyed, I must ask where you begin from to get this mindset?

    From your post? I shall quote you again:

    “What next? Will China’s population be suddenly sharply limited? Will growth cease? Will the ravenous demand for resources vanish?”

    OMG! The Chinese are coming! The Chinese are coming! What shall we do?

    What are your suggestions?

  57. Sister Y says:

    There is an equivocation going on here between “China” and “the Chinese people.”

  58. Takuan says:

    I’ll bet on human freedom

  59. Takuan says:

    Thank you Sister, I was hoping to come to that precise issue. Firstly, where I am coming from. My position on “race” is that it does not exist. In my opinion, the actual, genetic and physical differences that many are pleased to call “race” are so utterly trivial that they are not worth thinking about.

    Secondly; who and what are the “Chinese”? The Han? The citizens of the PRC (including all those claimed as citizens against their will?)? The few individuals that steer the current government of the nation of China? Does “Chinese” include all those of Chinese origin and many generations removed from the land currently called China?

    A note of warning here: I am genuinely interested in real discussion with no prejudice – and absolute no shrieking or accusations of “hysteria”. I am not at home to any nonsense.

    Further, I am prepared to have my mind changed.
    Any similar, please engage.

  60. Antinous says:

    How ’bout growing a set and attending your city board meeting or better yet running for office.

    How about being a little more congenial on your first comment on BB? What makes you think that we aren’t doing all those things? I’ve been on the boards of three different community groups in the last five years. As to ‘growing a set’, maybe you should mail yours in and we’ll award them to a deserving commenter.

  61. zzjing says:

    @93

    Then what do you mean by “China” when you ask “What does China offer to the world?” Do you mean “the few individuals that steer the current government of the nation of China”? Do you mean those who claim to be citizens of the PRC? Or do you mean only the Han? That can’t be it, since according to you, “race” does not exist.

    I assume by “China”, you mean the nation of China, which includes its people, which we may call “the Chinese”. So what is your definition of the “Chinese”? Or “the average Chinese”, as you say?

  62. UnfunnyIsBack says:

    ANTHROPOP

    I don;t know where you get your facts, but you might want to reconsider a new source for information.

    Since 2002, the US Supreme Court ruled the execution of Mentally Challanged people cruel and unusual punishment and has been unconstitutional ever since.

    Decriminalization of marijuana is something that needs to be addressed, but its medicinal values aren’t as miraculous as you make them seem.

    Hemp would not revitalize our economy. Peak Oil is something we need to consider, unless hemp can replace oil, this economy is far from being saved.

  63. Takuan says:

    For the purposes of a disussion about Tibet; who are the “Chinese”?

  64. zzjing says:

    Err, I thought I was asking you, since you have been using that term yourself. So, again, what do you mean by “China” when you ask “What does China offer to the world?” What do you mean by “the average Chinese”?

  65. freeeetibet says:

    Several people posting have commented on those making the protest and they are just plain wrong about us. This is not the only issue I have worked on in my life or recently even. In fact the things you mention – I personally have worked for free elections and against hangings in Iran (and in the US for that matter.) I’m not rich and if I was, would that make my protest wrong? Someone is actually justifying the Chinese occupation that destroyed 6000 monasteries and killed over a million Tibetans because the Chinese brought TV to Tibet? (By the way, there wasn’t much TV anywhere before 1950.) As for complaining that we should have gone to a “city board meeting”, we packed the recent city meetings. The city torch run is going to disrupt the commute more than the one shut lane of traffic today, which does seem like not much of an inconvenience when compared to getting imprisoned, tortured or shot dead as protesters in Tibet have experienced, and which is the reason we did this action. Participation in a torch run through occupied Tibet shames us all and we all need to say no in any way we can.

  66. Takuan says:

    Insofar as a discussion on Tibet is concerned, in this time and in this place, I shall use the term “the Chinese” to mean: the current government of the nation of China. Included is the proviso that I do not recognize this government as democratic(in the absence of meaningful elections) and that I further see this government engaging in practices of deliberate discrimination against peoples not of what is broadly recognized as “Han” people, in the Peoples Republic of China.

  67. Takuan says:

    I withdraw for approximately one hour

  68. zzjing says:

    I believe that was your definition of “China”, i.e. you define “China” as the current government of the nation of China. It cannot be the definition of “the Chinese” because then the phrase “the average Chinese” would make no sense.

    Sorry about splitting words, but I feel it’s important to define our terms precisely in order to understand each other.

  69. zzjing says:

    If my interpretation of your definition of “China” is correct, then the answer to your original question is simple. What does China, i.e. the Chinese government, offer to the world? The answer: it offers the same thing all governments offer — absolutely nothing. Nothing positive, anyway.

    The question was simply redundant, and possibly misleading.

    Also, your faith in democracy is misplaced. Democratic governments are equally capable of war and destruction as the evil communists. I think someone already mentioned Viet Nam, and I already mentioned Iraq. And let’s not forget WWII.

    Anyway, what do you suggest as the possible solution to the possible threat of the Chinese overrunning the world?

  70. CastanhasDoPara says:

    I’ll bite.

    PRC = Venal government bent on keeping its power intact. Seemingly through any means possible.

    Chinese = A diverse group of humans with different interests, cultural heritage, variated yet mutually intelligible language and not necessarily located in “China”. (Taiwan would be a good example, one that may complicate things significantly.)

    China = A physical set of borders controlled by the PRC and mainly populated by “Chinese” people and others (Tibetans, Mongols, etc.)

    Tibet = Contested area claimed by opposing factions.

    As is the case with any geopolitical dispute (Israel/Palestine, Kashmir/Pakistan/India, Colombia/FARC-EP, Taiwan/China, etc) there are a myriad of factors. In most cases the disputes are long standing, emotional, and unclear. They can involve religious conviction, national pride, linguistic homogeneity, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. The main problem with all of these disputes is that neither side wants to give up or lose face and their attachment to their cause verges on the fanatical. Fanaticism is the biggest roadblock to real dialog and the possibility of a negotiated and rational settlement of the issue.

    In this particular case the PRC and the exiled leadership/people of Tibet are fighting each other for slightly different reasons. The PRC sees this as an assault on their borders and control. The Tibetans see this as a assault on their cultural heritage and national sovereignty. This far into the conflict both parties are right and wrong, not to be vague but the issue is cloudy. So from the outside it is hard to definitively say who is right. What I can say is that fighting over it is not going to help anybody. After all war doesn’t prove who is right, it just proves who is dead. Originally the UN was asked to intervene and for some reason did not. So it would seem that the rest of the world tacitly agrees with the PRC, in a legal sense. The people of the world are as always a different story and harbor many differing opinions on this and other issues.

    Just my two and a half cents.

  71. dougrogers says:

    “Also, your faith in democracy is misplaced.”

    Democracy, the least evil of all the systems. At least there is a means to correct when the path is wrong.

  72. Takuan says:

    thank you for your patience

    continuing: I see the “Chinese” (though I will hence forth adopt the very thoughtful CastanhasDoPara’s term: “PRC”) as pursuing an aggressive policy of systematic destruction of a culture and people with the specific intent of seizing their lands and resources for immediate gain.

    Does anyone contest any point of this so far?

  73. opensource says:

    I know some people commented on why there aren’t protests to this scale about what’s going on in Zimbabwe, Darfur, and other such places and they have excellent points. All places in the world where this sort of animosity and , sadly enough, genocide should be in everyone’s faces everyday. People are less likely to forget.

    I’ve been a strong supporter for Tibet’s right for about 13 years. I even studied Buddhism for a couple years before it came time for me to “kill the Buddha”. I honestly think that the reason this problem gets the attention it does get is not because it’s more or less important, but the PR spin on it tends to be well done. It is well publicized, and often commented on by those of the upper class who we listen to. However, Americans have very short and selective memories. Except for the blip on the American human right radar in 1997 that went on for about 6 months, we don’t care. Especially when we get our stuff on the cheap at (favorite chain store here) from (poor third world countries whom we help exploit cheap labor)and China. It’s been time for us to take responsibility for our greedy capitalist actions. Question is, who takes the first step.

  74. Sister Y says:

    Castanhasdopara, your definitions are stunningly awesome; I plan on using those in the future.

    ZZJing, you bring up a good point that democracy doesn’t guarantee social justice – especially American “democracy,” it seems. However, just because a form of government fails to guarantee social justice, doesn’t mean that other forms of government aren’t worse. (I’m going to pretend we don’t need to define “better” or “worse” right now.) I think others will probably agree with me that if we oppose the Chinese government’s policies, it doesn’t mean that we won’t get pretty riled up if the rights of the Chinese people are threatened – in fact, it’s our conception of the Chinese people’s rights that often drives our negative impression of the Chinese government.

    To put it more concretely: if you oppose policies of the Chinese government, right on, I am with you. But if you mess with the liberties of individual Chinese people – my friends, my acquaintances, or people I haven’t met yet – then I have a huge problem with you.

  75. Antinous says:

    Can we get over the notion that the government of China is communist? A communist government would run the country for the benefit of the people. The PRC is run for the benefit of a tiny ruling class. Just enough benefits are doled out to the masses to keep them compliant. Not communism. Remarkably similar to many ‘democratic’ countries.

    Communism is not the antonym of democracy. That would be capitalism. Communism can run democratically or not, just like capitalism. Democratic centralism is a common model for ‘communist’ countries. ‘Democratic’ countries can have representative democracies, parliamentary ones, constitutional monarchies. Pretty much nobody practices direct democracy.

    My point is that the terms communism and democracy are useless for this discussion. Zimbabwe is a democracy. What more need I say?

  76. Takuan says:

    As a sidebar to the Tibet issue then; is the government of China, the PRC, legitimate? I contend it is not. It rules by force of arms and oppression, not consent. I further contend that a government that oppresses it’s “own” people can certainly not be believed in anything it says about “other” people it seeks to rule.

    As an example of the untrustworthiness of the PRC, I cite the immediate example of the use of a young woman olympic torchbearer as a media circus performer. This woman, confined to a wheelchair,is being touted by the PRC as an example of a victim of the “evil, violent Tibetan oppressors” because of an incident in the recent torch debacle. I find .this particularly disgusting since I remember not so long ago seeing a documentary about a young, female Chinese athlete rendered paraplegic by a training accident – and abandoned to rot by a government no longer interested in “losers”.

  77. Shalom says:

    Not sure what exactly is going on with Tibet, but I’m glad China’s finally getting some negative attention for it’s intolerance of other belief systems.

  78. Antinous says:

    This might be slightly semantic, but the problem lies in the idea that the government ‘rules’. A government should serve by administering. Beyond that, it’s a civic disease.

  79. dougrogers says:

    Antinous, #105. I see the PRC as a corporation.

    PRC Inc. owns the market – the manpower of China – the cheap labour, and the market of it’s billion people – it owns the physical land – it owns the people as commodities. This is what it has learned from Capitalism. From Marxism and Marxism it learned to value of History and the model of revolution. It learned from the Soviet Union, that a swift change is disastrous to the ruling class.

  80. Takuan says:

    SO,Salad, is that website and video you list in your profile you? Explains much.

  81. CastanhasDoPara says:

    True democracy and true communism don’t really exist as far as I am concerned, in real terms anyway. Academically sure, but one would be hard pressed to cite an actual example in the world today. The US is a Republic (possibly defined, loosely, as a representative democracy). More precisely, I would list the actual system as oligarchy/plutocracy (or one of my favorite terms kakistocracy, rule by the worst possible people), oddly the PRC looks much the same in real terms; the principle difference being that the rights of US citizens are ostensibly protected by the Constitution but who knows how much longer that will last with the way things are going…

    “…as pursuing an aggressive policy of systematic destruction of a culture and people with the specific intent of seizing their lands and resources for immediate gain.”

    Good point. You can swap out Chinese Govt/PRC with US Govt for haunting effect. Maybe this is why the US doesn’t really concern itself with pesky issues such as human rights and social justice. Just sprinkle sugar on the dog-shit and so on and so forth.

  82. Moon says:

    Today, Tibetans. Tomorrow, you.

    If we lose in Viet Nam, the Commies will be in California next year.

  83. Takuan says:

    one match at a time

  84. anthropop says:

    I don’t know how it goes in SF, but in Little Rock, Arkansas the kids of the wealthiest, pollutin’ist shit heads in town ride around in Range Rovers with Free Tibet stickers on the bumpers while their moms and dads are making out like gangbusters pumping our fresh, amazing water into shale to make millions in the natural gas racket. Meanwhile, when these big companies pack up shop and leave the state- which is notorious for giving breaks to big business- (see Wal-Mart and Tyson)- the poorest people in Arkansas get Thyroid disease and birth defects. There are environmental atrocities you cannot imagine happening in Arkansas. The ADEQ, the state agency charged with enforcing EPA law here is so ill-equipped, understaffed and devoid of leadership it is pitiful. I know it might seem like the poor, pitiful people of Arkansas deserve what they get- but voter fraud is rampant here as it is in many portions of the U.S. I’m just saying that I’m not that impressed with people climbing the bridge for Tibet. Climb the bridge for Lafayette County and I’ll tip my cap…

  85. Takuan says:

    Why Tibet now? Why should Tibet be a priority?

    Because their time has almost run out. The destruction has gone on so long and so extensively, that further silence now will mean the end. Forever.

  86. Antinous says:

    San Francisco is a bit different than that. If you park a 94 Jetta on the street at night, somebody will spray ‘Die, yuppie scum’ on it. Walk-in closets are in regular use as bedrooms. Strict water rationing has been in effect since the 1970s. The voter information pamphlet is sometimes 250 pages due to the number of candidates and local initiatives. It’s different than the rest of the country.

  87. Antinous says:

    I don’t know that that’s true. Culture is largely forged by environment. Egypt has been invaded many times, and the invaders eventually fell under the spell of the land. Tibet itself may turn invaders into Tibetans. Also, the Han may provide the bodies for future generations, but who will be born into those bodies?

  88. Takuan says:

    so help the ordinary people of Tibet today and maybe tomorrow they will help you

  89. Takuan says:

    mayhap. But if it were you, would you trust to the good will of posterity?

  90. Takuan says:

    the Dalai Lama uses the term: “my Chinese brothers and sisters”

  91. anthropop says:

    We’ve got our water issues here too. The difference here is that people are in denial and are not rationing but are finding new ways to waste water like the aforementioned shale-cracking. Rice production in Arkansas has two of our primary aquifers on alert status. At least the people in Tibet accept what they are facing. In America, 82% of us believe our government is failing us yet we do nothing about it.

  92. leonhill says:

    “But I do not respect fascism and deniel of human rights. ”

    what? Fascism? Are you kidding? I bet you never come to China. So do not use a word like this! OK?

    “Pointing the finger at someone else’s wrong doesn’t make your own countries wrongs disapear.”

    Sure, this are the same words I am gotta tell you. Please do not always grasp others’ fault, especially they are going out their way to resolve it.

  93. zzjing says:

    @104

    I totally agree with you that some forms of government are better than others. And I do oppose many policies of the Chinese government. As a matter of fact, that’s why I am now a Canadian citizen.

    What I am having problem with is Takuan’s inane question: “What does China offer to the world?” Since no governments actually have anything meaningful to offer the world, I can only assume he was talking about the Chinese people, whichever definition you may choose. The Chinese people, like any other people in the world, had and still have a lot to offer to the world. So I have no idea what he was implying. Again, I might be reading too much into this. And he hasn’t offered any explanation.

    As for Tibet, I am all for their independence. In fact, I am for the independence of any group of people, if they so choose, just as a matter of principle. The smaller the government, the better.

  94. Takuan says:

    ceasing to help your oppressor IS doing something.

    For the dignity of the common man,recognize this.

  95. jjasper says:

    @ # 47 – The Dalia Lama wants to bring back a theocracy.

    Um, no. He’s not on the record as being in favor of that as all. No more than the Pope is in favor of predominantly Catholic nations wanting theocracies. He’s already the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people. He’s on record as accepting Chinese rule, but just wanting more autonomy and freedom of religion for the Tibetan people.

    The “Free Tibet, man” crowd has always struck me as more than a little elitist in it’s assumptions, it’s high-mindedness and general down the nose gaze at the intricacies of the issue.

    And yet, it’s not just rich Americans who’re in favor of ending the way China treats Tibet. It’s a large number of nations with a variety of economic systems.

  96. zzjing says:

    @114

    I’d nuke the motherfuckers.

    Now we are talking. And don’t tell me about “collateral damage”.

    Can you get any crazier?

  97. Takuan says:

    stop. play this. face away from your computer.listen. the title was for you. are we not all brothers?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzf0rvQa4Mc

  98. Antinous says:

    The oppressed have the inalienable right to obliterate their oppressors.

  99. Takuan says:

    So,you are for the independent self determination of the people of Tibet, Good. Do you then condemn the PRC oppression of the people of Tibet?

  100. zzjing says:

    So,you are for the independent self determination of the people of Tibet, Good. Do you then condemn the PRC oppression of the people of Tibet?

    of course I do. The Chinese government is one of the most oppressive government in the world. Why did you think I left China?

    The oppressed have the inalienable right to obliterate their oppressors.

    With nuclear weapons? Without any regard to civilian casualty? You gotta be fucking kidding me.

  101. anthropop says:

    I’m quite sure you have missed my point, and perhaps I have missed yours but thanks for the Richard Simmons video…

  102. anthropop says:

    I’m quite sure you have missed my point, and perhaps I have missed yours but thanks for the Richard Simmons video…

  103. st vincent says:

    @anthropop:

    Ah, the “hierarchy of oppression” argument! Hm.

    Among my circle of friends, there’s a chap who is infamous for undermining nearly every conversation about something we feel is a bum deal, an injustice or generally unpleasant by saying “well, at least you aren’t sleeping under a bridge somewhere/don’t have a death squad at your door”. Well! What can you say in response to that? So much for dialogue. We all love this guy, but we all despair when he devalues and trivializes our concerns.

    I don’t think that giving attention to the events in Tibet takes anything away from what is happening in your backyard, indeed, I think that it helps raise awareness of injustice and oppression in general. In cruder terms, if you can get someone to give a crap about Tibet, maybe they’ll give a crap about , too.

  104. Takuan says:

    do you then agree, zzjing, that the conduct of the PRC has become conflated with the conduct of all “Chinese people” in regards to the treatment of Tibet? And would you further agree that this is a falsehood perpetuated by the government in Beijing as justification for something that cannot be justified?

  105. leonhill says:

    For those not fimilar or even know nothing about the history of China, especially Tibet, you ‘d better check out the video below:

    http://you.video.sina.com.cn/b/12048985-1365717970.html

    By the way, I post a video link about March 14th incident in Lhasha, however, it has been deleted by FREE BOINGBOING editor. Hope I can see this post next time I visit this page.

  106. anthropop says:

    Well said St. Vincent.

  107. Moon says:

    Geez, they didn’t have to even change the sign much – it just went from “Free Willy” to “Free Tibet”.

    I wonder what would happen to some religious sect in, say, Texas if they decided that Texas should be free from the tyranny of the United States?

  108. Takuan says:

    saith I

    “The man that hath no music in himself,
    Nor is not mov’d with concord of sweet sounds,
    Is fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils.”

  109. coyotl says:

    The number of china apologists here is appalling.

    I have travelled to Tibet, and observed firsthand the abuse of Tibetans and the destruction of the Tibetan culture. I watched Han police tasering merchants who wouldn’t pay them bribes, and saw the the police standing at attention every mile along the roadway between Lhasa and their airport.

    There are lots of arguments being made against supporting Tibet’s struggle for independence. The bottom line for me is that those supporting the Tibetans are supporting human freedom, while those arguing against these protests are supporting oppression.

    C.

  110. Anselm says:

    Sure didn’t take them long to disable that video…

  111. leonhill says:

    There’s another website established by a student from Tsinghua University whose name if anti-cnn.

    Aparently, it aims to tell you the real truth behind the so-called truth from CNN, especially for Tibet issue. Pictures, videos, articales are all available. Additionally, you guys can also read it because it has a English version.

    hope you can visit it to get the real truth of the FREE Tibet.

    link: http://www.anti-cnn.com/

  112. Bonnie says:

    In case you want to watch one of the climbers phone in the media to be interviewed WHILE hanging on the GG bridge — here ya go:

    http://www.yahoo.com/s/851815

  113. leonhill says:

    Just as the sentence on to top of the anti-cnn homepage:

    We are not against the western media, but against the lies and fabricated stories in the media.
    We are not against the western people, but against the prejudice from the western society.

  114. leonhill says:

    However,coyotl, I have stayed in United States for 2 years, and I also observed firsthand abuse of Americans in many different kind of areas. So what? There is not any perfect regime in the world, including yours.

    The only words I can say is that although China do not perform fairly good in Human Right area, they are trying their best. At least, the status quo is better than the era Dalailama’s theocracy.

    This is something like that although you think 5,000 dollars per month is not enough, and you can surely find a better job. However, to find another job which only provide 1,000 dollars is not an acceptable alternative.

    So, nowadays China is the 5,000 dollars job and Dalailama is another 1,000 one. Understand?

    Actually, we admit that human right is an obviously problem in China and our governers are struggle for that. I also do not like most of the governers but I will not accuse them merely for this March 14th incident in Lhasa. Because this incident is just like the terroristic attack your Americans always afraid of.

  115. dougrogers says:

    Q: How many pro oppressive Chinese government bloggers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

    A: Western media is biased stay out of internal affairs unless you lived in Tibet so you don’t have right to opinion we were a civilization before your country was even found monks made slaves screw in their lightbulbs nobody can deny the truth!

  116. ferrjerr says:

    Wow..what an “original” idea. Can’t these activists think of ways to get out the message that don’t involve screwing with people’s commute?

  117. Takuan says:

    There is no way you are going to have anyone at all outside China believe that the Tibetans were in the wrong as far as the recent violence is concerned. I don’t think that many Chinese completely buy it either.

    Why doesn’t China get out of Tibet and see if the Tibetan people ask them to come back?

    Why doesn’t China allow a Tibetan vote?

    Why won’t China let the world see what is happening in Tibet?

  118. Takuan says:

    people in China are not allowed to read

    Human rights

    Introduction

    Over 1.2 million Tibetans have died as a direct result of the Chinese invasion and occupation of Tibet. Today, it is hard to come across a Tibetan family that has not had at least one member imprisoned or killed by the Chinese regime. According to Jigme Ngabo, “after the suppressions of 1959 and 1969, almost every family in Tibet has been affected in some way”. These facts speak volumes about the “democratic reform” China claims to have brought to the “dark, feudal exploitative society” of Tibet.

    Independent Tibet was certainly not an embodiment of perfect human society. But it was, by no means, nearly as tyrannical as it is today under Chinese rule. Its two biggest prisons, located in Lhasa, had, at any one time, no more than 30 inmates each. But, following Chinese invasion the whole of Tibet has been turned into a vast network of prisons and labour camps. There are reports that China even resorted to massacre of prisoners to keep the prison population within manageable limits.

    However, China continues to claim that since its “liberation”, the people of Tibet have enjoyed wide measures of liberty and freedom. Let us examine the facts.

  119. Foolster41 says:

    Leonhill: I admit maybe “fascism” is too strong a word.

    Nick D: What I was saying was that the police were doing their job, arresting someone who was doing something ilegal (because it’s dangerous) and the arrests shouldn’t be seen as suppression. (It wasn’t even exp[licited said here, but it sounded like someone might get the wrong idea.) I don’t see how I was being “arrogant”. As I said, what’s happening in tibet is serious and I suppose there are times when one does need to do something dangerous to get attention to atrocities. I’d even say their braver than I am.

  120. Antinous says:

    The most hilarious thing about the Chinese government is that, when a Western leader offends them by meeting the Dalai Lama, they say, “You’ve hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.”

  121. Antinous says:

    Take the ferry. It’s more relaxing, saves gas and you’ll get a great view of the Free Tibet banner!

Leave a Reply