I am a ardent supporter of tibetan people's rights. I would like bloggers support also to various hindu causes like poverty stricken hindu priests rehabilitation in rural andhra,rescuing brahmin priests from persecution in TN etc

I need an invite to these DC meetups.

I am just wondering, if India were in China's situation would we still rally?

There's a world of a difference between let's say the Kashmiri separatism in India and the Tibetan one in China. In short the Tibetans' grievances are very legitimate while the Kashmiris' are not. I know I should elaborate on this but I won't. It'll misdirect the the thread.

I wasn't eluding to Kashmir at all, I was just wondering, hypothetically, if India had a past of human rights violations and was a country that had undergone major reform and on the rise ready to set foot into the big boy's club by hosting the Olympics, would Indian-Americans use the Olympic torch relay as an opportunity to protest currently looming human rights issues?

I would protest, but I was wondering if ethnic ties would override nationalism.
Vigil sounds nice, wish I lived in SF or DC.

I support Tibetan nationalism, but I don't support these protests. It's not "Beijing's Bloody Torch" they are snatching, it's the Olympics torch, and that should transcend all this. Think of all the black athletes who embarrassed Hitler himself and the Nazis at the Berlin '38 games. Read up on Jesse Owens here.

There are much more relevant however less symbolic ways of protesting against China or for Tibet.

I don't buy everyone's outrage over China. nobody protested the United States hosting the olympics with such vehemence. Their five year occupation of iraq is far more bloody than the fifty year occupation of Tibet, which does have some legitimacy - (an independent Tibet is about as meaningful, probably less so, as an independent Quebec. Far less Tibetans have been killed than Kashmiris by India). The US also holds captive a larger proportion of its citizens than does China, including almost half its blacks.

You're all being duped. It's the same outrage against a colored country's rise to superpower status that has been in force for the past 100 years.

flupping sheep you are.

6 · SSK said

It's not "Beijing's Bloody Torch" they are snatching, it's the Olympics torch, and that should transcend all this... There are much more relevant however less symbolic ways of protesting against China or for Tibet.

Word and thank you.

I am just wondering, if India were in China's situation would we still rally?

Well, more importantly, you are a person of Indian origin (I assume) as opposed to one of Chinese ancestry. India's security concerns are better addressed if Tibet is independent as opposed to China breathing down India's neck across such a large border. Thus even if you discount all other reasons like human rights, the nature of the occupation etc etc, this itself should be a reason to desire Tibetan autonomy which if an India was in China's situation, then China would be in India's and would desire the same.

You're all being duped. It's the same outrage against a colored country's rise to superpower status that has been in force for the past 100 years.

Again, that country of color does not care too much about is country of color.

9 · Ardy said

which if an India was in China's situation, then China would be in India's and would desire the same.

But we would still be Indian so that doesn't really answer the question of whether an Indian-American would protest against his or her country of origin in the U.S. I realize that the Olympic Games are a political vehicle and that's that. If I were a Chinese-American in SF tomorrow I wonder if I would be protesting, but I do know I would feel guilty living in the U.S. and not protesting at such a highly publicized event when fellow protesters in China are being punished for the same.

7 · noblekinsman said

nobody protested the United States hosting the olympics with such vehemence. Their five year occupation of iraq is far more bloody than the fifty year occupation of Tibet, which does have some legitimacy - (an independent Tibet is about as meaningful, probably less so, as an independent Quebec. Far less Tibetans have been killed than Kashmiris by India). The US also holds captive a larger proportion of its citizens than does China, including almost half its blacks.

How does the hypocrisy you are pointing out negate the justification for such protests?

What is "meaningful" about an occupied Tibet that would not benefit the region were it, as it has historically been, not part of China?

if India had a past of human rights violations and was a country that had undergone major reform and on the rise ready to set foot into the big boy's club by hosting the Olympics, would Indian-Americans use the Olympic torch relay as an opportunity to protest currently looming human rights issues?

nobody protested the United States hosting the olympics with such vehemence. Their five year occupation of iraq is far more bloody than the fifty year occupation of Tibet

I support Tibetan nationalism, but I don't support these protests. It's not "Beijing's Bloody Torch" they are snatching, it's the Olympics torch, and that should transcend all this. Think of all the black athletes who embarrassed Hitler himself and the Nazis at the Berlin '38 games. Read up on Jesse Owens here.

* In 1976 (Montreal), all the countries in Africa boycotted the Olympics when New Zealand, whose rugby team had toured apartheid South Africa (banned since 1964 from the Olympics), participated.
* In 1980 (Moscow), sixty six countries boycotted the Olympics because of the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan.
* That same year, Taiwan boycotted the Lake Placid Olympics when asked to compete under the Chinese flag as one team.
* In 1984, the USSR and Eastern Bloc countries retaliated against the Moscow boycott by refusing to participate in the Los Angeles games. Let's not pretend that the Olympics are a special exception to political protest.

While I agree that there are many causes that deserve attention and protest, I do not agree with the logic that one should not go out in protest over this particular cause just because no one protested over some other important cause. It makes no sense.

In addition, the Olympics are not just about sports and have not been just about sports for decades. It has always been political and more about commercial interest than sportsmanship. Why shouldn't pro-Tibet groups use the massive publicity generated by the Olympics to advance their cause? The time is right. In fact, Burma groups in Thailand will also be using the Olympics as a platform to highlight the atrocities of 8th August 1988 and China's backing of the junta there. I am all for hijacking the Olympics in the name of human rights!

There will be a demonstration in Bangkok when the torch gets here on the 19th of April - so far the pro-Tibet rallies here have been small but loud, and hopefully any Bangkok desis reading this will come out in support.

I apologize for my previous cynicism. It was temporary and I have since reverted to my original position that these protests are indeed a good thing.
I was deriding the protestors for going only for symbolic effect, but sadly that is all they can do and can't realistically affect things like their nations' economic cooperation with China. I failed to see that the Jesse Owens thing was only symbolic and did nothing to stem the tide of Nazism, and it could be argued that it would have hurt Hitler more if the world had isolated Germany then.

What I find really interesting is that the police reaction to these protests is making the rest of the world look like China.

I live in San Francisco, and I attended the protest, the speech and candlelight vigil. I proudly waved and held the Tibetan flag high and voiced my support for a "Free Tibet".

I went to show my solidarity with the Tibetan people, to stand up and to be counted, to protest human rights violations and to non-violently raise my voice and my consciousness.

Right now I feel tired, my back hurts, my shoulders hurt, and my feet are numb. But inside, I feel a sense of calm and peace within myself.
Ultimately, we should do whatever helps us sleep well at night, and I will definitely sleep well tonight.

You can choose to ignore this issue, you can choose to support it silently within your conscious, you can dismiss it, discuss it, stand for it.
Again, whatever helps you sleep well at night.

It only takes a few searches on youtube to see the struggles of the Tibetan people, read about the abduction(and disappearance) of the 6 year old Panchen lama by Chinese authorities , to watch a monk starve himself for six days and on the seventh day, set himself on fire, or to watch Tibetan people being shot at as they try to escape. You can even watch a NewYork cop say "om mani padme hum" on a loudspeaker to the Tibetans who were protesting there recently. Those words mean "I honor the jewel in the lotus/heart of humans". Sweet cop.

Having visited Dharamsala and being aware of the solidarity that our country, India, has shown to Tibetans, Nepalese and Bhutanese people in the past, only makes me prouder to be an Indian and stand by them in their hour of need. I'd love for the current Indian government to remember this past and do the right thing and not worry about economic consequences. I'd love to see the Chinese people wake up and not let themselves be brainwashed by propaganda, and to realize that Tibetans love them, but are protesting against the government and not the people of China.

I was just wondering, hypothetically, if India had a past of human rights

What do you mean in the past? India is TODAY the worst violator of human rights in the world. It leads the world in child slavery, child prostitution, child malnutrition etc. Is that not a violation of the rights of children? Then there is the culture of untouchability, widow shunning the hereditary caste system and so on. Not to mention the occupation by force of Kashmir and the tibeto-burmese northeastern states.

The west today couldnt care less about India or indians. It is far more concerned with Africa, China and the Middle East. But that will change someday and the hypocrisy and shamelessness of indians pointing fingers at others will become front page news.

In response comment posted by Vyasa, here is a link to a Human Rights Watch statement made a couple days ago calling for the UN Human Rights Council to tackle India's rights record, specifically in the northeast and Jammu-Kashmir: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/04/07/india18442.htm. I posted it in the News section of this site earlier today.

noblekinsman

You are so misguided, its kinda funny. First of all, protesting the US over Iraq is no option because they are not holding the Olympics. When you question the legitimacy of Tibetan Independence and compare it to Kashmir, we should understand that what Indian armed forces did/does in Kashmir deserves as much an uproar as Tibetan Independence, and this is coming from an Indian. And it is not about color either brother, it is about a people who have a large population displaced and a larger population which is supressed.

And also it does not matter what the US does, the policies of the American government should not become the guideline for other nations.

Tibet is 'in' right now, and will be till the Olympics are over. After the hype is over, the situation will be back to as it was, Tibetans crossing into India by the thousands, getting shot at at and Tibetans becoming a minority in their own country along with the state sponsored erosion of an ancient culture.

What the protesters aim of achieving by protesting is creating an awareness of the situation in Tibet.

If you have lived side by side with Tibetans in India, it becomes much more easier to understand their situation and their demand for their homeland.

To top it all of, the disrespect the Chinese (not just the government even the Chinese people), show for The Dalai Lama is outrageous. It is like disrespecting th Pope or any other religious leaders.. The attitude of the Chinese towards the Dalai Lama just adds to the feeling of oppression.

And yes never forget Gedhun Choekyi Nyima.

It is great that these protests are casting the international spotlight on Tibet (although, somehow, all the other widespread human rights abuses in China seem to be a non-issue), and maybe some countries will do something symbolic like choosing to boycott the games, or something even more vacuous, like not participate in the opening ceremonies. But the sad reality in today's world is that these gestures are ultimately mere showboating (as parodied quite effectively by Colbert) and will be forgotten by every one of us the moment we see our $1.99 pack of 12 tube socks at the neighborhood Walmart. Three cheers for the power of free markets!

The Tibetan qustion is not just about Human Rights violation. The difference with USA or India is that it would be possible to stage a protest in these countries against Human Rights Violations any day of the year. The Olympics is the only time when you can protest against Human Rights Violations in China, without the communist government being able to do anything. Keep the protest coming!

On the question would I pprotest if it was India, yes I would and I do, so do many Indians every day of the year. Have you not een all the demonstrations in India?!

I support Tibetan nationalism, but I don't support these protests. It's not "Beijing's Bloody Torch" they are snatching, it's the Olympics torch, and that should transcend all this.

SSK, China is going to run the Olympic Torch through Tibet as if it were part of China. So the Chinese are using the Olympics to help cement the idea that Tibet is fully integrated with China. It's not as if the Tibetan nationalists are sullying the pure non-political Olympics. Besides, remember the American boycott of the Moscow Olympics in 1980? Or the killing of Israeli athletes in Munich? The Olympics are political.

To top it all of, the disrespect the Chinese (not just the government even the Chinese people), show for The Dalai Lama is outrageous. It is like disrespecting th Pope or any other religious leaders..

No, it's like refusing to recognize the ruler of Tibet, whose power they usurped.

Their five year occupation of iraq is far more bloody than the fifty year occupation of Tibet

This I highly doubt.

Chinese-American here. Gonna chime in "our" side since the comments all seem neutral or anti.

In this case Western intelligence incited a violent riot that killed 22 civilians and burned 200 buildings or so. It is understood the CIA funds the Tibetan government in exile and sent Tibetan-American operatives to organize this affair. (The funding is openly documented in CIA fronts such as Freedom House. The role of U.S.-trained Tibetan-Americans I read about at Rediff.com three or four days ago.)

Some readers here may genuinely care about the Tibetans. Western intelligence agencies do not; they use the Tibetans as tools.

The neocons incited the Chechens against the Russians in the 1990s, various minority uprisings against Iran's Persian 52% majority since 2001, and did all they can to foment a civil war between the Kurdish-Sunni-Shite triad in Iraq.

It is plain divide-and-conquer.

India is lucky to have Russia, Iran, and China as its "outter gates", so to speak, to absorb these neocon power moves.

If it were not us, they would just as soon divide-and-conquer India. Consider the Tibet situation, where pacifist minority of just .5% can be made to riot. It would be a cinch in India with the Muslims and various castes and regional ethnicities.

It is known the CIA tried to splinter India during the Cold War.

They don't care if you're a "democracy" or not, only whether a country exercises sovereign power.

Their real argument against the CCP of China (of which I'm no fan of), is that authoritarian governments are much more difficult for the CIA to infiltrate behind the scenes, to bribe a political party, open a medium outlet, etc. The CIA has applied these same tactics in every color-revolution since 2000: Lebanon, Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgystan. To those one can add the failed color-revolutions in Uzbekistan and Belarus.

I think this is clear from the neocon-written National Security Strategy 2002;2006 which states the objective of global hegemony.

My convoluted argument is, India sits a decades-long geopolitical sweet spot because all U.S. containment effort is exerted elsewhere. So long as the world is multipolar India can extract favorable conditions from the U.S. It can "play the other poles off", so to speak.

Were the world not multipolar, India may expect the same type of hostilty and creeping containment from the US that Russia receives today.

India is safest in a muti-polar world. So is China, and Russia, for that matter. Therefore, I argue that each should, if not support each other, express neutrality.

5 year occupation of Iraq bloodier than 50 years occupation of Tibet, what a nutcase! Still you are free to protest against the Iraq war any time you want, it's done by high ranked politicians in the US regularly. The Olympic games however is used to cement the idea of Tibet as an integral part of China, and no protests is allowed. That is why these actions are so important.

22 · Han said

Chinese-American here. Gonna chime in "our" side since the comments all seem neutral or anti.
...

I really appreciate you writing this, and bringing a different point of view. I read your post, and it was quite insightful.
I agree that a multipolar world is better (and a united world would be the best, but not happening in my lifetime)

However, I don't agree that neutrality helps solve anything. It only keeps things surface-peaceful and pseudo-balanced and prolongs the impending.
I don't think the world hates the Chinese people. They hate the government. Just like they hate the current US government.
The former regime has got to change. The latter is changing this year. Vote.

I don't buy everyone's outrage over China. nobody protested the United States hosting the olympics with such vehemence. Their five year occupation of iraq is far more bloody than the fifty year occupation of Tibet, which does have some legitimacy

As an American, I would support similar international protests during the torch relay if an American city were hosting the Olympics. Our war in Iraq is a crime and that should be publicized at every opportunity. So I also don't have a problem with pro-Tibet protesters doing the same.

Holy Mandala!

India is lucky to have Russia, Iran, and China as its "outter gates", so to speak, to absorb these neocon power moves.

Fantastic morning so far - a doughnut, cuppa coffee and a threadful of nonsense!

Han

We do want a multi-polar world but also one in which people can express their feelings without fear. Do you really think that the chinese authoritarian system is making it safer or stronger? Its the opposite actually - and, yes, when you are weak or enemies will attack. And the CIA does have a history of fishing around wherever it can.

The chinese political system is too closed and information given to its citizens is biased and incomplete. Why is google censored in china? Why is it a crime to own a picture of the Dalai Lama in Tibet? These are very poor ways of trying to control political thinking - maybe its OK if the whole country is starving and at war and economic progress is the only thing that is needed. But is that the case in China today?

No country is "good" vs. "bad". The indian govt deserves huge criticism for some its actions in Kashmir and NE India. But you can express these criticisms in India. The US govt has made a monumental blunder with 10's of thousands killed in Iraq - you can see the demonstrations in US and impact on US elections. So the question is why the chinese govt policy in Tibet - which has caused 10s of thousands of deaths over last 50 years - should be exempt from criticism?

Although India may have some issues on the human rights side of things, it is nowhere close to the worst violator as I could probably think of a dozen countries easily right now that are far worse. The issue with Tibet is very complicated, and I know most people in America learned about it from watching Brad Pitt in 7 Years in Tibet, but it's not as easily wrapped up as that.

Look, I'm a fan of the underdog. I always find myself rooting for the long shot; hell, I've voted Libertarian at times. The bottom line is that while I am OK with the idea of these protests (freedom of speech), I think that people need to remember that A) China is not a monster, even if her government has a bit of a heavy hand from time to time and B) although I would concede that unfortunately the Olympics has become politicized, no country is totally innocent and we run the risk of every year boycotting or otherwise protesting where the games are held.

So to conclude: people are free to protest, but we should respect the sanctity of the torch and what it represents.

So the question is why the chinese govt policy in Tibet - which has caused 10s of thousands of deaths over last 50 years - should be exempt from criticism?

it shouldn't be. But I think what han is pointing out is that one should be aware that organized protests are often "used" by the U.S. government--who, and here I agree with han, have no special love for tibetans--for its own purposes (witness the situation of the kurds, currently a u.s. favorite in iraq, but who were routinely sold to be butchered--first by turkey, then by saddam--when it suited U.S. interests). So one should be aware of the foreseeable implications of large organized protests. This is however, not to say that protests should not happen, but only that the protest strategy should be rethought. It is also true that in international relations there are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests.

Not to be cynical, but what will this protest do? The U.S. will stay go to the Olympics regardless.

Han,
What multi-polar world are you talking about? The one where China sold ring magnets to Pakistan and allowed them access to nuclear technology to threaten India with,or the one in which China keeps claiming Arunachal and Sikkim while saying "Tibet is an integral part of China" or the one in which China occupies Aksai Chin?. Indians are skeptical of the Chinese government and anybody who supports it and rightly so.

As far as the neo-con conspiracy theories go, do you have any proof of these. India's interest is best served by a friendly neighborhood with countries that look to cooperate and work with it, not looking to run it down. Unfortunately that is not the case now, our biggest threats are in our neighborhood and not from far away America. Therefore, we have no use for the "multi-polar" arrangement. It is not like India with its castes and muslims as you claim, as these castes and muslims were not forcibly occupied by India, unlike China occupied Tibet. China moved in and occupied Tibet without any reason or provocation.

And as Al-beruni says, countries get criticized for their real or alleged rights violations, why should China be exempt from criticizm?

@Vyasa,
India is the worst violator huh? Maybe you should spend more time in countries like Haiti,Bangladesh, the whole continent of Africa, or China. You will see what REAL human rights abuse is. If you think India is so bad you are free not to visit India and renounce your Indian citizenship (assuming you are a citizen).

Han , Google Yasin Malik and India Today. The former was a gun toting anti-India militant [islamic terrorist in my opinion] who now preaches the Gandhian way; the latter is the Indian version of the Time and Newsweek magazine.
Last month, India Today invited Malik to address its annual forum, where the who is who of the global elite were speaking, including members of the Indian Govt.
Now, can you imagine a Chinese news outlet affording the Dalai Lama such a platform?

Seccessionist movements are nothing new to India and at any given point in time, there are a number of those going on in India. Indian government's response to those vary from reasonable to outright brutal in some extreme cases.
But Indian policy has never been to resettle the seccessionist areas with different ethnic people. That policy is not even on the table. That is the difference between China's response to Tibet and India's responses to Indian flare ups.

Han - If America is, as you claim, really worse than China, Iran and Pakistan [India's shield], one wonders why you chose to live there and not, China, Pakistan or Iran?

Oh Han, you took so many words to say so very little. Do you seriously believe that stuff? I'm sure playing people off each other is good for Indian interests, but, please.

Some people who protest care about the Tibetans and some people want to give the Chinese a good bloody nose, PR-wise. Why? Lots of reasons, but the best one is protesting human's right abuses and authoritarianism. China a bullwark for India against blood thirsty neocons? That's a good one. Sure, India can be as neutral as she wants but that's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about free peoples congregating to protest. And it's a beautiful thing.

*Oh, protest the Iraq War, too, if that's your want. See, this is what free peoples get up to.

Have a lovely, peaceful, and powerful protest SF'ers!

oh by the way, vyasa/prema is a troll (as many others have pointed out in different threads), please do not respond.

Han - Desidude has rightly pointed out in #31 about India's issues with China. If India's options are a China which has attacked India in the past, forcibly taken it's territories and claims more of them, supports India's other big problem Pakistan, has a track record of human rights violation and lack of free speech and the other option is a US who albeit is not to be trusted either but whose interests align with India's at the moment, why would an India be stupid to kiss a$$ when it comes to China.

Of course, this is not to say that there are sections in India which lean towards China and that the Indian Govt is weak and instead of using thw Tibet issue as a leverage and getting China to back off from Arunachal etc, we are following a policy of appeasing China without any benefits. Stupid that!

And yes, the Indian army has been accused of violations in the NE and Kashmir and I would like to see more transparency there and if the allegations are true, I would like the violations to stop.

Rahul wrote..
"Not to be cynical, but what will this protest do? The U.S. will stay go to the Olympics regardless"

--
Or , perhaps, this is Dubya's golden opportunity to redeem himself with a pacifist swan song.

Well, I don't know what it will specifically do for the Tibetans, but it will prevent the torch relay from being used as propaganda. Authoritarian regimes like that sort of thing, propaganda-wise.

India is the worst violator huh? Maybe you should spend more time in countries like Haiti,Bangladesh, the whole continent of Africa, or China. You will see what REAL human rights abuse

Lumping China with India, Bangladesh, Haiti etc is absurd and ignorant. Chinese children go to schools. They are not forced to work as bonded slaves or prostitutes as so many millions are in India. And even subsaharan Africa does a better job feeding its children than India does. Which is a more fundamental right: the right to food, clean water, sanitation facilities or the right to vote in a democracy? Thumping your chest over India's imitated (and failed) political system is not going to feed its hungry children or give dignity to its untouchables and widows, is it? Get your priorities straight.

Regarding the torch and "neutral" or "universal" ideals of sport it is supposed to represent: the torch was a marketing ploy first put into play by the Nazis for the Berlin olympics. Good summary here:

the argument that sport can be made entirely free of politics is not sustainable.

Han:

India is safest in a muti-polar world. So is China, and Russia, for that matter. Therefore, I argue that each should, if not support each other, express neutrality

True dat. The neocon fantasies of a hegemonic American Empire have gone up in smoke thanks to the disaster in Iraq and the economic meltdown. A strong China and Russia counter the "white (anglo) man's burden" of ruling the world . Too many indians on the other hand, both fake leftist liberals and fake right-wing nationalist jingos, still cling to the vain hope that the anglosaxons will use them as sepoys and slaves in their "war on terror" and their "containment" of China. They just cannot imagine a world in which their masters are not dominant. Even the thought terrifies them. This fear comes from a very deep rooted lack of self-confidence and self-respect.

38 · Neale said

Rahul wrote..

Neale, that Rahul isn't me, btw.

During the 1999 kargil conflict, one the first units to enter combat were the "Ladakh Scouts" who are over 90% ethnic Tibetan.

They did this because they knew the terrain and did not need the 3 days of acclimatization the rest of the Indian army needed to fight at 10,000 feet.

They also took 15:1 casualties.

When all the talking is done, the one who does the fighting and dying for you is your true friend.

Now you, the SF mutineers are standing up for your Tibetan cousins. Shabaash !!!

43 · Rahul said

38 · Neale said

Rahul wrote..

Neale, that Rahul isn't me, btw.

This multi-headed-Rahul will start attracting the faithful.

In response to 33, RC

You do realize that much of the Northeast where separatism is a factor is actively being resettled by Bengali immigrants.

It's funny that many Indians piss and moan about China repressing Tibetans when Indian policy towards it's own Himalayan minorities is not dissimilar.

Jing

First, of all, property rights of minorities are protected in many parts of india. You cannot buy property in Kashmir, Nagaland, Mizoram etc if you are an outsider. Second, if there are problems, such as too many bengali/bihari immigrants, you are free to protest. Often there are protests, sometimes even violent, but still people are free to express difference of opinion and demand change.

Do you understand the point here? No govt is perfect - US, India, China etc. All have committed errors and mistakes.

The question is - why is there no right to protest in China? Why is there repression and killing but unwillingness to discuss it? Why is it illegal to own a copy of Dalai Lama's picture? Why is Google censored in China?

Can you try to answer these specific questions? For some reasons no one wants to answer them.

whatever your viewpoints on this issue, at least you're able to read/express them in an open forum like this.

while i'm not really a mutineer, more of a sometimes-lurker, i wish i'd read this earlier. if anyone wants to join a group going to the protests, i work for amnesty and we're having people meet at our offices at 1663 mission. we're only here for another half hour or so, and then walking. we'll be there handing out signs and runner's bibs, though, so be on the lookout!

42 · Vyasa said

The neocon fantasies of a hegemonic American Empire have gone up in smoke thanks to the disaster in Iraq and the economic meltdown

Um. The economic meltdown isn't all of the right's fault. Have you ever heard about the Community Reinvestment Act?

http://townhall.com/columnists/JerryBowyer/2008/04/01/meet_barry_obama,_fair_housing_lawyer

http://townhall.com/columnists/JerryBowyer/2008/04/06/how_community_organizers_like_obama_created_the_subprime_crisis

Yea it must be all of the neocons fault (sarcasm).

Have fun with your boy Barry Obama.

Northeast where separatism is a factor is actively being resettled by Bengali immigrants.

@Desidude & Ardy

On the boundary issue
From afar, it seems like the claimants have "good faith" dispute arising because (1) the wasteland area was never demarcated, so objectively non one can really make a solid claim as to the exact boundary; (2) the disputed areas were never part of the core of either country; (3) they are not populated by the main ethnic group of either country. Obviously there are some on both sides who want 100% of the disputed area, others willing to settle it at 50-50 or whatever.

To me - as someone who knows little of the issue's history, the logical solution is to fix it at the current LOC, especially since the territories' value is relatively slight in the overall economic & security context. This could be done in 1 hour if both sides desired, given satellite mapping and exact lattitude/longitude.

Probably China, had I a say in running it, could even have much of the Tibetan plateau demilitarized of heavy weapons to alleviate India's security concerns. If the boundary dispute is settled nothing except border guards and maybe some light infantry are needed. (Basing stuff costs money, so it's win/win.)

Personally I don't know which side is impeding a final agreement. If it is the CCP holding things up it's because they probably don't recognize the importance of settling the issue to India. When I look at Rediff threads 1/3 are on the border disputes with Pakistan or China; on Xinhua threads, not so much.

Interesting. Just wrote a post on this very issue on my blog.

Protesting is a fundamental right, indeed a bounded duty, as my man, Benjamin Franklin would have said.

But I can't help but think that most of the protesers in London, Paris and SFO belong to the Che-T-shirt-wearing, bleeding-heart liberal segment who wouldn't think twice before purchasing any products of these brands sponsoring the Beijing Olympics:
http://en.beijing2008.cn/90/53/column211995390.shtml

Where were these guys when China was awarded the Olympics more than eight years ago? Also, have they spared a thought for the thousands of athletes whose dream it is to participate in these Games?

As Rahul mentioned, these people would choose EDLP (Every Day Low Prices) over FT (Free Tibet) in a heartbeat.

Sorry, I meant to post using my regular handle, 'Buzza'. Typed in my first name instead in post # 52. Apologies.

Vyasa,
Chinese children go to school. Oh boy,Gee what a revelation. I did not know that /sarcasm off
Now,
Have you heard of the brick kiln in China where thousands of children were held in slavery

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/18/news/china.php

Guess those children were just doing a little after school work I guess. Silly me

And why is comparing India to Bangladesh, haiti etc..absurd. You said India has the WORST human rights record, you did not say BAD, you said worst. Therefore, there should be nobody worse than India right?

Oops there goes that argument

@ Al beruni

We do want a multi-polar world but also one in which people can express their feelings without fear. Do you really think that the chinese authoritarian system is making it safer or stronger? Its the opposite actually - and, yes, when you are weak or enemies will attack. And the CIA does have a history of fishing around wherever it can.

The chinese political system is too closed and information given to its citizens is biased and incomplete. Why is google censored in china? Why is it a crime to own a picture of the Dalai Lama in Tibet? These are very poor ways of trying to control political thinking - maybe its OK if the whole country is starving and at war and economic progress is the only thing that is needed. But is that the case in China today?

I strongly suspect the main reason for continued censorship in China is precisely because the CIA & bought reporters run wild when restrictions are loosened. That sounds like paranoia to the average liberal American but it’s not.

Cynically, that’s probably the real reason why the US always badgers China on this issue – because such operations are no longer possible. That restrictions may hinder China’s citizens probably does not actually matter to them.

I’ll further play the devil’s advocate and claim that even with restrictions speech is *far* freer in China than in the US.

In the U.S., the *speech code* of political correctness forces one to pre-censor one’s word stream. This is highly irritating, at least to me.

I have traveled to China. You can say anything in everyday speech, including criticism of the government. Nobody cares. I’ve written analyses of problems with swathes of the government’s policies, including those pertaining to the Communist ideological core, and they’re posted online by mainstream research organizations in China. The government doesn’t care.

A professor could advocate all the usual human rights stuff in class and no one cares. In the U.S., choose the wrong word and the professor’s fired. Pick a particularly bad word his career’s over.

Someone in China would have to really go out of their way to get the government on their case, like open an activist organization and make repetitive, unsound arguments.

The activist arrests publicized on CNN (e.g. Harry Wu, Rebiya Kadeer), it turns out ~80-90% are on foreign intelligence payroll.

> But I can't help but think that most of the protesers in London, Paris and SFO belong to the Che-T-shirt-wearing, bleeding-heart liberal segment who wouldn't think twice before purchasing any products of these brands sponsoring the Beijing Olympics

Nah, sorry. If you were there at any of these protests, you'd clearly see that the people protesting were NOT the "Che" variety, including myself. Che was not a pacifist, and yesterday's rally was 100% non violent.

And for what its worth, When I heard that Coca Cola was sponsoring the torch run through Tibet, I clearly decided not to purchase Coca Cola again (It'd be good for my health anyway).
So, last night after the rally, when ordering some fast food, Seeing that "Coca Cola" and its posse of drinks were the only thing served at that place, I chose water.
I'm gonna follow this up with a letter to their PR department. American companies need to put ethics before capitalistic greed.

"bleeding-heart liberal" ?
Ok, I'll take that label. Whats wrong with having compassion?

Han, did you go to Tianmen Square with your T-shirt emblazoned with "Free Tibet"?

Oh, and needless to say, I am boycotting Orange Sesame Chicken as well.
Damnit! I loved that thing!

Nah, sorry. If you were there at any of these protests, you'd clearly see that the people protesting were NOT the "Che" variety, including myself. Che was not a pacifist, and yesterday's rally was 100% non violent.

Agreed. But rax, my point was not that these protests were violent. Hell, most people in the 'Che' variety are passive herbal tea drinkers who while away the hours discussing 'oppression' and 'free love' at places like Veggie-Planet in Cambridge (which is awesome, by the way).

My point was that a lot of these protesters are simply along for the ride, and are actually hurting the cause of the Tibetans by deflecting attention away from the real issues, which is Tibetans not getting their share of the economic pie that the Chinese are baking. His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, does not approve of such tactics and has categorically ruled out a boycott of the Olympics.

"bleeding-heart liberal" ? Ok, I'll take that label. Whats wrong with having compassion?

None at all. Except that my point was this 'compassion' is somewhat driven by wallets and brand loyalty. You passed on Coke (!), good on you. No, really.

Han,
The Communist propaganda must be very strong. So you have more free speech in China? Maybe the Falun Gong sect can have something to say on that. Oops, their organs have been harvested already. China bans google, has no independent private news channels in the mainland, that is not censored, bans foreign journals in Tibet except for a few doctored photoshoots, and you still claim that China is better in free speech.

US has a few problems with PC, but it nowhere compares to the censoring in China. Yeah the US badgers China as China tries to screw the US at every chance. Just a few days ago, a DOD official was caught trying to sell military secrets to China. Now the US is no angel and is a cynical, selfish power but so is everyone else. But there atleast one can protest (like against the iraq war) and call the president names without fear. When such a thing is possible in China, you can claim about freedom in China. Not till then.

And like Al-beruni asked,if China is so great and US is so evil why are you in the US?

I am just wondering, if India were in China's situation would we still rally?

Indian origin South Asian regional specialists in academia do nothing besides criticize India, so that pretty much answers your question. China specialists on the other hand urge "nuance & balance" in the examination of PROC. How else has a country that pushes Han monoculturalism and even spent money for scientific research "proving" that they developed from a separate branch of early humanity escape the fascist tag?

And like Al-beruni asked,if China is so great and US is so evil why are you in the US?

Look this is a bad argument; its like saying you cannot criticize a government or a state/regime unless you leave it. Han possibly likes living here, has friends and family here, but all that is completely irrelevant to his argument (flawed though they may be). This "like it or leave it" mentality is deeply authoritarian and uncomfortably smells like a commissar's line (or occasional lines from the rulers of Singapore when sometimes questioned about the lack of freedom).

Why is google censored in china?

Why are American businesses with catchy mission statements like "do no evil" operating in China?

Why did, until very recently, AT&T secretly provide direct access to its network to the NSA for monitoring internet traffic?

The reality is the people who are for the 'Free Tibet' movement have no clue how complex the issue is. Even the Dalai Lama acknowledges that the monk-aristocracy that ruled Tibet is something that should be left in the past. He has acknowledged that Tibet's future is as a part of China.

I do not like how China treats him and I think these protests only weaken his position, because it only antagonizes China.

China views the Olympic games as their 'coming out' and taking their rightful place in the world. They view it in the context of a nation with a history of being victimized by colonialism and western imperialism.

The people in this forum would balk at the mere suggestion of a vote of self-determination in Kashmir. How much sympathy do you all have for the descendants of the Princely states who want their territorial claims returned?

These protests are silly and show just how disconnected and out-of-touch westerners are with the changes going on in Asia.

@ Krish#$%,

The reality is the people who are for the 'Free Tibet' movement have no clue how complex the issue is.

Ok,enlighten us.

I do not like how China treats him and I think these protests only weaken his position, because it only antagonizes China.

China views the Olympic games as their 'coming out' and taking their rightful place in the world. They view it in the context of a nation with a history of being victimized by colonialism and western imperialism

While they go about doing the same to others

The people in this forum would balk at the mere suggestion of a vote of self-determination in Kashmir. How much sympathy do you all have for the descendants of the Princely states who want their territorial claims returned?

Umm,the plebistice for Kashmir is unnecessary as the, the legal ruler signed a document aggreeing to be a part of India. He did this as Pakistan invaded. Had Pakistan not invaded in 1948, Kashmir could very well be independent.As far as the princely states go, no sympathy as the ruled in those states as very happy to be a part of India. There are no protests in Hyderabad against being a part of India, clearly not in the case of Tibet. Besides, all the princely states had always been a part of "India" be the Mauryan or the Mughal empire. Going by your logic, CA and TX should be a part of Mexico right?

These protests are silly and show just how disconnected and out-of-touch westerners are with the changes going on in Asia.

No,this just shows how ignorant you are

@ sigh!
What I meant was Han's constant claim that China is better than the US. Therefore, my question was very relevant. If he thinks China so much better than the US, why stay here?. It is not authoritarian to point out hypocrisy. If you are a citizen of a country while claiming allegiance to another antogonistic country, you have no business staying in the first country (kinda like Tokyo Rose)

Oh, and needless to say, I am boycotting Orange Sesame Chicken as well.

Is this a serious comment, or parody?

The economic meltdown isn't all of the right's fault. Have you ever heard about the Community Reinvestment Act?

I don't want to derail the thread, but didn't want to leave this comment unchallenged, so just one note on it. Blaming predatory lending practices on the CRA - which made them illegal - is a humongous stretch and a fringe view probably being floated to avoid further legislation, the really serious problem has been the absolute lack of any sort of regulation of the mortage-backed securities market, based on a baseless argument of "market responsibility" which has been disproven time and time again. The estimates of the entire credit derivative market, and the nominal values of the CDS that the big banks are believed to hold, are staggering. Any sort of reasonable disclosure would never allows this mindblowing level of risk taking, which is now requiring massive bailouts on taxpayer money.

Desidude,

Your comments remind me of the following saying:

It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt :(

And why is comparing India to Bangladesh, haiti etc..absurd. You said India has the WORST human rights record, you did not say BAD, you said worst

Of course India has by far the WORST human rights record on earth. In what other country is 15% of the population considered untouchable by birth? Which country treats women and children as cruelly as India? Which country has such a high number of beggars? Which country has a higher malnutrition rate than the subsaharan region if not India (and Bangladesh)? Which country is home to more bonded labor? To more child slaves? To more child prostitutes (sanctioned by the majority religion even)? Read and weep if you have any shame at all:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/India3.htm

"With credible estimates ranging from 60 to 115 million, India has the largest number of working children in the world. Whether they are sweating in the heat of stone quarries, working in the fields sixteen hours a day, picking rags in city streets, or hidden away as domestic servants, these children endure miserable and difficult lives. They earn little and are abused much. They struggle to make enough to eat and perhaps to help feed their families as well. They do not go to school; more than half of them will never learn the barest skills of literacy. Many of them have been working since the age of four or five, and by the time they reach adulthood they may be irrevocably sick or deformed-they will certainly be exhausted, old men and women by the age of forty, likely to be dead by fifty.

Most or all of these children are working under some form of compulsion, whether from their parents, from the expectations attached to their caste, or from simple economic necessity. At least fifteen million of them, however, are working as virtual slaves.3 These are the bonded child laborers of India. This report is about them."

The practice of child debt servitude has been illegal in India since 1933, when the Children (Pledging of Labour) Act was enacted under British rule. Since independence, a plethora of additional protective legislation has been put in place. There are distinct laws governing child labor in factories, in commercial establishments, on plantations, and in apprenticeships. There are laws governing the use of migrant labor and contract labor. A relatively recent law-the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986-designates a child as "a person who has not completed their fourteenth year of age."10 It purports to regulate the hours and conditions of some child workers and to prohibit the use of child labor in certain enumerated hazardous industries. (There is no blanket prohibition on the use of child labor, nor any universal minimum age set for child workers.)11 Most important of all, for children in servitude, is the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 which strictly outlaws all forms of debt bondage and forced labor. These extensive legal safeguards mean little, however, without the political will to implement them. In India, this will is sorely lacking. All of the labor laws areroutinely flouted, and with virtually no risk of punishment to the offender. Whether due to corruption or indifference-and both are much in evidence-these laws are simply not enforced. In those rare cases where offenders are prosecuted, sentences are limited to negligible fines."

Why does India-the Indian government, the ruling elite, the business interests, the populace as a whole-tolerate this slavery in its midst? According to a vast and deeply entrenched set of myths, bonded labor and child labor in India are inevitable. They are caused by poverty. They represent the natural order of things, and it is not possible to change them by force; they must evolve slowly toward eradication.12

In truth, the Indian government has failed to protect its most vulnerable children. When others have stepped in to try to fill the vacuum and advocate on behalf of those children, India's leaders and much of its media have attributed nearly all "outside" attempts at action to an ulterior commercial motive. The developed world is not concerned with Indian children, this view holds, but rather with maintaining a competitive lead in the global marketplace. Holding to this defensive stance, some officials have threatened to end all foreign funding of child labor-related projects.

This nationalist rhetoric has been largely a diversionary tactic. What the government has hoped to hide is the news that, no matter how the data are analyzed, official efforts to end the exploitation of child laborers are woefully deficient"

"it is possible to end child servitude. The only thing lacking is will."

"It is not poverty which prevents India from investing more in its children, but rather the prejudices and values of those who create and implement policy in India.3"

The government's failure to enforce the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act and the government's failure to enforce the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act-not to mention the failure to enforce the several other laws protecting child workers-are twin manifestations of the same set ofphenomena. These phenomena include apathy, caste and class bias, obstruction of enforcement efforts, corruption, low prioritization of the problem, and disregard for the deep and widespread suffering of bonded child laborers.......From India's top labor officials all the way down to the local level, where tehsildars (community leaders) use their influence to support the status quo, Human Rights Watch and other researchers have found a profound lack of concern for the plight of bonded and child laborers."

Han

strongly suspect the main reason for continued censorship in China is precisely because the CIA & bought reporters run wild when restrictions are loosened. That sounds like paranoia to the average liberal American but it’s not.

also

The activist arrests publicized on CNN (e.g. Harry Wu, Rebiya Kadeer), it turns out ~80-90% are on foreign intelligence payroll.

This is pretty serious paranoia, as tho' every criticism is an enemy in the payroll of the bad-bad USA. If you believe you have enemies everywhere, even when you are prospering and doing well, then all I can say is that this is an unbalanced view. i cannot agree with it.

Anyway, thanks for responding to my questions, I do appreciate that courtesy.

from msm...British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will skip the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics.

He became the second major world leader after German Chancellor Angela Merkel to decide to stay away from the opening ceremonies, although Brown’s office insisted Wednesday that he was not boycotting the Olympics and would attend the closing ceremony.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said last month that he was debating not attending the opening ceremony.

YEAH!

31 · Desidude said

@Vyasa,
India is the worst violator huh? Maybe you should spend more time in countries like Haiti,Bangladesh, the whole continent of Africa, or China. You will see what REAL human rights abuse is. If you think India is so bad you are free not to visit India and renounce your Indian citizenship (assuming you are a citizen).

Vyasa might well be a troll, and I can understand your being a tad upset at his/her comments, but do try not to drag us Bangladeshis down in your passionate defence of India. I don't mean to suggest that we don't have human rights abuses, but we've never seen anything like say, the Gujarat riots.

My point was that a lot of these protesters are simply along for the ride, and are actually hurting the cause of the Tibetans by deflecting attention away from the real issues, which is Tibetans not getting their share of the economic pie that the Chinese are baking.

This is correct. The pictures and videos from Lhasa show a city that looks more modern and developed with a far better infrastructure than any Indian city or town, so China is certainly growing the economic pie in Tibet. The same cannot be said about the tibeto-burmese states under Indian occupation. The fact that the tibetan rioters and looters targeted stores and businesses owned not only by han chinese but also hui muslims shows that the root cause of their grievance is economic. Tibetan culture isnt very mercantile so the locals are losing the economic competition. China will probably have to implement some sort of affirmative action for ethnic tibetans to address their grievances.

His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, does not approve of such tactics and has categorically ruled out a boycott of the Olympics.

True. The Dalai Lama has also ruled out independence for Tibet. He just wants some autonomy though which China is unwilling to relinquish.

Good anti Chinese and few anti US comments, our world is ruled by media, and most of them are run by big corporate CEO's who in turn are mostly Westerners, u name it FOX, BBC, CNN on and on, well to cut it short media has agenda and that is West is Best, downplaying other countries is biggest ammunition in US arsenal and I bet they play it pretty well, India becomes target for human rights in Kashmir, Russia becomes target for being communist and locking up oil tycoons, Cuba is ugly due to Fediel castro and so called illicit drugs, let me clarify US has more human rights violations, go see Lancaster's Loma Linda prison, these are the people who are in lock up for immigration violation, have you heard of china having prison only for immigration violations, read the following website http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/10041.php

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will skip the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics.

He became the second major world leader after German Chancellor Angela Merkel to decide to stay away from the opening ceremonies, although Brown’s office insisted Wednesday that he was not boycotting the Olympics and would attend the closing ceremony.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said last month that he was debating not attending the opening ceremony.

YEAH!

Big frickin' deal. I for one do not give a rat's ass whether these western leaders avoid the opening ceremonies or not, as long as the show goes on. The Beijing Olympic Games is likely to be the most spectacular event in the history of mankind. It will be unforgivable if the West, out of sheer jealousy of China's rise, somehow manages to ruin it for the rest of the world.

BTW, just the fact that such an unprecedented number of world leaders are planning to be in the stands for these Olympics shows how momentous this event is recognized as.

74 · Vyasa said

. The Beijing Olympic Games is likely to be the most spectacular event in the history of mankind.

What about the time Marsha beat Greg in that driving contest with the egg? That was pretty cool.

The Beijing Olympic Games is likely to be the most spectacular event in the history of mankind.

I personally enjoyed the Tiananmen Square Massacre much more.

76 · Rahul said

I personally enjoyed the Tiananmen Square Massacre much more.

how beorgoise. i prefer the cultural revolution.

74 · Vyasa said

The Beijing Olympic Games is likely to be the most spectacular event in the history of mankind.

Whether you mean spectacular in reference to its magnitude or literally in reference to the sensational and symbolic/ideological impact of the event, this is pretty over the top.

How is it over the top? Do you doubt that thanks to technology modern spectacles are more impressive than anything in history? China has shown that it can put on a helluva show as it did during the Hong Kong handover a decade ago. They will be going gang busters for the 3 plus hour opening ceremony in a hugely impressive brand new modernistic stadium. I fully expect this to be the most spectucular show of all time.

However, pollution is the one thing that could mar these games.

79 · Vyasa said

Do you doubt that thanks to technology modern spectacles are more impressive than anything in history?

The world moved to contact lenses a couple of decades ago.

so China is certainly growing the economic pie in Tibet.

And everybody knows that just like omelets, you cannot make pies without breaking a few hands. And legs. And heads. And dispensing with any semblance of due process. And without being the world's leader in executions.

The San Francisco torch relay was a spectacle all right!

After its parade was rerouted and shortened to prevent disruptions by massive crowds of anti-China protesters, the planned closing ceremony at the waterfront was canceled and moved to San Francisco International Airport. The flame was put directly on a plane and was not displayed.

Which, of course, brings you to that age old Taoist dilemma: If you throw a party so secret that nobody knows about it, does it count as a success?

Hey Rahul, maybe you should try to talk the chinese into using you as a clown during the opening ceremonies. Its not too late. Dressed in a red dhoti and nothing else, caste marks on your forehead, waving your spindly arms spastically, bobbing your coconut-oiled head, while cracking silly jokes incessantly in a high pitched voice, you could make the event even more memorable :)

69 · Al beruni said

Han

strongly suspect the main reason for continued censorship in China is precisely because the CIA & bought reporters run wild when restrictions are loosened. That sounds like paranoia to the average liberal American but it’s not.

also

The activist arrests publicized on CNN (e.g. Harry Wu, Rebiya Kadeer), it turns out ~80-90% are on foreign intelligence payroll.

This is pretty serious paranoia, as tho' every criticism is an enemy in the payroll of the bad-bad USA. If you believe you have enemies everywhere, even when you are prospering and doing well, then all I can say is that this is an unbalanced view. i cannot agree with it.

Anyway, thanks for responding to my questions, I do appreciate that courtesy.

Al beruni: I do not mean 80-90% of critics are foreign-funded -- only that percentage of arrested activists who receive CNN-level coverage are. My estimate's based on 10-15 years of empirical observation rather than mental illness.

Regarding media, the CIA has had a global purview going back to its early 1940s days. They operated globally in practically every country larger than Antigua by 1960. It's also generally known that upon entering a country they aggressively build or buy media access. (See Color Revolutions where they often build a media infrastructure from naught to back a candidate. Ominously, this media infrastructure remains in place for future use.)

Personally I can't consider this paranoia. It's just how things work.

Yes Prema but do you still look like this?

caste marks on your forehead

Oh Vyasa, that sounds so tempting. But I think I'll pass, I hear their caste marks have lead paint in them. And as you so astutely observed, the pollution there is the one teeny thing that's a real bitch.

I think I'll pass, I hear their caste marks have lead paint in them.

Dude you heard wrong, they dont make caste marks. They will let you bring your cow dung with you :)

66. Rahul said

Oh, and needless to say, I am boycotting Orange Sesame Chicken as well.

Is this a serious comment, or parody?

Vyasa, you are so right! Given China's flourishing child labor system (and this was just 2005, they've surely made even greater strides since!), an exploitative high-caste like myself should naturally feel at home with the similarly inclined communist overlords.

And I concede that you are a far better clown than I can ever aspire to be, so I won't get in your way any more while you use this thread as an arena to demonstrate your incessantly hilarious view of the world.

80 · Rahul said

The world moved to contact lenses a couple of decades ago.

Heh, Heh, Heh. The 2-second-delay-before-you-get-it-jokes are the best.

As the originator of the request to Anna, I was keen to rally our bloggers into a united front of South Asians against Chinese crimes against humanity..However, I am saddened that the discussion has disintegrated into a self-involved, inward-looking discourse. The point here is to support a down-trodden peoples, namely the Tibetans. Yes, I did attend the rally and merged with various different groups of people from Team Tibet/Team Darfur/Team Burma...etc. I was aghast at viciousness of the Chinese supporters as they taunted and gloated in the midst of the peaceful protestors. I personally got shoved in the chest by a half-crazed China supporter for no reason other than being in his way. I also witnessed rude gestures used only by Team China. It was China's aggressive behavior condensed into the American Chinese people. Shame, shame China. Shame, shame Gavin Newsome.

The Chinese supporters were very rude to the other protest groups, calling the Tibetans "slaves" etc. They outnumbered the Tibetans (given their population difference)

And yet, majority doesn't always win.
I think their whole strategy backfired because all I saw was Americans siding with the Tibetans and Burmese and Darfur-supporters, and telling the Chinese that they would boycott their products and "send them all back home". A Black man came upto me and told me "there's no getting through to these Chinese people. They just don't understand".

The mass media controls the sheeple, and it is not an Asian group that owns U.S. mass media. The same idiots could be incited against India on the issue of Kashmir with similar ease.

rally our bloggers into a united front of South Asians against Chinese crimes against humanity.

I'm with you. I have an on-going full scale China boycott--not just the Olympics. I have been at the
receiving end of Chinese (mainland Chinese) bigotry, xenophobia and racism for a long long time. I'm a Californian
and a techie which means I have a *lot* of data and field research to support me. Btw, and I have posted this before on SM, I was once told by a Chinese professor that he didn't want muslims in his lab. Like I said, I have a lot of stories and they are mos tly bad.

blockquote>China's aggressive behavior condensed into the American Chinese people. Shame, shame China.
Ten years ago in the SF Chinatown, I witnessed anti-Tibet, anti-India protests. I suspect a lot of the
belligerent Chinese are from the mainland -- the Chinese equivalent of DBD.

This is correct. The pictures and videos from Lhasa show a city that looks more modern and developed with a far better infrastructure than any Indian city or town, so China is certainly growing the economic pie in Tibet. The same cannot be said about the tibeto-burmese states under Indian occupation. The fact that the tibetan rioters and looters targeted stores and businesses owned not only by han chinese but also hui muslims shows that the root cause of their grievance is economic. Tibetan culture isnt very mercantile so the locals are losing the economic competition. China will probably have to implement some sort of affirmative action for ethnic tibetans to address their grievances.

Translation: China has put in some modern infrastructure and moved in people from other regions to weaken the identity of Tibet so it can better be absorbed into China. The new modern conveniences are enjoyed by the immigrants with the Tibetans relegated to society's fringe (like American Indians). So the Tibetans do not in fact benefit from Chinese development of the region.

Looks like we agree on the observable phenomenon, but you think this is a good thing while I think it's not. What is the point of saying Tibet is being developed economically by China when the Tibetans are not benefiting economically, culturally, or politically? And as you do think this is a good thing, you must logically also support the US's invasion "liberation" of Iraq. Unasked for, but done for the good of the invaded country, at least so says the oppressor.

Ashwani Batra

No China do not have immigration violations because no one migrates to China, people do however escape from China.

I had a very interesting experience at the protests in San Francisco.
It'd be too much to post it here, because it is a tad too long.

So, I'll plug my blog, and if you are interested to know what happened between an Indian and a few Chinese people today, read on

http://rakshan.blogspot.com/2008/04/observations-of-san-franciscan-pacifist.html

The point here is to support a down-trodden peoples, namely the Tibetans

Who is more downtrodden: the tibetans in China or the untouchables, tribals, child slaves etc in India? Why dont indians like you ever get exercised over the far worse violations of human rights going on in India? I see desis like you joining white liberals in protests against the oppressions of palestinians, tibetans etc but not against the far worse oppressions that are endemic in India. Could it be because you think that the fairer skins of tibetans and palestinians somehow make them more worthy of your compassion than fellow desis? If so, you should be ashamed of your racial self-loathing. If not, what is the reason for this moral blind spot?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese441.html

"Tibet was part of China for centuries. In 1913, when China seemed to be falling apart, the British Empire encouraged Tibet to declare its independence. It did, and that lasted until 1950, when, at the end of the Chinese civil war, China invaded and reclaimed the area. By then, the impotent British Empire was in no position to help anyone even if it had been so inclined. America chose to do nothing.

If you are not willing to make your way to the Tibetan plateau and face Chinese guns and prisons, then you certainly should not sit around some coffee shop and urge Tibetans to do so. Tibet is a strategic area of China, and the Chinese government is not going to give it up or grant it independence or even autonomy. To paraphrase a famous outlaw, it is enough that we know that China will do what it has to do.

As for us, we should do nothing. Tibet is part of China, and what happens there is an internal affair of China. The rest of the world has no right to interfere, and other than bloviating for a while, I seriously doubt that it will. Unfortunately, in this age of global communications even bloviating can cause bad things to happen to people.

Boycotting the Olympics is a foolish idea by a tiny minority of fanatics. The Olympics have nothing to do with Tibet, just as they had nothing to do with the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Boycotting the games would be a cruel blow to athletes who have been sweating and training for four years. It would accomplish nothing. It would further politicize the games, which should be encouraged to return to their amateur status.

China was awarded the Summer Games in a fair international competition and has spent a lot of money getting ready for them. Any attempt to spoil the games will do a great disservice to the athletes, the Chinese government and the Chinese people. It will do nothing positive and will only harden attitudes and end up making the world even more dangerous than it already is.

Americans in particular should keep in mind that we are currently engaged in mismanaging two occupations of two countries that we illegally invaded. Neither enterprise is going well. Neither is our economy. In short, we have enough on our own plate without trying to steal a bite off of China's plate. We should make sure that Afghanistan and Iran are the last wheezes of the sick American Empire and shut it down and return to our republic.

I don't know why some Americans seem to have trouble realizing that the days of the European empires are over. Part of the problem is that we have way too many vocational intellectuals and way too few real intellects. A vocational intellectual is someone who makes a living writing or talking. Such people tend to live inside their heads. Delusions of grandeur and fantasies about the real world are constant occupational hazards for such people."

82 · Vyasa said

Dressed in a red dhoti and nothing else

Vyasa, the thought of Rahul in a red dhoti and nothing else, even my contact lenses are fogging up at the thought of this grand spectacle.

Anyhow, weighing in on this debate seemed like a waste of time because you obviously will not be intellectually honest with several people that have engaged with you despite your trolling. I cannot, however, get over the content of your argument. South Asians (diaspora or otherwise) do not protest China's conduct in Tibet because of human rights violations in your backyard. It is more than likely the same subset of desis is equally opposed to India's human rights problems, given their moral convictions.
And since when is Tibet an 'internal matter' of China? You're assuming that Tibet is a part of China (exactly the question which is being debated), and therefore, its dealings with Tibet are legitimate. And second, the status of Tibet is an issue vital to the consideration of Indian (security and geopolitical) interests in South Asia.

In short, we have enough on our own plate without trying to steal a bite off of China's plate. We should make sure that Afghanistan and Iran are the last wheezes of the sick American Empire and shut it down and return to our republic.

That's nice. Countries should have continued to invest and continue business as usual in South Africa (apartheid was an internal matter after all). After all, they must have had their own domestic mess to contend with.

Part of the problem is that we have way too many vocational intellectuals and way too few real intellects. A vocational intellectual is someone who makes a living writing or talking. Such people tend to live inside their heads. Delusions of grandeur and fantasies about the real world are constant occupational hazards for such people.

Confucius say foolish man never heeds own advice.

What you have done is conflate citizen protests with diplomatic tactics employed by governments as a matter of foreign policy. While the US and India could stay out of the controversy, their citizens could endorse/denounce China as per their conscience. Decide what you're against: diplomatic sanctions, citizen protests, or both? And if you're anti-citizen protests: Congratulations! Your tastes match China's.

77 · Manju said

how beorgoise. i prefer the cultural revolution.

Oh, it's hard for refined Rahul to give up his embroidery and tea parties.

97 · Vyasa said

"Tibet was part of China for centuries. In 1913, when China seemed to be falling apart, the British Empire encouraged Tibet to declare its independence. It did, and that lasted until 1950, when, at the end of the Chinese civil war, China invaded and reclaimed the area. By then, the impotent British Empire was in no position to help anyone even if it had been so inclined. America chose to do nothing.

You need to do some better research, because this is complete nonsense. Tibet was never historically part of China. In fact, parts China were owned by Tibet for some time. Only in 1949 did the PRC even officially declare that Tibet "had always been part of China".

No country in the world has to do what we tell it to do. Certainly that's the case with the big powers like China, Russia, Japan and India. As you can see every day in your morning paper, even a little country like Iraq can cause us more trouble than it's worth....Don't encourage Tibetans to die in some futile fantasy about independence. They are not independent. They are part of China, and part of China they will stay.

Vyasa, your friend Charley Reese is asking people to shut up about about human rights issues in India as well. He could as well say:

Don't encourage child slaves* to die in some futile fantasy about independence. They are not independent. They are child slaves, and child slaves they will stay.

* The child slaves you alluded to in your post #97.

portmanteau,

its futile to expect an honest debate with prema/vyasa/the troll; it's objective is not honest discussion but sophistry (and here I am being highly charitable). The constant aim to to reiterate "India, bad", "all Indians, bad" (whatever "India/Indians" and "bad" might signify). I suspect personal issues (which one can sympathize with, but thats no reason to encourage it).

typo, I meant "the constant aim is to"

unfortunate that wackos like Vyasa have hijacked the discussion with their nonsensical mixture of racism sprinkled with a few selected facts...

I actually enjoyed the interchange with Han and Jin, both made some arguments that I agree with - no question the western powers have their own strategic interest in mind here and will use this situation to their own advantage. But that does not mean that Tibetans should be silenced...

I did have some discussions with several chinese colleagues and overall its a bit dismaying. The chinese-born folk have little knowledge of "others" in asian culture in general, with one exception they were astonished to learn that the indian govt can do little to silence the dalai lama. Or that Tibetans move freely throughout india and that no one has to get official sanction to demonstrate!! or that Tibetans use an indic script for their language..

I was in SFO yesterday and saw quite large groups marching with the chinese flag. Good for them, I am glad they got to express their feelings, I just wish that Tibetans were given the same rights in Tibet.

Vyasa come off it your handle is simply a non de guerre. You are really a Chen, or a Hu.

At least have the decency to come clean.

you obviously will not be intellectually honest with several people that have engaged with you despite your trolling

Really? You call the Rahul-Manju comedy act an engagement in debate? And you really think desidude is being intellectually honest about India's own human rights issues? Its too easy to dismiss someone as a troll when the issues they raise make you squirm.

It is more than likely the same subset of desis is equally opposed to India's human rights problems, given their moral convictions.

More than likely? Really? On what do you base this assumption? Please try to be intellectually honest yourself.

Do you deny that India is a far more egregious violator of human rights and dignity than China? Do you disagree that charity and compassion should begin at home and then expand outwards? Do you not see the shameless hypocrisy in pointing fingers at others while ignoring or even denying one's own sins that are even worse?

You're assuming that Tibet is a part of China (exactly the question which is being debated

Thats a fine example of either intellectual dishonesty or pathetic ignorance. Practically all the nations of the world including India and America recognize Tibet as part of China. Even the Dalai Lama is not claiming independence.

the status of Tibet is an issue vital to the consideration of Indian (security and geopolitical) interests in South Asia

India has recognized the status of Tibet as an integral part of China since 1952. Get with the program.

While the US and India could stay out of the controversy, their citizens could endorse/denounce China as per their conscience. Decide what you're against: diplomatic sanctions, citizen protests, or both?

The point is not against protests. The point is highlighting the hypocrisy of certain protesters. Protesting against China while ignoring India's far worse record is OK with you?

Countries should have continued to invest and continue business as usual in South Africa (apartheid was an internal matter after all).

Many if not most of the Americans who campaigned against South Africa's racial discrimination against africans and indians had earned the moral right to do so for they had also campaigned against the institutionalized racial discrimination against non-whites in America, or identified with the successful Civil Rights movement. That cannot be said about the desi hypocrites who cry rivers over the sufferings of tibetans, chinese, palestinians etc but do not have a tear to shed for the vastly greater suffering of their own fellow desis. As that link from HRW I posted noted: "Why does India-the Indian government, the ruling elite, the business interests, the populace as a whole-tolerate this slavery in its midst? ..........It is not poverty which prevents India from investing more in its children, but rather the prejudices and values of those who create and implement policy in India.........The government's failure to enforce the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act and the government's failure to enforce the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act-not to mention the failure to enforce the several other laws protecting child workers-are twin manifestations of the same set ofphenomena. These phenomena include apathy, caste and class bias, obstruction of enforcement efforts, corruption, low prioritization of the problem, and disregard for the deep and widespread suffering of bonded child laborers.......From India's top labor officials all the way down to the local level, where tehsildars (community leaders) use their influence to support the status quo, Human Rights Watch and other researchers have found a profound lack of concern for the plight of bonded and child laborers."

Vyasa, maybe you will grant that a debate is not resolved unless you respond effectively to compelling arguments posed by the other side.
From wikipedia:

Tibet was once an independent kingdom, which later became a part of China. The government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of Tibet in Exile, however, disagree over when Tibet became a part of China, and whether this incorporation into China is legitimate according to international law.

The International Commission of Jurists concluded that Tibet in 1913-50 demonstrated the conditions of statehood as generally accepted under international law. In the opinion of the commission, the government of Tibet conducted its own domestic and foreign affairs free from any outside authority, and countries with whom Tibet had foreign relations are shown by official documents to have treated Tibet in practice as an independent State.

And China's view:

The ROC government had indeed no effective control over Tibet from 1912 to 1951; however, in the opinion of the Chinese government, this condition does not represent Tibet's complete independence as many other parts of China also enjoyed de facto independence when the Chinese nation was torn by warlordism, Japanese invasion, and civil war [20]. While at times, the Tibetans were fiercely independent-minded, at other times, Tibet indicated its willingness to accept subordinate status as part of China provided that Tibetan internal systems were left untouched and provided China relinquished control over a number of important ethnic Tibetan groups in Kham and Amdo

On self-determination:

While the earliest ROC constitutional documents already claim Tibet as part of China, Chinese political leaders also acknowledged the principle of self-determination. For example, at a party conference in 1924, Kuomintang leader Sun Yat-sen issued a statement calling for the right of self-determination of all Chinese ethnic groups: "The Kuomintang can state with solemnity that it recognizes the right of self-determination of all national minorities in China and it will organize a free and united Chinese republic."In 1931, the CCP issued a constitution for the short-lived Chinese Soviet Republic which states that Tibetans and other ethnic minorities, "may either join the Union of Chinese Soviets or secede from it." The possibility of complete secession was denied by Communist leader Mao Zedong in 1938: "They must have the right to self-determination and at the same time they should continue to unite with the Chinese people to form one nation".

You say:

Many if not most of the Americans who campaigned against South Africa's racial discrimination against africans and indians had earned the moral right to do so for they had also campaigned against the institutionalized racial discrimination against non-whites in America, or identified with the successful Civil Rights movement.

It is also true that the ruling elite of Tibet has been implicated in several centuries of violence against its own citizens, so I'm not romanticizing Tibet. Yet, I don't think this has disqualified any other country from (eg US history wrt Native peoples) self-determination in the 20th century. The people of Tibet deserve the right to self-determination. Personally (and I know my beliefs are not popular with many desis), I think there should have been some kind of referendum in Kashmir right after independence, and there ought to have been a state for the Palestinians as well. Of course, these problems have become so insoluble now that the possibility of fair referendums is a simplistic, and ultimately, infeasible political solution.

Also, another (commonly held) view on the Dalai Lama claiming only autonomy, better understood in context here:

So by asking for autonomy now, the Dalai Lama is giving up what all Tibetans really basically want, which is to be returned to being an independent country, a sovereign country, which they always were throughout their history. But he is giving that up pragmatically because of the difficulty of getting China to withdraw. After all, he is a non-violent leader and has never called for an insurrection against the Chinese, as in the case say of the Afghanis or of the Vietnamese or others against outside occupiers. He has pledged to try non-violently to engage in dialogue with the Chinese leaders all along.

So in order to do that, he's now had to give up the claim of independence, which has cost him some support within the Tibetan community who want independence, but he has said it is not practical and genuine autonomy means that internally Tibet has its own government and its own way of living, and it agrees to join the Chinese unions and allow the Chinese to control defense and foreign affairs

That is it from me on this.

Is there any good way to do something meaningful and long-term on this? Just like companies run scared when they are caught out using sweatshops, is there a good way to shed light on which companies and products outsource their manufacturing to China? Is it even feasible to practically avoid using such goods, given their prevalence?

There's an interesting (at least I think so) article from noted sports columnist Jason Whitlock that the protests make the Olympics more compelling than it might otherwise be. It's linked. I don't know if it was linked earlier since I got lost in the morass of conspiracy theories, america bashing and historical inaccuracy. If it was, my apologies.

Other than the article, I'd like to contribute this thought (hopefully on thread): the fact that one can openly peacefully protest, attack, admonish or issue an opinion against a government's policies without getting arrested, "lost" or disappeared is a test of a country's soul. The U.S. and India (to a certain extent) both allow open criticism of their gov'ts. Both are not perfect countries, both have dark stains on their history. However, the fact that a light can be shined on these stains is the fundamental difference between these countries and PRC.

The fact that the people of Tibet (or of Tibetan descent) find the only way they can gain international attention to their cause is to hijack the Olympic flame should have people asking not only whether this is a suitable tactic but why these people feel it is a suitable tactic (i.e. why is it that protests against the Chinese gov't in Tibet are suppressed). I think a lot of people here should appreciate that one can use the internet, post an opinion on a blog on whatever they feel like (no matter how ill informed it may be) while there are places in the world that act is likely to get one arrested or worse.

I will happily watch the Olympic Games and support the games for the pursuit of athletic excellence and the overall spirit of international comity. Further, I would support the right of any person to protest these games or use it as a platform for whatever human rights abuses they claim they have suffered from the host gov't, especially where other avenues of dissent have been effectively shut down.

Endless hypocrisy:

From wikipedia:

Tibet was once an independent kingdom, which later became a part of China.

Look buddy, anyway you look at it China has a far better claim to Tibet than India has to Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Andaman Islands etc. Or the Queen of England has over Canada and Australia. Or the descendants of english colonists have over America. And so on. All the countries of the world recognize Tibet as part of China. The Dalai Lama is not seeking independence either. On the other hand Kashmir is recognized as disputed territory by the UN. India has held onto it by military force killing tens of thousands in the process. Why dont you organize protests against India's occupation of Kashmir, Nagaland, A.P. etc?

China is as likely to give up Tibet as the anglos are to give Australia back to the aborigines (who are racial cousins of desis) or give North America back to the native americans (who are racial cousins of tibetans).

Also, another (commonly held) view on the Dalai Lama claiming only autonomy, better understood in context here

Your "context" is coming from a second hand source (an american) who basically insinuates that the Dalai Lama is lying when he says that he does not want independence. Thats pathetic.

your point allows that socially-conscious persons the world over, who've protested injustices in their own country have *earned* the right to protest Chinese treatment of Tibetan dissenters. Surely, some desis make the cut

Where are all the protest marches organized by "socially-conscious" desis against India's crimes against humanity? As HRW noted: "Why does India-the Indian government, the ruling elite, the business interests, the populace as a whole-tolerate this slavery in its midst?........ Human Rights Watch and other researchers have found a profound lack of concern for the plight of bonded and child laborers."

JJ,
Nicely said.

110 · Vyasa said

Dalai Lama is lying when he says that he does not want independence.

Just a point of clarification: what is being said is that some Tibetans feel that autonomy is not enough, and their political goal is independence. The Dalai Lama, however, has indicated that he desires autonomy for Tibet.
Are you saying that American scholars or scholars of any other nationality other than Chinese/Tibet are incapable of reliable scholarship about this issue?
And, again, it should seem obvious from my post that I am sympathetic to people who reside in territories subsumed by larger political entities and feel isolated or discriminated against. But I do not endorse violence by factions among such communities, although, it is true that such factions do feel that violence is the only way to get their voice heard.
Again, I advise you not to assume that people do not do anything in India against human rights abuses. The adivasi displacement issue has been framed as such by many in India, and you might have heard about the Narmada Bachao Andolan. You might have also heard about how a significant number schoolchildren in India over the past many years boycott Diwali crackers made in Sivakasi by child laborers. Many DBD mutineers, I suspect, are of the age that might have also done this as kids.

I will happily watch the Olympic Games

I will totally boycott these and all future Olympic Games as long as they keep that annoying Bob Costas guy on, and push those soft-focus puff pieces of athletes overcoming adversity to achieve their childhood dream of representing their country in dressage.

110 · Vyasa said

Look buddy, anyway you look at it China has a far better claim to Tibet than India has to Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Andaman Islands etc. Or the Queen of England has over Canada and Australia. Or the descendants of english colonists have over America. And so on.

Only if you use some ill-defined definition of the legitimacy of a claim to some territory, based on, again, ill-defined concepts of historial sovereignty and ethnic distributions. In the real world, meanwhile, legitimacy is determined by the consent of the people who actually live on the land in question. That Tibet might have once been a suzereign of some Chinese dynasty that disappeared hundreds of years ago is neither here nor there. Those people are all dead. This is why all the hubbub about independence vs. autonomy is a distraction: the issue is not the political status of Tibet per se, but the fact that the self-determination of the Tibetan people is not being respected. No amount of history or legitimization by third parties can override the essential right of the Tibetan nation to decide its own course. It is not for China (the state or the nation) to unilaterally decide which other nations will be included in the Chinese state.

Also, this line of argument (i.e., implying that other countries have problems of their own) is not very effective: in the first place, the type of person who is going to protest for Tibet probably also thinks that the colonization of the New World was an evil, illegitimate affair and, in the second place, people from those countries are quite used to receiving this sort of criticism, and so it's not going to slow them down. If anything, they're going to think "yeah, and we get criticized for wiping out the natives all the time, so why should China get a pass?"

110 · Vyasa said

All the countries of the world recognize Tibet as part of China.

Recognizing that China controls Tibet is not the same as viewing said control as legitimate. Moreover, this is purely a question of the boundaries of the various states in question; the right to self-determination is inherent in the Tibetan nation, whether they possess their own independent state or not, and so the question of which states accept which boundaries of which other states has no bearing on it. Nations are self-identified units, and nothing China or anyone else (besides Tibetans) do can affect their status or rights as a nation.

110 · Vyasa said

Why dont you organize protests against India's occupation of Kashmir, Nagaland, A.P. etc?

Presumably because India is not hosting the Olympics, and so not receiving de-facto international legitimization of any controversial claims. The whole rationale for awarding the games to China was that it would put them in the spotlight and so make them more responsive to concerns about human rights and political freedoms. Naturally, people are going to use this rare opportunity to make as much impact as they can. That so many Chinese expected they could hold a "coming out" party and be the center of international attention without receiving criticism for controversial policies strikes me as pretty naive.

110 · Vyasa said

China is as likely to give up Tibet as the anglos are to give Australia back to the aborigines (who are racial cousins of desis) or give North America back to the native americans (who are racial cousins of tibetans).

Of course, you realize that this comparison validates the charge that China is committing cultural genocide in Tibet, right?

I think we're seeing a sea-change in the way China is perceived, and how it manages its image in the world. Formerly, it was sufficient for China to keep a low-ish profile, and fall back on post-colonialist rhetoric whenever any contentious issues came up. But now China draws a lot more attention, and the power dynamics and passage of history have greatly reduced their ability to change the subject to Western Imperialism. I suggest that China get accustomed to receiving criticism, and develop methods for responding that go beyond indignation and insistence that critics are ignorant and/or agents of some evil anti-China cabal. If you want to be a superpower, this is the kind of stuff that comes with the territory.

113 · Rahul said

overcoming adversity to achieve their childhood dream of representing their country in dressage.

Speaking of dressage...what...you don't like the women's beach volleyball matches or any of the water events?? I find these events riveting for ummmmm... the athletic performances.

For Rahul, that line should have read: I will happily watch the Olympics with the sound muted.

The Olympics does do us the favor of preventing Bob from announcing any baseball games although I do hear the IPL is looking for announcers and Bob is practicing saying Tendulkar and Ganguly.....

That so many Chinese expected they could hold a "coming out" party and be the center of international attention without receiving criticism for controversial policies strikes me as pretty naive.

Yep, it must feel so humiliating to have to sneak around under cover of darkness and subterfuge much like the neighborhood pedophile (thanks to Ultrabrown for that analogy!) But it would be good to hit them where it hurts most - economically.

110 · Vyasa said

Look buddy, anyway you look at it China has a far better claim to Tibet than India has to Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Andaman Islands etc. Or the Queen of England has over Canada and Australia. Or the descendants of english colonists have over America. And so on. All the countries of the world recognize Tibet as part of China. The Dalai Lama is not seeking independence either. On the other hand Kashmir is recognized as disputed territory by the UN. India has held onto it by military force killing tens of thousands in the process. Why dont you organize protests against India's occupation of Kashmir, Nagaland, A.P. etc?

This is filled with all manner of poor reasoning. Since all of that has already been pointed out, I will say that I hope your India-critical activism extends beyond derailing potentially productive SM discussions. I would also hope you protest for Tibetan autonomy with vigor, so as not to be a hypocrite yourself.

I don't get the logic behind arguments like "oh yea, but your country does it too"

Just because Americans have treated natives badly, does the current generation not have a right to point a finger at the Chinese government?
Or I get retorts from Chinese people, like "have you been to Tibet? no? then you dont know the truth."
Well, Whoop fucking do! I'd bet 99% of the Chinese Americans here haven't been to Tibet themselves.

Most people will defend their country but will admit that it is not perfect.
But not the Chinese. Come what may, their country and government is the prettiest perfectest thing to ever happen to humanity.

or any of the water events??

I am sure you avidly read FHM for its expose on Olympic athletes?

> All the countries of the world recognize Tibet as part of China.

Oh sure, and it shows. Look at all the recognition and support you get in England, France, Germany, USA, and others.
The only reason they "tolerate" China is because of its economic size and cheap, sub-standard products.

Well, pretty soon, the population will grow old and be halved.
Manufacturing will move to Taiwan, Korea, Philipines and other smaller countries with growing economies and better manufacturing standards.

Then you're going to be in a tough spot with no friends to call your own.
I bet the CIA is already compiling a list of all the American Chinese people who were mobilized by the Chinese consulate yesterday, because if war should break out between the US and China, these (pseudo) American-Chinese traitors need to be handled immediately.

I am sure you avidly read FHM for its expose on Olympic athletes?

Unfortunately, I missed those issues. The revelations within are eye-opening but overall the articles lacked depth and were a bit plastic. It was certainly not worthy of a pulitzer despite the attempt to put beauty in a frame. The pictures are instructive in that they do show evidence of either an innate ability to tan evenly or the use of certain spray on products.

Perhaps China should use this as a guide for selling the Olympics, a tag line could be: "Ignore the protests, the arrests, the silencing of dissent and come watch the hot athletes". :) That could work.

Note the similarities between Microsft & China:

* Both don't open up/share their internal workings
* Are monopolistic/monoparty-stic
* Claim to be perfect despite their poor record
* Everybody disses them ..
* .. But still ends up buying their toys

The Chinese-American people should watch this PBS documentary

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tankman/view/

I respect that man who stood in front of tanks in Tiananmen square and did not allow them to enter his city.
I respect all the students who stood up and protested there, and they were all Chinese people.

How can you forget that and allow your government to oppress your own countrymen?
If Hong Kong and Macau can be autonomous and yet be part of "One China" dream, then why not Tibet ?

the fact that one can openly peacefully protest, attack, admonish or issue an opinion against a government's policies without getting arrested, "lost" or disappeared is a test of a country's soul

What do you think 60 years of this "test" has revealed about India's "soul"? Despite blindly imitating its erstwhile colonial masters' institutions of free speech, democracy, and even their english language (things indians never tire of boasting about and rubbing on chinese and other faces) India remains a deeply corrupt, caste-ridden, callous society that in the words of Human Rights Watch has a "profound lack of concern" for such social evils as child slavery and chronic hunger that any moral, civilized society would deem intolerable.

Its really inexplicable how so many indians are actually proud of India's achievements!

In the real world, meanwhile, legitimacy is determined by the consent of the people who actually live on the land in question.

So why has India refused to hold a plebiscite in the disputed territory of Kashmir? Why did it brutally crush the khalistani independence movement? Why is it illegitimately holding on to the northeastern states over the objections of "the people who actually live on the land"? Just come clean and admit that your finger-pointing is hypocritical.

> that in the words of Human Rights Watch

Who is "Human Rights Watch" ?
(an organisation I'd never heard of before, but maybe thats just my ignorance)

Here's the "what they say" page from their own site. They are good at pissing people off all over the world.
http://hrw.org/about/what_they_say.html

things I noted :
They're a 233 people organization. Huge!
They're no HRC or Amnesty International.

They groups "China and Tibet" together in their country listing. What stance is that? Was there not enough space under "T" for Tibet ? Or they take the opposite stance (of Tibet being part of China), well then why not name all its other provinces in the list too ? Fence sitting.

Sorry, show me some credible data and I'll read it. Not this junk.

124 · Vyasa said

What do you think 60 years of this "test" has revealed about India's "soul"? Despite blindly imitating its erstwhile colonial masters' institutions of free speech, democracy, and even their english language (things indians never tire of boasting about and rubbing on chinese and other faces) India remains a deeply corrupt, caste-ridden, callous society that in the words of Human Rights Watch has a "profound lack of concern" for such social evils as child slavery and chronic hunger that any moral, civilized society would deem intolerable.

First, I am not going to be the other hand that claps to your drumbeat so stir up the pot elsewhere using someone else. Second, in the faint chance that you may actually be sincere in your beliefs, no one ever said that India was without ill. In fact my earlier post said as much, perhaps that speed reading course caused you to miss a word or two like "Both are not perfect countries, both have dark stains on their history".

Third, since I don't believe you are sincere, I won't resist a parting shot. Well done, you have managed to turn a thread regarding Tibet and their protest against China into a forum on how much India and to a lesser degree, Indians suck. Mission accomplished. India is a rotten country, in fact there's no place on earth that isn't rotten to the core including America, and we're all hypocrites for not pointing that out. Kudos to you. You should go to the hipster olympics and proclaim yourself victor.

But here's one thing for you to consider while you are placing the laurels on your own head, none of what you have said changes that China still occupies a special floor in the superpower crimes building for what it's done to it's own people, for what has happened in Tibet and the use of their own jackboot to crush dissent. Any attempt to deny that is hypocritical.

Oh wait, of course, nothing of the sort ever happens in China, that shangri-la, that little piece of heaven on earth. Any news regarding Chinese oppression is just a fiction of the imperialist propaganda machine created by the colonial masters and their intelligence agencies. Us sheep are just too stupid and fail to realize it. Got it.

Could it be perhaps, just perhaps, there may be a grain of truth in the protests made by those in opposition to the Chinese. Oh wait, I'm letting my wool get pulled over my eyes, Baaaa Baaaa out.

Does anyone else see similarities of the torch run with Ashwamedha Yagya ?

Not going too well, is it?

Despite blindly imitating its erstwhile colonial masters' institutions of free speech, democracy

WOW. What sort of government are you recommending for India, then? Oh, right, one like China probably. You do realize that Communism was also invented in the West...

You ignore everything substantive people respond with, put up straw-man arguments and back up what you say with "facts" which are simply incorrect, or propaganda. It looks like you basically distrust the West, put China up as an antidote, and perceive attacks on China as being motivated by white racism. Everything else you say follows from this motivation, history, logic and ethics be damned.

There are legitimate points to be made about how pro-Tibetan activism can express and feed white racism, and Western political agendas, but you are in fact not making them. You're just caught up in saying whatever junk you have to in order to feel like you're "winning." If you would step back you would see how little sense you are making.

That Tibet might have once been a suzer[ain] of some Chinese dynasty that disappeared hundreds of years ago is neither here nor there

Recognizing that China controls Tibet is not the same as viewing said control as legitimate. Moreover, this is purely a question of the boundaries of the various states in question; the right to self-determination is inherent in the Tibetan nation, whether they possess their own independent state or not, and so the question of which states accept which boundaries of which other states has no bearing on it.

redr @114, many excellent points, and thanks for doing what I would have I like to do, if I had the energy :)

Jangli said..

Any news regarding Chinese oppression is just a fiction of the imperialist propaganda machine created by the colonial masters and their intelligence agencies. Us sheep are just too stupid and fail to realize it. Got it.

a small anecdote - my grad school chinese classmate's family who live back in China (I think in Shanghai) were shocked to hear that there was such a thing as the SARS epidemic going on in China.
Oh.. those imbeciles at CNN paint such a false and misleading picture of the open society that is the PRC! After all, FOX NEWS gets great ratings making random shit up. But to go to such lengths to tarnish the good name of such a model member of the world community as China. Oppressive countries like India and the US should learn more from China.

Vyasa

India and indians are stinking hypocrites, caste fascists, violent darkies, their culture is a cheap copy of their western masters, stinky cricket-playing slaves with bad breath and awful shitty cuisine. I fully accept all of this - your wisdom has given us insight into all aspects of india and indians.

AND YET the tibetans deserve to be heard. And yet the chinese govt has oppressed tibetan culture, it does not give Tibet the cultural and religous autonomy it deservers. This is why the tibetans protest all over the world and this is why I support their non-violent protest methods.

Are you able to understand this? Or does your brain only function on special logic that comes from the communist party HQ in Beijing??

125 · Vyasa said

So why has India refused to hold a plebiscite in the disputed territory of Kashmir? Why did it brutally crush the khalistani independence movement? Why is it illegitimately holding on to the northeastern states over the objections of "the people who actually live on the land"?

Presumably because it has other concerns than legitimacy, just like China in Tibet. Arguing that India deserves criticism too does not add up to an argument that criticism of China is wrong or undeserved. You're just banking on people being as reactively pro-India as the various China apologists are reactively pro-China, and so hoping to derail the conversatation. But, guess what? Criticism of India's Kashmir and other policies doesn't bother me in the least, nor America's history of Manifest Destiny. I have complained about them at length in the past, although not on SM. And if India ever gets awarded the Olympics and gets protested over it, I'll stand up for those protestors as well. But you should be aware that Chinese are, apparently, fairly unique in their overreactions to criticism. Pretty much everyone else is used to hearing this kind of stuff said about their country all the time, so don't expect them to fly off the handle.

125 · Vyasa said

Just come clean and admit that your finger-pointing is hypocritical.

For it to be hypocritical, I'd have to be applying a different standard to India or some other polity. Please point to a single instance of me doing so. And please get it through your head that calling me a hypocrite, even if it were true, is effectively an admission that you don't have a valid counterargument. And, unfortunately for you, people here are mature enough that you're not going to be able to control the discourse by starting a flame-war once you run out of relevant comments.

118 · suede said

Or I get retorts from Chinese people, like "have you been to Tibet? no? then you dont know the truth."Well, Whoop fucking do! I'd bet 99% of the Chinese Americans here haven't been to Tibet themselves.

No need to go across any oceans: I'm quite sure that 99% of Chinese in China haven't been to Tibet. But, don't worry, they hear all about it in the CCP-controlled press, which is so much more objective than all other media (which we all know are simply tools of a secret Imperialist cabal bent on humiliating China).

What gives Americans (Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq - hundreds of thousands of innocents killed) or for that matter Indians (Kashmir, Gujarat) the right to throw stones at China? To criticize a foreign policy in a political forum is one thing, to snatch an Olympic torch with already sullied hands is another. I wonder if you would have maintained the same self-righteous tone if this was the Atlanta Olympics.

To criticize a foreign policy in a political forum is one thing, to snatch an Olympic torch with already sullied hands is another.

For you and all those talking about the purity of the Olympic torch, this article details the political origin of the Olympic torch - invented and used by the Nazis to run through territories they were ambitious to occupy.

Aryan ideals, not ancient Greece, were the inspiration behind flame tradition

#2, many of the people on this thread have already pointed out that they do not support America's invasion of Iraq, and some even have supported plebiscite in Kashmir, and I don't think anyone agrees with what happened in Gujarat. By your logic no one should protest unethical or unlawful behavior since everyone is implicated in some way. So we should all keep quiet about everything.

Hey, for that matter, why are you telling us to keep quiet about Tibet when you are not keeping quiet about the US and India?

no one ever said that India was without ill. In fact my earlier post said as much, perhaps that speed reading course caused you to miss a word or two like "Both are not perfect countries, both have dark stains on their history".

Forget about history, India has the darkest stain of all today: child slavery, massive child hunger, untouchability, bonded labor, widespread beggary and homelessness, widow shunning, bride burning, child marriage, child prostitution, hereditary casteism etc etc.......all tolerated without shame or conscience. Shouldnt you be protesting that instead of pointing fingers at countries that treat their citizens far better than India does?

I don't believe you are sincere

Actually its your insincerity that is patent. If you sincerely were offended by violations of human rights you would be shouting "free the child slaves of India" and "feed your children India" in front of the Indian Embassy instead of posing like a wannabe white latte liberal wearing a "free Tibet" tshirt, with hungry eyes darting around looking for acceptance in that crowd.

none of what you have said changes that China still occupies a special floor in the superpower crimes building for what it's done to it's own

India may not be a superpower but no other major nation can come close to matching what India has done to its citizens. Millions of children die every year from malnutrition related causes. And no one cares. First time visitors to India are invariably shocked and horrified by the living conditions there, even when they come from other third world countries. Yet the democratic politicians and the "free press" of India keep gloating about how India is an "incredible" " shining" "IT superpower" that the world is envious of! Are you so clueless and deluded that you cannot see how obscene it is for Indians of all people to be lecturing others about human values?

135 · etlamatey said

What gives Americans (Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq - hundreds of thousands of innocents killed) or for that matter Indians (Kashmir, Gujarat) the right to throw stones at China? To criticize a foreign policy in a political forum is one thing, to snatch an Olympic torch with already sullied hands is another. I wonder if you would have maintained the same self-righteous tone if this was the Atlanta Olympics.

individual consciences are different from national policies. it doesn't do to conflate the two. the american state/ federal government(s) responsible for protecting the flame are assiduously doing so. also, individual americans and indians have all vigorously opposed the stands of their governments on the events/issues you mention. it's not clear whether their hands are 'sullied,' or they are necessarily implicated in the ethical failures of their government (especially if they have not voted for those in power, and have consistently opposed their policies).

besides, the right to free speech allows anyone to say what they like, as long as they don't violate other laws or harm anyone in the process. so, even if you accuse the pro-tibetan protesters of being hypocritical, ignorant, misguided, whatever -- they are acting well-within the domain of their rights. i'm pretty certain if the american olympics happened in the civil rights era, we would see protests by americans against the institutional structure as well. ditto for the vietnam war -- where people continued to carry out anti-gov't activities to the detriment of their personal interests.

India and indians are stinking hypocrites, caste fascists, violent darkies, their culture is a cheap copy of their western masters

Thats a lie. Its not the indian culture per se, but institutions like its political, judicial, educational, media systems etc that are blind imitations of their erstwhile western masters. Those institutions have worked well in the West and in East Asia but they have failed in India even after 6 decades of independence. What do you blame for this failure if not indian culture?

if India ever gets awarded the Olympics and gets protested over it, I'll stand up for those protestors as well.

A convenient cop out since India is unlikely to be awarded the Olympics in your lifetime. Why do you need an Olympics to protest India's massive human rights violations anyway?

please get it through your head that calling me a hypocrite, even if it were true, is effectively an admission that you don't have a valid counterargument

Actually, the shameless hypocrisy of indians lecturing others on human rights is effectively my argument. Since you all are macaulayite anglophiles you must know the english saying: "people in glass houses should not throw stones".....

I'm quite sure that 99% of Chinese in China haven't been to Tibet. But, don't worry, they hear all about it in the CCP-controlled press, which is so much more objective than all other media (which we all know are simply tools of a secret Imperialist cabal bent on humiliating China)

So why are the millions of chinese, including hundreds of thousands of students from China, living in the West and exposed to all its media, still so overwhelmingly supportive of its government? Could it be because they can see how well the chinese government has performed since Deng Xiaoping basically abandoned communist orthodoxy?

If anything you should have a problem with the Indian press which has brainwashed indians into thinking that India is doing far better than it actually is.

Actually its your insincerity that is patent. If you sincerely were offended by violations of human rights you would be shouting "free the child slaves of India" and "feed your children India" in front of the Indian Embassy instead of posing like a wannabe white latte liberal wearing a "free Tibet" tshirt, with hungry eyes darting around looking for acceptance in that crowd.

That white latte liberal line is pretty good. Props to you on that one. I think I'll use it next time. I'm more of a Dunkin Donuts coffee man (good coffee and have to support the people) though I have been known to splurge on occasion for a Starbucks, tall skinny vanilla latte (usually when a friend or a date deems Starbucks necessary otherwise I wouldn't pay for Star-yucks). Skinny because as I get older its harder to keep the weight down and I sooo want to be able to tan evenly this beach season. (The colonial masters have me imitating them at every turn, dang it!). Not to mention I want to be able to wear one of my cuban guayabera shirts this summer without a gut. See, I support one communist regime. Actually, I think those shirts are made by chinese and indian child labor. Oh well.

BTW, not so much of a liberal (though, I'm not sure of your definition), I'm more of a warmonger as I'm leaning toward supporting Mccain this election season. A funny thing happens to me when I read your posts, I am usually very critical of India and Indian policies but since you opened your mouth (started posting) to derail any discussion of the protests, I feel more solidarity towards the Motherland. Thanks for that. Keep posting, at this rate, you will have us all saying "God Bless America" and "Jai Hind". One love.

139 · Vyasa said

Thats a lie. Its not the indian culture per se, but institutions like its political, judicial, educational, media systems etc that are blind imitations of their erstwhile western masters. Those institutions have worked well in the West and in East Asia but they have failed in India even after 6 decades of independence. What do you blame for this failure if not indian culture?

Looks like even the foundation of your argument is a hotbed of confusion. Do you have any purpose but to constantly call Indians hypocrites, or are you some kind of real activist yourself?

Vyasa/prema has a long history on the mutiny (just do a search); he/she/it is highly predictable. In my early days I too tried to engage her honestly (and being ardently non-nationalistic, even agreed with it about certain things) , but honesty does not define a troll. just ask razib or any of the long-time contributors...

Looks like even the foundation of your argument is a hotbed of confusion

Clearly you have the same reading comprehension problem as al-beruni to whom I was responding. What part confused you? The part where I corrected him by pointing out that it wasnt indian culture per se that i had said was aped from the british but indian governmental institutions? Or the part where i questioned whether it was the indian culture that accounts for the failures of those aped institutions in India?

Do you have any purpose but to constantly call Indians hypocrites

Are you saying that exposing the hypocrisy of a certain worldview is purposeless? I am not the only one who believes otherwise:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/opinions/2947777.cms

"Violent protests in Tibet and a subsequent crackdown by the Beijing government have created a worldwide outpouring of sympathy for the Tibetan cause.

In India, where the Dalai Lama lives in exile, politicians, celebrities, and common citizens have sided with the underdogs. But those who support the idea of an independent Tibet are misguided, and Indians who do so are hypocritical to boot.

Here's why. The land claimed by Tibet's government-in-exile is far larger than the territory ruled by the Dalai Lama before he fled to India in 1959. Greater Tibet covers an incredible 25 percent of the entire People's Republic of China (PRC). There is no legal or historical basis whatsoever for this claim. Moreover, were such a nation to split from China, it would feel incomplete without Arunachal Pradesh, often referred to as Southern Tibet.

The case for an independent state composed of the smaller Tibet Autonomous Region is also questionable. For centuries, theocratic rulers of the Roof of the World accepted the land was part of the Chinese empire. This elite declared independence during a period of instability in the early twentieth century, but China never accepted it.

It's true the fifties and sixties were dreadful for the region, but we must bear in mind that the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution were disastrous for China as a whole.

Recent years have witnessed an increased tolerance of traditional culture by Chinese authorities, alongside a rise in Tibetans' standard of living. Thus far, the liberalisation has stopped short of negotiations with the Dalai Lama, which is unfortunate, for he is one of the great moral figures of our time and has signalled he would accept genuine autonomy instead of the complete independence he had previously sought.

Tibet's best hope lies in the ruling party developing a respect for rights and freedoms throughout the PRC, and that's what world leaders ought to try and influence. However, that's not the way most Indians appear to see the matter.

The former foreign minister Yashwant Sinha argued we should intervene to secure Tibet's freedom: "We want good relations with China. I am not saying let's have war with China. But if we reach a point of conflict over Tibet, we should be prepared for that eventuality."

This is mind-bogglingly stupid. Indian forces have less chance of driving the People's Liberation Army from Lhasa than Harbhajan Singh has of scoring hundreds in each of his next fifty innings. Sinha didn't stop there. "We, along with the brave Tibetan activists, will not relent till we get justice from China", he thundered.

"If need be, I am prepared to march to Lhasa in support of this movement." George Fernandes, former defence minister, also advocated Tibetan independence, repudiating the policy of his prime minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee.

The reason such sentiments are not just ill-informed but hypocritical is that we have our own secessionist movements to deal with, and there is no public or political pressure to resolve those. The most prominent, the problem of Jammu and Kashmir is the elephant in the room which Indians debating Tibet are doing their darndest to ignore. The two issues make for an interesting comparison. No nation regards Tibet as disputed territory, while every country, India included, places J&K in that category. (These days we are not allowed to refer to it as ‘disputed', but the Simla Agreement as well as our commitment to the United Nations makes clear it is).

Though we accuse Pakistan of occupying a chunk of our turf, we do nothing about that, apart from marking every imported atlas with a stamp saying the borders of India as depicted are inaccurate.

If Pakistan brings up Kashmir at multilateral forums, we complain it is contravening the Simla Agreement. But when it presses for bilateral talks, as recommended by that Agreement, we insist J&K is an internal matter. We parrot the slogan about the valley being an integral part of India, in the face of the fact that all nation-states are provisional entities.

but honesty does not define a troll

Thats why you have been correctly accused of being a troll yourself. All you do is sigh a lot, whine a lot, try to get posters banned a lot. And when you do try to write a meaningful post it is always a convoluted jumble designed to impress with unnecessary pseudo-academic verbiage that instead of advancing debate gets mocked for its pretentious confusion.

I am not here to make friends but to hammer home points that I honestly believe in, as clearly and forcefully as I can. Obviously thats an alien concept to the likes of you. If you can find flaws in my reasoning or errors in the facts I present then correct me and I will be thankful. Otherwise quit your endless whining and STFU, and get a frickin' life already.

Vyasa, if you're gonna go out... go out with your guns blazing.

When I drew the connection Kashmir, I was told by some moron that this was nothing similar since there's a historical agreement placing Kashmir in India. Really? Why don't we hold a referendum and see?

I don't agree with everything you say (I do believe that India has a role to play as a net-giver of aid).

C'mon people. I ask people to think about how we define the South Asian diaspora and someone attacks me with "why should you get consideration when you're not a taxpayer in India" (to which I must retort: neither are your families in India ;) Really? That's the kind of thinking that's going to see India rise to take it's place amongst poweful nations in the next thirty years?

Does anyone out there think? Chinese nationalists claim a relationship with Tibet going back a thousand years.

My ancestors left India under difficult circumstances 130 years ago and you're only interested in my fate/well-being if I'm a taxpayer in India?

143 · NYC Akshay said

Looks like even the foundation of your argument is a hotbed of confusion. Do you have any purpose but to constantly call Indians hypocrites, or are you some kind of real activist yourself?

I think what you're looking for is, "syphilitic twisted shadow of a Naipaulean account of India that will not die."

My ancestors left India under difficult circumstances 130 years ago and you're only interested in my fate/well-being if I'm a taxpayer in India?

Not me...I'm interested in the fate and well-being of the diaspora, including those who left in the 19th century...but once they stop considering themselves ethnically or culturally Indian, my interest lessens. There are some in the younger generations who (perhaps rightly) feel they are Trinidadian and not Indian, or South African and not Indian...in that case it's hard to feel concern for them on the basis of their being Indian. One can still care on humanitarian grounds, or even on the grounds that one considers them desis even if they do not self-identify that way.

Being a taxpayer has nothing to do with it. And I don't expect any political loyalty to India, since politically I don't consider myself Indian at all. I'm Indian ethnically and culturally, that's it, and my ties to anyone in the diaspora are based on the same concepts.

I don't take my activism cues from Richard Gere and guys hanging off the Golden Gate Bridge.

I don't harbor any nostalgia for an outdated monk-elite ruling Tibet and neither does the Dalai Lama.

Tibet's future is inside China. Antagonizing China is not the best strategy, because as they overload spell-checkers everywhere getting ready for the Olympics, their children will remember how dimwits repeatedly tried to blow out the torch of humanity.

London: morons. France: umm, this country is allowed to protest treatment of minorities?. San Francisco: busloads of Chinese descendants to REPRESENT. Argentina: Southern hemisphere won't let the torch go out.

One of the first boycotts of the modern era: African countries did not participate in Games because of New Zealand Rugby team touring South Africa.

The Olympics themselves are the first time ever so many foreign media will be given such access to China. That is the true yardstick by which their openness to media will be measured, or at least that's what the IOC says.

Generally, I am against any cause that involves anything with hanging off the Golden Gate Bridge, unless of course it's part of an effort to guide misdirected whales out of the Bay and back onto their path in the Pacific.

145 · Vyasa said

Are you saying that exposing the hypocrisy of a certain worldview is purposeless? I am not the only one who believes otherwise:

The article makes all the same logical fallacies of which you are guilty. Hypocrisy doesn't negate the veracity of criticism. Not everyone who posts here is an Indian or an Indian who lives in India. The vast majority of reasonable people will accept much of what you say as being at least partially grounded in valid criticism. Not everyone advocates independence for Tibet, making the issue at hand one of human rights.

"For centuries, theocratic rulers of the Roof of the World accepted the land was part of the Chinese empire. This elite declared independence during a period of instability in the early twentieth century, but China never accepted it."

Once again, this is complete nonsense. I encourage you to do some more historical research. The "Chinese Empire" of which Tibet was a part was ruled by people the majority Chinese considered foreign invaders (Mongols), not the people who govern now, making it a Mongol empire, and negating any of the ownership claims of modern China. In any case, you seem incapable of accepting any of this, since it's all been posted before, so I'm not going to bother encouraging this trolling anymore.

The article makes all the same logical fallacies of which you are guilty. Hypocrisy doesn't negate the veracity of criticism

Amusing how he defends his right to be a hypocrite which is another word for an intellectually and morally dishonest person and claim with a straight face that he is being logical. If your criticism of China is valid then by logic India is guilty of similar and much worse offenses. Is it intellectually or morally honest of you to get so upset when India's gross violations of human rights and dignity are pointed out when you act so hot and bothered by the far milder violations of China?

Not everyone advocates independence for Tibet, making the issue at hand one of human rights

The issue here is the right to return to a theocratic autonomy. Tibetan theocracy wasn't exactly a bastion of human rights was it? Far from it. Its you who needs to do some historical research. Besides, Buddha never advocated the right of monks to political power.The claim that the rule of monks is a "human right" is patently absurd.

again, this is complete nonsense. I encourage you to do some more historical research. The "Chinese Empire" of which Tibet was a part was ruled by people the majority Chinese considered foreign invaders (Mongols), not the people who govern now, making it a Mongol empire, and negating any of the ownership claims of modern China.

Ignorant and hypocritical nonsense:

Ignorant, because the Mongol Yuan Dynasty lasted less than a century. It was followed by the Han Ming Dynasty which in turn was followed by the Manchu Qing Dynasty. The Manchus are assimilated chinese and Manchuria is an integral part of China. China is no longer run by dynasties and there is no reason for its part Tibet to be run by reincarnated lamas. The age of Emperors and Theocracies is over. Welcome to the 21st century.

Hypocritical, because India's current borders were bestowed on it by its racially alien British rulers who never assimilated but packed up and left lock, stock and barrel. Does India have any legitimate historical claim over the northeastern states other than the few decades of British Rule over it? Even the mighty Mughal Dynasty of India (which was of mongol extraction BTW) was stopped at Assam. Yet from Nehru on India acts as if it has a god given right to the tibeto-burman northeast and the borders arbitrarily drawn there by british cartographers to separate its Empire from China are somehow sacrosanct!

Oops, screwed up the formatting. Admins please delete previous post.

The article makes all the same logical fallacies of which you are guilty. Hypocrisy doesn't negate the veracity of criticism

Amusing how he defends his right to be a hypocrite which is another word for an intellectually and morally dishonest person and claim with a straight face that he is being logical. If your criticism of China is valid then by logic India is guilty of similar and much worse offenses. Is it intellectually or morally honest of you to get so upset when India's gross violations of human rights and dignity are pointed out when you act so hot and bothered by the far milder violations of China?

Not everyone advocates independence for Tibet, making the issue at hand one of human rights

The issue here is the right to return to a theocratic autonomy. Tibetan theocracy wasn't exactly a bastion of human rights was it? Far from it. Its you who needs to do some historical research. Besides, Buddha never advocated the right of monks to political power.The claim that the rule of monks is a "human right" is patently absurd.

again, this is complete nonsense. I encourage you to do some more historical research. The "Chinese Empire" of which Tibet was a part was ruled by people the majority Chinese considered foreign invaders (Mongols), not the people who govern now, making it a Mongol empire, and negating any of the ownership claims of modern China.

Ignorant and hypocritical nonsense:

Ignorant, because the Mongol Yuan Dynasty lasted less than a century. It was followed by the Han Ming Dynasty which in turn was followed by the Manchu Qing Dynasty. The Manchus are assimilated chinese and Manchuria is an integral part of China. China is no longer run by dynasties and there is no reason for its part Tibet to be run by reincarnated lamas. The age of Emperors and Theocracies is over. Welcome to the 21st century.

Hypocritical, because India's current borders were bestowed on it by its racially alien British rulers who never assimilated but packed up and left lock, stock and barrel. Does India have any legitimate historical claim over the northeastern states other than the few decades of British Rule over it? Even the mighty Mughal Dynasty of India (which was of mongol extraction BTW) was stopped at Assam. Yet from Nehru on India acts as if it has a god given right to the tibeto-burman northeast and the borders arbitrarily drawn there by british cartographers to separate its Empire from China are somehow sacrosanct!

If you would like to take part in the Protest here in Bangkok, have a look at http://notorch.blogspot.com/ for details on time and place. (those details are not there yet, but once we know you will know).. what we do know is:

it will be on saturday the 19th April (probably in the afternoon), it will probably be in the area around grand palace, and government area, and it will be peacefull.

go to http://notorch.blogspot.com/ and find out what we know. and show up.

if anyone have more details on the route, and timetable, please email us at no.torch@gmail.com

thanks

Thats why you have been correctly accused of being a troll yourself.

as i told you when you were "desidawg" (i.e. after you were "prema"), i'll let others decide who is the troll. but i have a feeling that everyone here will be happier if would stfu, and fo to boot. i have no further interest in exchanging insults with you...

137 · Vyasa said

posing like a wannabe white latte liberal wearing a "free Tibet" tshirt, with hungry eyes darting around looking for acceptance in that crowd.

hungry eyes? vyasa, you're truly omniscient like your namesake mahabharata narrator, because i treat the tibet protests as my personal eharmony swayamvara. you must've figured my penchant for white-latte-swilling-sons-of-hippies, who prefer to, uh, dance dirty (because they're foregoing showers to conserve water and energy). and as my casteist hypocrisy would have it, the only brown people my eyes are hungry for are four-veda-reciting-sandhya-and-all-ablutions-performing brahmins.

typo, i meant, "if you would stfu", above

140 · Vyasa said

A convenient cop out since India is unlikely to be awarded the Olympics in your lifetime.

I don't see any basis for that assumption.

Why do you need an Olympics to protest India's massive human rights violations anyway?

Who ever said you did? Anyway, your assertions of equivalence between not protesting a government that is actively (if not always successfully) working to fix the problems you bring up, and refusing to play along with an authoritarian regime that openly demands that everyone endorse its trampling of human rights, are ridiculous on their face. Even ignoring that, your blatant eagerness to call people hypocrites on that basis, without first discerning their attitudes or actions in regards to said problems in India, belies your claim to be making a reasoned argument. You're not; you're simply looking to manufacture pretenses for calling Indian people hypocrites.

Actually, the shameless hypocrisy of indians lecturing others on human rights is effectively my argument.

Well, I'm glad we've got it cleared up that your point is "Indians are assholes," and not anything to do with China per se.

Since you all are macaulayite anglophiles you must know the english saying: "people in glass houses should not throw stones".....

Presumably that goes for trolls posing as holier-than-thou judges of national character as well? But, anyway, the implication of that saying is that you're likely to get stones thrown back at your glass house, which you presumably wouldn't want broken. Except that this reciprocity doesn't apply here: neither Indians nor Westerners are perturbed by international criticism in the same way that Chinese are. For example, despite your best efforts, you haven't been able to taunt even a single SM poster in the sort of indignant, juvenile theatrics you seem to crave. So the critics of China don't seem to be violating the Golden Rule here... Indeed, I suspect that most of them would be only to happy to join you in criticizing India's problems, if they thought for a second that you were the slightest bit sincere in your concern for them.

BTW, a better saying would have been "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

So why are the millions of chinese, including hundreds of thousands of students from China, living in the West and exposed to all its media, still so overwhelmingly supportive of its government? Could it be because they can see how well the chinese government has performed since Deng Xiaoping basically abandoned communist orthodoxy?

Yes, that's one reason. The social contract there basically comes down to "leave us in power and we'll enrich the Chinese people/nation." Another is the decades-long effort by the CCP to instill a reactionary nationalism in the educated classes (which we all know is no mean feat). There are other reasons, but this all is missing the point: the message of the Tibet protests is not the the CCP should be disowned by the Chinese people, but that the approach to Tibet should change. And I have yet to hear a single Chinese person give me a well-reasoned argument for why the Tibet policy deserves their support. What it seems to come down to is that Tibet is a small, remote, powerless nation, and the Han masses are not interested in rocking the boat over it when the stuff that actually affects their daily lives is going well. This isn't a unique phenomenon, but it is compounded by the authoritarian nature of the CCP, which greatly increases the cost of activism.

If anything you should have a problem with the Indian press which has brainwashed indians into thinking that India is doing far better than it actually is.

Can't say I particularly care about the Indian press. They're free to report what they want to report, and I do not share your assessment that Indians are unaware of, or cavalier towards, the problems in India. So, feel free to persist in your racist characitures, but understand that nobody buys into your pretenses of reason and righteousness.

your blatant eagerness to call people hypocrites on that basis, without first discerning their attitudes or actions in regards to said problems in India, belies your claim to be making a reasoned argument. You're not; you're simply looking to manufacture pretenses for calling Indian people hypocrites.

The "attitudes or actions in regards to said problems in India" I see are denial, defensiveness, dismissiveness. As HRW pointed out, there is a "profound lack of concern" towards the massive human rights violations that have been going on in India in the decades that it has been an independent, democratic nation with a free press. We can see examples of this callous attitude right here.

Except that this reciprocity doesn't apply here: neither Indians nor Westerners are perturbed by international criticism in the same way that Chinese are. For example, despite your best efforts, you haven't been able to taunt even a single SM poster in the sort of indignant, juvenile theatrics you seem to crave. So the critics of China don't seem to be violating the Golden Rule here...

First of all dont try to equate yourself with westerners. Westerners do not tolerate the degrading conditions that much of India is forced to live in. Secondly, anyone can see the "indignant, juvenile" reactions from the posters here. Unless you think whining about trolls and cracking silly jokes in desperate attempts to avoid confronting their hypocrisies is cool and mature.

Indeed, I suspect that most of them would be only to happy to join you in criticizing India's problems, if they thought for a second that you were the slightest bit sincere in your concern for them.

You shouldnt need the Olympics to be held in India or proof of my sincerity to do the right thing, do you? Those are just excuses to avoid being intellectually and morally honest about India's crimes against its children and other offenses.

a better saying would have been "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

If you are going to quote from the New Testament Bible a more appropriate saying would be "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?". Recognize yourself?

the message of the Tibet protests is not the the CCP should be disowned by the Chinese people, but that the approach to Tibet should change. And I have yet to hear a single Chinese person give me a well-reasoned argument for why the Tibet policy deserves their support.

You are not listening then. You seem to think that it is a "human right" for monks to have political power. The modern chinese reject the idea of a theocracy just as they reject the idea of rule by emperors. The Dalai Lama is persona non grata to China because he let himself be used by the CIA in a global powerplay against China. The very idea of buddhist monks clinging to worldly power is anti-thetical to the Buddha's teaching anyway.

Can't say I particularly care about the Indian press. They're free to report what they want to report, and I do not share your assessment that Indians are unaware of, or cavalier towards, the problems in India.

Firstly how can indians possibly be unaware of the human degradations that stare them in the face on a daily basis? Secondly if indians are not callous and cavalier about these problems why have the problems persisted for so long with no recognition that it is a crisis situation and no sincere effort to relieve the massive suffering? Thirdly, if indians are not in denial about these problems why does the free indian media and the numerous free indian posters all over the internet keep gloating over India's shining success and keep mocking and pointing fingers at nations that are doing far better?

understand that nobody buys into your pretenses of reason and righteousness.

Presume to speak only for yourself and your ilk. Perhaps in your book ignoring or denying the massive sufferings of your own kind while lecturing others on human values is reasonable and righteous, but do not delude yourself that you are fooling everybody.

But, Vyasa, which do you prefer? Dosas or scallion pancakes?

> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/opinions/2947777.cms

You quoted this article, but do you understand that this was written by an Indian in an indian media newspaper?
Thats freedom of speech and press.
Show me an article written by a Chinese man, published in Chinese press, with similar scathing views of the Chinese government?

We are not above criticizing our own country and government.
The "people who live in glass houses.." argument is bs, because that would mean there would be no criticism at all and evil would just thrive.

159 · Vyasa said

Firstly how can indians possibly be unaware of the human degradations that stare them in the face on a daily basis? Secondly if indians are not callous and cavalier about these problems why have the problems persisted for so long with no recognition that it is a crisis situation and no sincere effort to relieve the massive suffering? Thirdly, if indians are not in denial about these problems why does the free indian media and the numerous free indian posters all over the internet keep gloating over India's shining success and keep mocking and pointing fingers at nations that are doing far better?

Vyasa,

Why are you so cynical of India?

159 · Vyasa said

The "attitudes or actions in regards to said problems in India" I see are denial, defensiveness, dismissiveness.

Oh, and where have I ever denied that India had problems? It absurd how you think that some characiture of Indians as self-righteous hypocrites somehow extends you the authority to judge individuals you have no knowledge of.

First of all dont try to equate yourself with westerners.

Funny, I thought that having been born in the West and lived here all my life qualified me as a genuine Westerner. You do understand that this site is run by and for people in the United States, right? And that going around trying to assign identities to strangers on the Internet is a patently ridiculous tactic?

You shouldnt need the Olympics to be held in India or proof of my sincerity to do the right thing, do you? Those are just excuses to avoid being intellectually and morally honest about India's crimes against its children and other offenses.

Ah, but I wasn't talking about "doing the right thing" (again, you have no idea what stances or actions I've taken on India outside of this thread), but rather about empowering the conversation you keep trying to have. Of course, you seem to think that the two are the same thing, but this is on its face a silly, self-serving supposition.

If you are going to quote from the New Testament Bible a more appropriate saying would be "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?". Recognize yourself?

Well, at least you're trying to be literate here. But for you to have a point would still require the assumption that I give India a pass, when I don't. And no amount of characterizations of Indian press or other SM posters is going to change that: they don't speak for me. That you're so eager to call me a hypocrite that you skip over the part of the conversation where you learn about what my stances are, and instead just assign me convenient straw-man positions, is pretty stupid.

You seem to think that it is a "human right" for monks to have political power.

Please point out a single instance of me advocating theocracy, in Tibet or anywhere else. Supporting self-determination for Tibet is just that: support for the right of the Tibetan nation to choose its own destiny. I would prefer to see them choose a liberal democracy, but the bottom line is that their right to self determination is more important than any opinions I might have about what form their government should take. In any case, I wouldn't choose to live under the CCP regime any more than I'd choose to live under a theocracy, so...

The modern chinese reject the idea of a theocracy just as they reject the idea of rule by emperors.

Good for them. Of course, modern China is a territorial empire, headed by an unaccountable overlord (who happens to have climbed the Party ladder by, you guessed it, suppressing unrest in Tibet), but... hey, whatever makes for a good slogan, right?

The Dalai Lama is persona non grata to China because he let himself be used by the CIA in a global powerplay against China.

Sort of like how the CCP, its military, and its settler are persona non grata to Tibet because of their power play against the independent Tibetan state. None of that means that they can't sit down like grown-ups and come to an acceptable agreement. Particularly considering that the Tibetan side has such a reasonable set of goals.

The very idea of buddhist monks clinging to worldly power is anti-thetical to the Buddha's teaching anyway.

Yeah, good thing we have China around to enforce the Buddha's teachings through violence. Oh, wait...

Firstly how can indians possibly be unaware of the human degradations that stare them in the face on a daily basis?

Having lived my entire life in the United States of America, like many people on SM, I find this question to be somewhat irrelevant. Again, what is the basis for all of your assumptions about my positions on India, national identity, and daily life? Given that they're all completely wrong, and yet just happen to support your urge to call me a hypocrite, you can see why they come off as suspicious.

Secondly if indians are not callous and cavalier about these problems why have the problems persisted for so long with no recognition that it is a crisis situation and no sincere effort to relieve the massive suffering?

I reject the premises of that question. Indeed, I had explicitly rejected them before you even posed it, so I don't know what you think this is going to prove to me. I'm already well aware that you're committed to your characterization of Indians; but why do you think that repeating it for the 100th time in this thread is going to prove anything?

Thirdly, if indians are not in denial about these problems why does the free indian media and the numerous free indian posters all over the internet keep gloating over India's shining success and keep mocking and pointing fingers at nations that are doing far better?

Can't say I share that perception either. Although I'd note that it's perfectly possible for a national media to be both honestly self critical and also fiercely proud. Except, of course, in authoritarian states where criticism is equated with treason.

Presume to speak only for yourself and your ilk.

Can't see where I've done anything other than that... you're the one that keeps trying to tell me what I think, over my own objections.

Perhaps in your book ignoring or denying the massive sufferings of your own kind while lecturing others on human values is reasonable and righteous, but do not delude yourself that you are fooling everybody.

And perhaps in your book assigning straw-man positions to others without any support or justification is a convincing debate technique, but do not delude yourself that you are fooling anybody.

This clown Vyasa is now giving us lectures on buddhism and human rights, he is proving that indians have problems by quoting from the many opinions found in the free indian press! All this while supporting a dictatorship which murdered more than 10 million of its own citizens during the 60s and 70s and even today does not permit dissent or open access to information for its citizens.

It is like having a shark give a long and detailed sermon on the virtues of vegetarianism - bizarre, absurd, tragic but nevertheless useful - because it exposes the thinking of such an entity before the whole world. So now I understand better some of the problems of chinese ultra-nationalism and the danger it poses to asia and the world at large.

Vyasa's comments get us closer to the truth than further away from it.

Why do you care so much about media freedom in China? They don't seem to be bothered by it. Besides, it's the Olympic Games that are seen as the best opportunity at 'opening up' China... the first time so many media will be gathered in China. They're getting ready to host a party for the world and we are acting like ungrateful guests. This is how their children will remember our actions.

I thought the reason why so many of us are supporting Obama is because we want a new way to engage with the world. These protests seem like good old-fashioned antagonizing to me.

I look forward to 2028, when all of you hypocrites will condemn me for protesting India's terrible human rights record leading up to the New Delhi games.

Fellow troll, Krish****, opines -

Why do you care so much about media freedom in China? They don't seem to be bothered by it.

How do you know that buddy? Did you take a poll there? Where are the results? What was the methodology used? Or is this special knowledge that only members of the chinese communist party possess?

Your comments would be really funny, if they didnt stink so much of arrogance and self-serving duplicity.

And, yes, even hypocrites have the right to protest things they dont like. I realize you are never going to understand simple ideas like that.

165 · Krish**** said

Why do you care so much about media freedom in China?

I, for one, care about media freedom *everywhere*. China is of particular interest because they are the single most influential, significant state that does not respect media freedom. As long as China maintains such an attitude, and openly defends the legitimacy of it, there is hope for every petty tyrant in the world. If China were to embrace human rights and democracy, the global triumph of those ideals would be assured. Sort of like how their embrace of capitalism was the death knell of communism.

They don't seem to be bothered by it.

Indeed, the pernicious effects of authoritarianism on polities that are subjected to it is a very grave concern.

Besides, it's the Olympic Games that are seen as the best opportunity at 'opening up' China...

Or so the IOC has been telling us, anyway. For their part, China seems to view it as an opportunity for everyone else to unquestioningly approve of them. It's the clash between these two conflicting fantasies as the Games become imminent that is creating so much tension.

the first time so many media will be gathered in China. They're getting ready to host a party for the world and we are acting like ungrateful guests. This is how their children will remember our actions.

If I'm "ungrateful" that they've gone on a spree of locking up dissidents in order to ensure that there won't be anyone "subversive" for all those foreign media to interview, then so be it. I just hope that my children remember that we didn't quietly sit by and get steamrolled by an authoritarian regime seeking to boost its international legitimacy. The whole implication that we should be focussed on currying favor with China, since, of course, they're going to rule the world within a decade, is pretty vapid.

I thought the reason why so many of us are supporting Obama is because we want a new way to engage with the world. These protests seem like good old-fashioned antagonizing to me.

The new way to engage with the world I had in mind doesn't involve rolling over for authoritarian regimes in the name of politeness. Which, by the way, is exactly what Bush does with China, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and countless other examples.

I look forward to 2028, when all of you hypocrites will condemn me for protesting India's terrible human rights record leading up to the New Delhi games.

Well, at least we've progressed to where the strawmen underpinning the accusations of hypocrisy are explicitly hypothetical...

Isn't the many-headed monster behind Vyasa/Prema terribly inconsistent though? I mean, isn't Prema a woman's name?

168 · Meena said

I mean, isn't Prema a woman's name?

Yeah, what's up with that?

I mean, isn't Prema a woman's name?

No, Prema (2030-2116 AD) is a transgendered reincarnation of Shakti. [wiki] [Prema Sai Baba's timeline]

166 · Al beruni said

Fellow troll, Krish****, opines -

Shameless hypocrisy. They claim to be fighting for the right to free speech in China but when the free speech here isnt going to their liking.......

, yes, even hypocrites have the right to protest things they dont like. I realize you are never going to understand simple ideas like that.

Lol. In your twisted worldview hypocrisy is a human right as is rule by reincarnated lamas. While abominations like child slavery etc in India are nothing to get worked up over. Ugly and obscene to say the least.

171 · Vyasa said

Shameless hypocrisy. They claim to be fighting for the right to free speech in China but when the free speech here isnt going to their liking.......

Free speech doesn't mean nobody ever tells anybody that they're a fool with worthless opinions and highly suspicious motives. Quite the opposite, in fact. Free speech just means that the *government* can't force you to shut up; other free speakers can, and will, encourage you to shut up all the time. And you, in turn, are free to ignore them, or tell them to shut up themselves, or whatever else you want.

In your twisted worldview hypocrisy is a human right

No, freedom of conscience is a human right, hypocrisy is just a corollary to that.

I would prefer to see them choose a liberal democracy

You mean a liberal democracy like India? Which after more than a half century remains home to more hungry people, more child slaves, more people living without clean water and access to sanitation facilities. etc etc than the rest of the world combined. Why do you wish that on the Tibetans? Visitors to Tibet under chinese rule arent horrified by the living conditions of the tibetans as they are by the conditions in India. Why are you so much more concerned about tibetan rights than indian rights? Isnt the right to food and water the most fundamental human need and right?

If China were to embrace human rights and democracy, the global triumph of those ideals would be assured. Sort of like how their embrace of capitalism was the death knell of communism.

Firstly, what have those ideals accomplished for India? Some 80% of whose population lives under the global extreme poverty line of $1 a day; and 25% of whose population lives under the Indian govts definition of extreme poverty: 33 cents a day.

Secondly, I am glad you, unlike some other ignoramuses here , recognize that China isnt practicing communism anymore. But while Maoism may have died in China it is gaining strength in the Indian subcontinent: the Maoists in Nepal have just gained political power. They will be running Nepal now not the hindu monarchy. Their victory is bound to energize and embolden India's own Maoist insurgency. With he world's largest concentration of hungry people facing a food crisis of gargantuan proportions, South Asia is ripe for some revolutionary changes. India is likely to be on the front pages for all the reasons that indians like you try desperately to hide or ignore.

173 · Vyasa said

You mean a liberal democracy like India?

I was thinking more of the United States.

Which after more than a half century remains home to more hungry people, more child slaves, more people living without clean water and access to sanitation facilities. etc etc than the rest of the world combined.

None of which is attributable to liberal Democracy per se. I.e., there also happen to be liberal democracies that have the highest standards of living in the world. Not that I have any illusions that this diversion wasn't intentional trolling, but still...

Why are you so much more concerned about tibetan rights than indian rights?

Why can't you write a single response without putting words in peoples' mouths?

Isnt the right to food and water the most fundamental human need and right?

Some people think so. Others think that political rights are more fundamental. I tend to fall into the latter camp, although not without some reservations. More to the point, it is not the responsibility of China to ensure Tibetans' access to food and water (if they were to give up being an occupying power, anyway), but it IS their responsibility not to interfere with their right to self-determination.

Firstly, what have those ideals accomplished for India? Some 80% of whose population lives under the global extreme poverty line of $1 a day; and 25% of whose population lives under the Indian govts definition of extreme poverty: 33 cents a day.

There are other things besides economic development that are worthy goals. National self-determination, for example. But, again, this whole choice between liberal Democracy and economic development is a false dichotomy: the richest, most prosperous countries in the world are all liberal democracies. And although it's true that Tibet has developed a lot since China took over, that does not imply that they would magically return to their former economic status if China were to grant them meaningful autonomy. Likewise for their political system. Nobody is advocating turning back the clock to 1951. What is desired is progress and freedom.

With he world's largest concentration of hungry people facing a food crisis of gargantuan proportions, South Asia is ripe for some revolutionary changes. India is likely to be on the front pages for all the reasons that indians like you try desperately to hide or ignore.

Remind me again where I've hid or ignored anything about India? Oh, that's right, you can't be bothered to back up your invective. Which is why it's so easy to brush off.

Isnt the right to food and water the most fundamental human need and right? Some people think so. Others think that political rights are more fundamental. I tend to fall into the latter camp

That highlights your cynical, selfish, amoral callousness. Its so easy for people like you, having escaped the grinding poverty and hunger of India, to talk so glibly about political rights being more fundamental than the right to food and water. Would you feel similarly if you were watching your children starve before your eyes?

the richest, most prosperous countries in the world are all liberal democracies

Wrong. A number of them are monarchies. Secondly, and more tellingly, the majority (by far) of the world's hungry and extremely poor people live in democracies like India and Bangladesh. There are more abjectly poor, illiterate, starving humans living in democracies than under any other system of government. So much for your ignorant correlation of democracy with prosperity.

The questions you need to ask are: why does democracy work for people of european and east asian extraction but not for indians and africans? and why should a nation continue to cling to a system of government that has failed to deliver the basic requirements of its citizens even after three generations?

the richest countries are economically free, including countries like singapore and hong kong who severely restrict political freedom. democracy is about freedom, not equality, something the fabians never understood. so as india's gini coefficient increases, her poverty decreases, at a remarkable rate in fact. china will eventually become politically free, india economically.

175 · Vyasa said

That highlights your cynical, selfish, amoral callousness.

Uh huh. Maybe next time you could at least quote the entire sentence before launching into the unfounded characterizations.

Its so easy for people like you, having escaped the grinding poverty and hunger of India,

More baseless assumptions about my life and background, from someone that's never met me. Why is it that you can't make an argument that does not depend on the identity of the person it's addressed to?

to talk so glibly about political rights being more fundamental than the right to food and water.

I wasn't glib at all, despite your selective quoting. I want everyone to enjoy all rights. You're the one arguing that it's okay for China to override Tibetans' rights.

Would you feel similarly if you were watching your children starve before your eyes?

Would you feel the same way if the CCP were subject to electoral control, and so it wasn't a matter of national pride to defend authoritarianism?

Wrong. A number of them are monarchies.

Oh yeah? Name one.

Secondly, and more tellingly, the majority (by far) of the world's hungry and extremely poor people live in democracies like India and Bangladesh. There are more abjectly poor, illiterate, starving humans living in democracies than under any other system of government.

That, of course, is because there are more democracies than any other form of government. With the exception of a few stubborn hold-outs, everyone in the world has realized that it's a superior form of government to all others that have ever been tried. That poor countries are among those that realized this and acted upon it is not a fault of democracy; quite the reverse, in fact.

So much for your ignorant correlation of democracy with prosperity.

I was pointing out that there is no correlation between being undemocratic and prosperity, which is not the same thing as asserting that there is a correlation between democracy and prosperity. I.e., Tibet is not faced with a choice between democracy + poverty, or authoritarianism + prosperity (except to the extent that China would work to undermine them if they managed to get a democracy of their own, that is). That said, correlation is an average quantity, and so it bears mentioning that the fact that the overwhelming majority of rich, prosperous people live in liberal democracies cancels out your assertion. To really answer this question, you'd need to look at how well the various democracies in the world have faired compared to their previous forms of government (there were plenty of poor people in India before they got democracy, after all). If you were to look at this issue seriously, you'd find that democracy is generally quite good for business. Just look at the Korean peninsula. Or Taiwan.

The questions you need to ask are: why does democracy work for people of european and east asian extraction but not for indians and africans?

Actually, the question on my mind is: does Vyasa really think he's proving anything except that he's a racist?

and why should a nation continue to cling to a system of government that has failed to deliver the basic requirements of its citizens even after three generations?

I suppose because it still beats all the other systems they've tried, which were at least as bad in terms of basic services, and ALSO deprived people of their rights. Not that I accept the premise that India hasn't seen massive strides forward in the last 60 years (people have been predicting large-scale starvation there for generations, and yet the population keeps growing... and the decline the percentage of people below the poverty line in recent decades has been similar to other spots in Asia).

Also, let's not get too carried away with your exaggerations of the differences in poverty between China and India. Despite all of the growth in China in recent years, there is still a 9-digit number of poor people there. Huge swaths of the country do not have access to running water, much less *clean* running water. This is no surprise: one of the keys to Chinese manufacturing growth has been the *massive* supply of desperately poor people willing to work for peanuts. For hundreds of millions of Chinese, the only thing the CCP has done about their living conditions is to paper over them by suppressing protests and preventing media coverage. Naturally, your insecurity about the huge problems remaining in China is one of the major factors motivating you to demonize India but, still, for someone who'se going to call others glib...

Moreover, why are you even bothering to wrap your invective in sham arguments in the first place? If you aren't going to make even a token effort at a substantiative argument, it doesn't add anything to your credibility. Obviously, your strategy is to keep taking cheap shots at India in the hope that you'll hit a nerve somewhere and provoke an embarassing response. In which case, why the pretense of seriousness? Is it just in hopes that the interns won't delete your posts and ban you? It certainly doesn't add any heft to your assertions of righteousness.

My apologies to any third parties that have actually read this thread.

I'm planning a candle-light vigil to protest the arrests, who's with me?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/world/asia/17torch.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

http://www.guernicamag.com/features/556/post_1/

While many governments now involve indigenous groups in environmental conservation, India is on the verge of creating what might become the largest mass eviction for conservation ever. Groups like India's Adivasis have come to be called “conservation refugees.” But many conservationists now say conservation initiatives are doomed to fail without them.

178 · Krish**** said

I'm planning a candle-light vigil to protest the arrests, who's with me?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/world/asia/17torch.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

If you actually followed SM closely enough to be able to critique it, you'd know that there was already an entire post/thread lambasting India for not being more supportive of Tibet and less deferent to China. But, hey, why resist a cheap shot?

Did I miss the candlelight vigil for that, as well? Were there people reading poetry in Portugese or reciting Tibetan couplets?

Of the two links I posted, the 2nd one was more interesting. Other links I've posted in this thread were discussions on India being a net-aid giver.

These are all good articles that I like that I never see make it to Sepia. I'm just surprised they don't get caught by such a well-read readership. A bias of some kind?

I'm not one to talk about bias or deny anyone who's moving forward with a cause. I just like a bit more rational approach. And, in this forum, I think Vyasa has carried the day.

Why do we have to talk about Tibetans just by themselves? What about the Uighurs and the Muslim west of China?

And their current policies?

Well, they're no different than India. The march toward modernity/development/progress/whatever-you-want-to-call-it will bring all sorts of challenges to these countries.

And this is not India doing this, this is an NGO displacing millions in their blind quest for 'conservation'.

http://www.guernicamag.com/features/556/post_1/

Almost four million people were at that time living inside India's formally protected areas, and alongside several million others in surrounding towns and villages. Most of them resided there before the protected areas were created, and all were heavily dependent on local natural resources for fuel, fodder, medicines, fish, water and non-timber forest products. “To pass an order that denies all ‘rights and concessions’ to such people is virtually like telling them to pack up and go,” proclaimed Indian sociologist Ashish Kothari. “Both the WWF petition and the learned judges' order are, to put it bluntly, devoid of any sense of grounded reality. Even if the procedure for inquiry was to be done properly, it could be grossly unjust to villagers.”

181 · Krish**** said

Why do we have to talk about Tibetans just by themselves? What about the Uighurs and the Muslim west of China?

Who ever said we had to talk about Tibetans in isolation? I'm happy to talk about how badly China is screwing over the Uighurs.

Oh yeah? Name one.

Brunei, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain all have per capita incomes over $25,000. The UAE is ranked third richest above the USA. According to this list:

http://www.aneki.com/countries_gdp_per_capita.html

the majority (by far) of the world's hungry and extremely poor people live in democracies like India and Bangladesh. There are more abjectly poor, illiterate, starving humans living in democracies than under any other system of government .....That of course, is because there are more democracies than any other form of government.

There are at least 50 nations of the world that are not democracies including China the largest country by population. Some one-third of the total world population still lives under non-democratic govts. Democratic India (with around 15% of the global population) alone accounts for more than half the world's extremely poor and hungry! That glaring failure of a long term stable democracy makes a mockery of your claims. Add the poor and hungry in other democracies like Bangladesh, Indonesia, Phillipines, Guatemala, the various african democracies etc and one can see that a disproportional number of the poor and hungry live in democracies.

it bears mentioning that the fact that the overwhelming majority of rich, prosperous people live in liberal democracies cancels out your assertion.

Do explain how the miserable failure of democracy in India is "canceled out" by the successes of democracy in western europe, north america and east asia??

If you were to look at this issue seriously, you'd find that democracy is generally quite good for business. Just look at the Korean peninsula. Or Taiwan.

China is considered excellent for doing business as well. So is Dubai. Much better than most democracies including India. So whats your point? Democracy is not a necessary requirement for capitalism to flourish as China is showing.

I suppose because it still beats all the other systems they've tried

What other system has INdia tried in the 60 years it has been independent?

Also, let's not get too carried away with your exaggerations of the differences in poverty between China and India.

You have to be really ignorant to deny that China is miles ahead of India. The most extreme manifestation of poverty is hunger. India leads the world in this metric both in total numbers and in percentage. One has to be really thick-skinned, truly heartless and totally shameless to ignore India's inexcusable callousness towards the worst suffering in the world and instead taunt nations like China which has a far better record feeding (and educating, and employing) its citizens.

I'll agree that Democracy doesn't work for all countries.
The people must want it for it to prevail. The Chinese people seem far too happy giving up a few rights in exchange for economic success and protection and "one china" and other propaganda that their government pushes out regularly.

And democracy and economic success have nothing to do with each other. The fact that USA is so rich is because of its Capitalistic ideals, not because of Democratic morals.
So, lets not mis-diagnose the effects of democracy. The fact that India is still so poor is because of corruption, population explosion, and the basic behavioral characteristic that Indians look before they leap (i.e. less risk taking).