China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

[vanvaley1]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

No excuses for the way the government did and still does treat Native Americans, i don't know what to say:confused:

When in retreat call up 'The Force' of rationality to justify actions. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one tenet of Ayn Rand's philosophy that it was ok to take something from somebody if they weren't using it rationally?

Will somebody please take our banking system.

Errrrrrrrrrr, let me expand on that thought...somebody take it...other than the US taxpayers.

Guess only time will tell if the Indians had it right and Ayn had it wrong. Right now the Great Spirit must have a bemused smile crackin' that stiff upper lip.

[allenjs]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

I have to vehemently disagree with these statements as they appear to have come from the Official Chinese Census. ....

You basically sound like a voice box for the PRC. Taking a side in this situation doesn't do much, but at least acknowledge what is going on! Maybe it isn't quite as bad as some report, but it surely isn't as peachy as you try and make the current occupation sound! If you presented the argument from an even seemingly unbiased stance i could take u seriously. From what u wrote you sound like nothing more than some one who likes to think in absolutes and loves the "official story." I wonder how much money China has spent promoting their side of the Tibetan debate compared to the amount that the Free Tibet crowd has spent!

I could easily have quoted PRC propaganda, but I didn't, since I don't find PRC propaganda any more credible than the "Free Tibet" propaganda. I quoted the study from UCLA, because it is the closest I've seen to an unbiased and informed attempt at analyzing the situation. I don't think it is perfect -- it indulges in a bit too much western bias, IMO, and admittedly relies on some sources which may be too close to PRC in other case.

Of course, one doesn't judge "fair and balanced" by placing a cut between two extremes. Good judgment comes from lots of listening and experience, and it's almost impossible to arrive at good judgment by simply listening to PRC or "Free Tibet" propaganda and trying to triangulate between. However, one can be cautious about taking one's views about something like this from a person like Brad Pitt or Richard Gere (fine human beings, no doubt).

I personally know a number of ethnic Tibetans, have studied Tibetan Buddhism for more than a decade, and I visit China regularly on business and speak Chinese. I've also read a number of scholarly books on the history of Tibet. In the west, we have access to a lot more information from which to make an informed decision, and even an amateur student can read a few books and realize that the popular portrayal in the western political press is gravely incomplete and skewed. The fact that people persist in their ignorance (and worse, repeat their misconceptions on Internet message boards, put stickers on their car bumpers, and intimidate anyone who raises questions), is a testament to how steadfastly human nature refuses to look for evidence which might disconfirm our hypotheses. I have more than once tried to engage in polite conversation about Tibet with one of Tibet's proud bumper-sticker sporting defenders, only to realize that this person knows absolutely nothing about the history or religion. Tibet is a very convenient "cause" to choose when one is trying to signal to others here in the west, since it makes one seem very worldly and "exotic", and one is rarely going to run into anyone who can actually call B.S.

I am not shilling for the PRC by any means -- saying that normal Han Chinese have even fewer civil liberties than the Tibetans is not to say that Tibetans have a lot of liberties. We could look at what percentage of the ethnic Tibetan population is imprisoned in China versus the percentage of black and hispanic population imprisoned in the U.S. (the highest rate in the world). But this would just be argumentative, and I admit it's somewhat apples and oranges. I am simply making a relative statement. And I don't see much value in debunking PRC propaganda, since neither westerners nor Chinese people believe it. It's the western propaganda about Tibet that seems to be swallowed unchallenged by many in the west, and which deserves a very skeptical and critical look by westerners.

I'm sorry if I sound impolite or "biased", but somehow the sight of otherwise rational people militating for a revolution to impose a theocracy leaves me befuddled.

[*T*]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Frankly, the current situation in Tibet is nothing short of miraculous, considering that it is a region that produces no goods or services of any value other than a sophist cult to be peddled to Canadian trust fund babies.

Interesting discussion, allenjs, but I would point out that Tibet has two very important resources: water, and strategic positioning.
The plateau holds the source to much of India & China's water. Also, the Chinese are investing so much in opening up Tibet with railroads not for economic reasons but strategic - as a viable land passage to India.

[cjppjc]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

In your studies did you come accross any references to non violence?

The team of officials then demanded that all the monks denounce the Dalai Lama, who fled China after a failed uprising in 1959. One monk, Yixi Lima, stood up and voiced his opposition, prompting the other monks to add their voices.
About 6.30pm, the entire monastic body marched down to a nearby river, where paramilitary police were encamped and demanded the release of the two men. They were joined by several hundred local villagers, many of them enraged at the detention of the elderly monk, who locals say is well respected in the area for his learning and piety.
Shouting “Long Live the Dalai Lama”, “Let the Dalai Lama come back” and “We want freedom”, the crowd demonstrated until about 9pm.
Witnesses said that up to 1,000 paramilitary police used force to try to end the protest and opened fire on the crowd. In the gunfire, eight people died, according to a local resident in direct contact with the monastery. These included a 27-year-old monk identified as Cangdan and two women named as Zhulongcuo and Danluo.


http://www.poligazette.com/2008/04/0...ight-tibetans/



China arrests 100 Tibetan monks
Chinese police have arrested nearly 100 monks after what they describe as a riot by hundreds of Tibetans, according to state media.


http://en.timeturk.com/china-arrests...87-haberi.html




Talk about culture clash. How does this grab you?

In one of history's more absurd acts of totalitarianism, China has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnating without government permission. According to a statement issued by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, the law, which goes into effect next month and strictly stipulates the procedures by which one is to reincarnate, is "an important move to institutionalize management of reincarnation."


http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/22...betan-bud.html

[Jay]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Gordon Brown closing remarks at the G-20 Summit: " A New World Order is emerging"

We can see that ...:rolleyes:

I thought of you and Sapiens when he said that!

[cjppjc]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

I thought of you and Sapiens when he said that!

Why is that?

[*T*]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

In one of history's more absurd acts of totalitarianism, China has banned Buddhist monks in Tibet from reincarnating without government permission. According to a statement issued by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, the law, which goes into effect next month and strictly stipulates the procedures by which one is to reincarnate, is "an important move to institutionalize management of reincarnation."
[/URL]

This is so that only the chosen Pancen Lama is the 'legal' or 'legitimate' one.

[touchring]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

No excuses for the way the government did and still does treat Native Americans, i don't know what to say:confused:

That is how democracy works, the majority rule, even if the minority suffers. Tibet will never be an independent state as long as the PRC is around, just like North American natives will never have independence as long as the whites are around.

The Tibetans are luckier than the North American Indians, they did not have to go through genocide.

[Jay]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Why is that?

Both of them, in my opinion, take a hard look at "the man behind the curtain" and what powers he may or may not hold. A viewpoint that has always forced me to question my assumptions, for the better BTW. The "New World Order" has been a clarion call for those that believe the financial oligarchs, usurers, Banksters, etc., are consolidating their power. The actions at G20 don't invalidate this view at all.

[allenjs]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

It reminds me a bit of the recent spat where the Vatican and the Israelis asked the Mormons to stop "baptizing in absentia" people who died as Catholics or Jews during WWII. Apparently, neither the Catholics or Jews believe in the Mormon doctrine, but they want to outlaw it "just in case" it actually turns dead people into Mormons.

Anyway, that's really my gripe about the Western obsession with Tibet. There are a hundred other causes within China that should be more sympathetic to the average Westerner. For example, PRC booted the Catholic cardinals in China and installed their own. The pope excommunicated them, but China keeps them in place. Richard Gere doesn't really care about this, since talking about Catholicism is regarded as "uncool" and is not "exotic" enough.

The real issue here is not about religious or cultural freedom. The issue is that the PRC doesn't tolerate *any* organized political opposition. There is no first amendment in China, and it is *illegal* to form political opposition. So when you have western governments trying to install a government leader who is a fist-puppet of the CIA (and a cult leader, to boot), I don't know why anyone is surprised at the reaction. I'm not justifying the lack of political freedom in China, but the point is that you could not pick a better way to sabotage Tibet's cultural and religious freedom than by associating it so tightly with Western political interference.

An instructive example would be the protestant churches in China, where I (and people like George Bush and Hillary Clinton) have worshiped openly in China. Protestant theology generally frowns upon attempts of the religion to interfere with the state ("render unto Caesar" and all that), and protestants are not generally seeking to establish a theocracy and overthrow the PRC. Therefore, the protestant churches are huge and allowed relative freedom. Of course, there are many non-sanctioned fringe churches which are persecuted, often for having ties to CIA-backed groups, but the point here is that it's not about religious freedom, it's about threatening the PRC.

This, incidentally, is why the Muslims, particularly in Xinjiang, have more trouble. The idea of an Umma-style theocracy is not compatible with PRC's worldview.

Western interference is certainly not trying to impose Shariah on China, and most meddlers probably have good intentions to bring more political freedoms to China. But I personally think that backing Tibet is the stupidest possible way to increase political freedom in China. The historical political system of Tibetan Buddhism is absolutely incompatible with Western values and is not much better than Shariah. I'm not kidding to say that we would be better off backing self-determination of Scientologists in China than to back the Tibetans.

And the issue has almost zero popular support within China -- far less support than even George Bush had for the Iraq war. The average Chinese person doesn't have nearly the same reverence for rights of free speech and free assembly as we Westerners do, and until that changes, we are attempting to impose a political system that doesn't reflect the political will of the people. (And *when* it changes, which may be soon, the Chinese will do it for themselves -- they don't need the CIA and Canadian trust fund babies to show them).

On the other hand, China has no problem contributing money to influence America's oligarch-dominated system, or infiltrating Taiwanese political parties. When you see how easy it is for our vaunted political freedoms to be subverted and compromised, it's no wonder that the PRC are paranoid about anything that would open the way to foreign influence. It's part of the Chinese character -- they built a wall around their country to keep people out, for heaven's sake!

[c1ue]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

The average Chinese person doesn't have nearly the same reverence for rights of free speech and free assembly as we Westerners do, and until that changes, we are attempting to impose a political system that doesn't reflect the political will of the people.

Sorry, but your (CCP red) slip is showing.

Tibetans certainly have had a violent past - they had a military force comparable to Polish pancerny in the long ago past when Tibet's climate was more hospitable.

But that is totally irrelevant now.

What China is doing there is pure imperialism. That railroads are being built makes it no more right than Britain's White Man's Burden in India.

As for your assertion that the 'average Chinese' has no reverence for free speech or assembly - the statistics on protests in China number in the thousands. The gigantic Internet monitoring efforts that China undertakes is equally damning.

So please stop trying to disguise your official Chinese government party line views by saying they're just yours.

If, on the other hand, you merely decried the sensationalist posturing undertaken by movie stars and what not, that I could agree with.

But the shameless manipulation of public opinion for personal self esteem gain does not itself make the cause unjust.

[cjppjc]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Tibetans certainly have had a violent past - they had a military force comparable to Polish pancerny in the long ago past when Tibet's climate was more hospitable.

But that is totally irrelevant now.

What China is doing there is pure imperialism. That railroads are being built makes it no more right than Britain's White Man's Burden in India.

Aggreed. I'll leave it to you to deconstruct motives.

Tibet of course has had a violent past. Whose history does not include violence? The wholesale slaughter of Tibeten religious history and the fact that the Dali Lama is not safe in his own country speaks to the truth of the situation. An uniterrupted chain from the 1400's to this day is about to end.

[touchring]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Tibet can never be independent, if China doesn't take it, India will. Let's not forget India has taken one of the Tibetan nations - Sikkim. I been there a decade ago and it is distinctively Tibetan with an alien Hindu population that migrated there over the years and is now dominant over the Tibetan minority.

This is a tug of war between China and India. China having the historical advantage that Tibet was ruled by the Manchurian government for 300 years.

[allenjs]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

Sorry, but your (CCP red) slip is showing.

Tibetans certainly have had a violent past - they had a military force comparable to Polish pancerny in the long ago past when Tibet's climate was more hospitable.

But that is totally irrelevant now.

What China is doing there is pure imperialism. That railroads are being built makes it no more right than Britain's White Man's Burden in India.

Yes, that's my point. What America is doing in Tibet is pure imperialism as well. I'm not judging, other than to ask that people call a spade a spade. At least China has some tenuous historical claim to the area, while America has none.

The cries of "cultural imperialism" sound like craven propaganda to me, when every ethnic Tibetan I know is at least as westernized as the Chinese people I know.

The Tibetans *will* be ruled -- the question is by whom. I'm not taking sides in this debate, I honestly don't care who rules them. But when people flame away on message boards and claim that the only proper ruler for Tibet is a slave-owning God-king cult leader, my discern-o-meter goes off. That isn't a cause that I can ever get behind.

To put it as succinctly as possible -- if turkmenistan or tibet end up ruled by some religious nuts, I don't lose any sleep over that. But when my fellow countrymen are out there campaigning on behalf of shariah in turkmenistan or some twisted perversion of buddhism in tibet, I wonder what the hell is wrong with them.

And it's all so very selective. Where are these people on the issue of genocide of Christians in Darfur, or when Christians were being persecuted in Serbia, or even on the issue of the Catholic cardinals in China?

As for your assertion that the 'average Chinese' has no reverence for free speech or assembly - the statistics on protests in China number in the thousands. The gigantic Internet monitoring efforts that China undertakes is equally damning.

So please stop trying to disguise your official Chinese government party line views by saying they're just yours.

This is the second time you are maliciously slandering me and accusing me of being a CCP rep in public. Ad Hominem attacks are a sure signal that someone lacks any real points of substance.

I've already given you some of my background. I have far more direct experience with this matter than you do, and I am not even taking a position -- simply pointing out that the western position is equally self-serving and manipulative. We saw how it turned out when Paulson said "the banks are fundamentally sound", yet we still believe everything the mouthpieces say about Tibet or Chinese political freedom?

It's sadly predictable that anyone who criticizes the U.S. policy on China will be completely dismissed as a brainwashed fool (since China apparently exercises complete mind-control of their citizens, as well as WASPs like me who visit more than once). But these folks never seem to think that the American propaganda machine results in brainwashed fools. And least of all do they imagine that a cult-leader God-king has any ability whatsoever to brainwash people.

If, on the other hand, you merely decried the sensationalist posturing undertaken by movie stars and what not, that I could agree with.

But the shameless manipulation of public opinion for personal self esteem gain does not itself make the cause unjust.

You are right. However, the eagerness of people to adopt the cause without knowing the slightest bit about it, does show that those people lack integrity. As does the inability to consider, for even a moment, that a cult leader might make a bad leader for a country. As does the inability to consider that one's own government might be wrong about some things, or that the average Chinese citizen might retain some slight ability to think for himself.

As I said, the vast majority of bumper-sticker warriors I've talked with have absolutely no real understanding of the history, religion, America's involvement, and have zero desire to try to understand any viewpoint which disconfirms their biases.

[allenjs]

Re: China May Press G-20 to Guard Its U.S. Assets

BTW, this thread has clearly veered off of the core topic, and seems to have degraded into a rhetorical debate, and I apologize for that. My intent was to let people form their own opinions by looking at a relatively unbiased third-party report, and to leave it at that. But I got a bit defensive when my personal integrity was questioned.

If anyone wants to discuss the topic further, you can PM me or e-mail personal e-mail. Despite the accusations, I am a rather patriotic guy who has spent years getting educated about this issue. Taking it offline lets us get back to the topics that iTulip is best at.

I owe a lot to this forum, as I completely got out of stocks in September-November of last year, and 5% in PM. And as I try to plan for future bumps in the road, the level of intelligence and experience of the posters here in filtering and analyzing news is invaluable. I would much rather have my contribution to the group be in finding interesting new reportage like Mega does, or giving perspective more related to financial and business model stuff that I know about. So, sorry for the tangent; carry on!