The Bear

It is.

It didn't need to be, but British politicians decided that it should be, and so there it is Fait accompli.

What’s more the way that Britain has gone under New Labour our only hope is to get ever closer with Europe.

I HATE the idea in principle and in fact but the alternative … well candidly there isn’t one other than find some way to grow bananas following the civil war that would break out.

As for Tibet, historically it was a part of what is in fact China, it now is once more. In any case it’s NONE of our business.

Olympic Flame

I would not make such a conclusion though Nazism have overlapping ideological ground with other forms of ethnonationalism. Nazism itself is rather "fluid" that some historians argue if Nazism itself is a concrete ideology or simply a manifestation of German politics by the Nazi party at the particular turning point in their history. Of course one can write volumes on that subject as well.

The point Im trying to make that whether in Tibet, Kosovo or Chechnya, a very large motivation for secessionist/separatist movement was due to ethnonationalism like sentiments regardless of the political nature, affluence/poverty of the host nation or whatever "moral or historical justification". This is often what common folks ignore or fail to realise. This is what "Free Tibet'' main advocates and supporters know but dont want to talk about it, or rephrase such sentiments in more political correct packages.

The Bear

So the Tibetans and the Kosovans and the Chechans are racist? Well well! Who would have ever thought it!

Olympic Flame

You have confused about the idea of a nation with other political concepts. Modern International relationship functions with nation states being the basic unit. This is also reflected in the way how international laws recognised by the UN are constructed.

Britian is a nation. EU is an international political and economic community. Tibet issues are internal affairs of China. Thats not something very hard to work out.

Olympic Flame

While it is different from racism we talk about in the west, ethnonationalist and the primary instigators of secessionist/separatist activities worldwide are definitely no friend of multicultrualism and in many circumstances oppose it.

22ANDUK

I drew a comparison to Tibert and Britain in this thread's original post.

As such those that argue the counter-side of Tibet being better under China and that there is more to the issue than meets the eye should only replace 'Britain' with 'Tibet' and 'China' with the 'EU'.

An outsider in fact could objectively argue that Britain is a generally pro-EU nation and had the choice to join and remain, that it is better off in the EU, and if it moan about the issue it is ungrateful.

As such it can be said that Britain voted in favour of membership of a European body in some form, and all the governments that have taken the country further and futher into Europe have all been elected or re-elected by the public. There has been a vocal grouping of opposition, but most of those that sit in all the democratcally elected bodies are pro-EU membership, and that there has never been a serious anti-EU movement or popular support in the form of real marches or protests.

Also it can be said that Britain has gained a lot from the EU - with generous funds for enviornmental, economic and community projects, enshrined rights for minorities, a larger market and employment pool as well a no longer being at war with its European neighbours.

Politics change when they come close to home.

Hartlepool

It was Germany that was dissatisfied with,and, at war with its neighbours,twice if I remember correctly and they are known for evermore as WW1 and WW2 in which the German agressors came in second.

Also,this country getting funds from the EU is a fraud and farse because the funds are in the form of repayments from monies we have donated to the EU to become and stay members.

Politics in this country and the EU have been corrupt for decades now,but,this is because the Conservatives,Labour and Lib-Dems turn a blind eye to it every single day,in fact,they unashamedly go out of their way to encourage it at every opportunity.

22ANDUK

Yeah I agree Hartelpool, just saying that the format of the arguments for the Chinese situation with Tibet can be applied to the EU and Britain. A Martian could land on Earth and objectively look at Britain's membership and history with the EU and see it as a willing member gaining a lot.

Olympic Flame

Huh? Where is the link in the deduction?

Thats a very generalised and unsourced description which I have nothing to say on a forum like this. Neither do I believe in the effectiveness of arguing technicality of sovereignty on an internet forum. All political force/powers had bloody history (surely I recognise the prosecution against millions including Tibetans as well in the great cultural revolution and previous civil wars). There are better ways to look at the future to benefit all regardless of race and religion in China rather than a story of Nazi Chinese trying to keep the Tibetan down version of image more fictional than Alice in Wonder Land.
There are two points I see about the Free Tibet Advocates.
1) They dont have a pragmatic and realistic version of the future for China or Tibet to best benefit the region and people rather than simple rhetoric.
2) Many of the arguments they brought forward are hyprocritical, fallacious and in some cases morally repulsive under detailed scrutiny.


Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, racial, religious or national group. Unless you believed that Beijing has a timetable and constructed plans to wipe out the Tibetans, genocide is no way relevent.

Would they be better or worst off? Tibet has been part of the greater China empire historically. Unless you believe that an independent landlocked economy controlled by system of serfdom would be better, it would be worthwhile to resist. It was not a "moral justification", just some plained reality.


He changed his mind. He believed in higher autonomy instead of total independence as he believed that Tibet as a nation with poor infrastructrue locked between India and China will not survive. Sincere or not I dont know. Surely it makes sense.


It was a digression to illustrate hyprocrisy of the Universalism in Imperialism conducted by leaders in Washinton and unelected ones in Brussels.



A good question but what has it to do with Tibetan independence?


Medical assistance. The infant mortality rate and life expectancy cant magically change on its own.
Infrastructure assistance. Buildings, railways and schools dont root from nowhere. Thats why Im more focused on current hard statistics rather than decades ago of personal accounts from exiles if you are interested in the future of the region.



What about anti-Chinese immigration claims? They were based on "Tibetans against Chinese" mentality. Look at your source in the immigration part. Free Tibet Campaign - Major Allegations: Key Facts on the Chinese Occupation of Tibet You said Chinese should pay a high prize for the occupation only then they will "release" Tibet.

We could spend days debating on "illegality" issue or accounts of the suffering of people in China, be it Tibet or other parts of China under communist rule decades ago.
But on the end of the discussion, little support a rationale conclusion of a better China or Tibet or people of China for a independent Tibet.

Olympic Flame

What about the British invasion of Tibet and the great game she played against Tscar russia?


Why do you need to end segregation and promote equality in a communist country if you know what communism stands for?


But you said:"Further, I would suggest that anybody who acts as an appologist for an illegal invasion of an independent nation and subsequent genocide is probably not best placed to start questioning others on what 'the spirit of human rights and democracy' means! " Enforcing an consensus through rhetoric is against the idea of scrutinizing Free Tibet movement.



I believe that unless the advocates can prove or even try to show that Indepence is good for China and Tibet and all people regardless of faith or skin colour, I cant believe they have formed a rationale and mature view of complex issues.

You talked about the so called crimes but you are not talking about paying reparations to Tibetans. You talked about Tibetans should form an independent nation. You talked about ethicially Chinese civilians in Tibet should go home and leave Tibet which is only for Tibetans. There is not much different from the teaching of Free Tibet Movement.

It does not mean that Tibetan independence will be a win-win situation for all.
I said pages ago I had no disillusionment about China. Certain ideas of control and stability in a vast populous dveloping nation is not in line with many libertarians here. It is not about pointing fingers at the time being but what free Tibet is really about.
Tell me a nation that supports its secessionist movement.
Even USA kept control of guatemala prisoners out of constitutional control when it regrads terrorism as a threat.
Welcome to the world of realpolitik.

If we believe in your logic of "historical justice" assuming your past account of CCp's opression being largely proven true and thus Tibet shall be independent with Chinese settlements being sent back to the East, I think the modern English all the more could very well be in a simlar position. Not only a large of them should go back to modern Denmark, they should share a colletive guilt and promote the establishment of a new nation solely by the Celtic settlers( if there exist a significant number of them in the south and wales) on English soil. Of course you will know the humour if you study about the Anglo-Saxon conquests and the founding of England for it had been for more "oppressive" than Apartheid South Africa.