To do in SF - Tibet rally on April 8, Richard Gere, Desmond Tutu
Pro-Tibetan human rights activists (who also erected the billboard shown above) are organizing a rally in San Francisco this Tuesday, April 8, to be led by Richard Gere, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and Tibetan community leaders.
As China prepares to host the Olympics in August, the government is conducting the worst crackdown in Tibet since the 1960s Cultural Revolution. Come show your support for the Tibetan and Chinese people on the eve of the Beijing Olympic torch passing through San Francisco - the only stop in North America.Link (Thanks Jake Appelbaum)Where: United Nations Plaza, at Market & Hyde, near Civic Center BART
Rally & Speeches 6:00pm
Culture / Music 7:15pm
Candle Light Vigil 8:00pm
UPDATE: Sean Savage says,
1) On Wednesday, the day the torch will be run here, another big protest will take place.Related BB posts:2) SF Team Tibet will send out SMS updates to anyone who wants to take part on the 8th and 9th. People can send a text message with the word SFTORCH to the phone number 41411 to receive important text message updates on 8th and 9th.
* BBtv Vlog (Xeni): Tibet report - monks forced to participate in staged videos.
* BBtv Vlog (Xeni): Tibet's uprising and the internet.
the latest
latest episodes
Here's a BBC article about clashes on the route of the Olympic torch, which for some reason, the comment interface is not allowing me to mark up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7332942.stm
And a quote for the ages:
Beijing Olympic torch relay spokesman Qu Yingpu told the BBC: "This is not the right time, the right platform, for any people to voice their political views.
So Yingpu, when exactly would be the right time?
Please Please Please do not wreck the Olympics for our athletes.
I know this is a dream, but the Olympics should not be about politics. Ideally it should be a time when all nations, regardless of strife and disagreements, can compete with each other in a fair competition. Athletics are a way to compete
and show athority in a non violent manner (boxing excluded).
Athletes have sacrificed many many years to compete and they should be able to in an environment that is based on trust and with out fear.
I shudder for the year when Jimmy Carter boycotted the Olympics to protest Russia's
invasion of Afghanistan. Then, later the USA
invaded Afghanistan and we look like the biggest hypocrites.
I think it is hypocrisy to slap at China for human rights, while we deny many Iraq citizens of human rights. This is called HYPOCRACY.
Thanks BoingBoing.
Dear Peacock:
The Dalai Lama has repeatedly made clear that it is not the intent of the Tibetan people to "wreck the Olympics".
Indeed, I invite you to consider the very real probability that the "riots" in Tibet together with the accompanying violence could very well be instigated and staged by the Chinese government.
Please do not wreck the Olympics for our athletes.
Sorry. Unable to comply. Death and torture are more significant than rhythmic gymnastics. Is the US hypocritical? Hell, yes. But one big, fat part of the hypocrisy is doing business with China and other repressive regimes. Is the US a nasty, abusive bully? Fuck, yes. But we're still vastly better than China. Or should I come to your house and throw you in jail just for reading BoingBoing?
I have been opposed to boycotting the Olympics ever since the 80s, but I'm over it now. The games were given to China on the agreement that they would improve their human rights record. They've gotten worse. Our policy of appeasement, which I must sadly lay at Bill Clinton's doorstep, has given them a clear message. Kill, torture, maim as much as you want. As long as we get economic benefits from trade with you, we don't give a shit.
Boycott the Olympics. Boycott every Olympic sponsor. Boycott every politician who participates. And if you meet an athlete who's participating, remind them that they're legitimizing a brutal totalitarian regime and whatever gold they win is no better than blood diamonds. Unless of course, they shout Free Tibet from the podium, wear a Tibet tee shirt to the opening ceremonies or otherwise disrupt this disgusting, inhuman spectacle. If they do that, beer's on me.
what is this Olympic "Ideal" anyway? Can anyone explain to me what there is to respect here?
what is this Olympic Ideal anyway? Can anyone explain to me what there is to respect here?
If you view the Olympics as a pagan ceremony (which I do), then there is an ideal. By becoming perfectly focused, absolutely single-minded, utterly freed from all distraction, you become godlike. The qualities necessary to win are (in theory) the same qualities that lead to spiritual transcendence. Some athletes, and I would guess a lot of the winners, do achieve that. But a lot of others take performance enhancing drugs, cheat and spend all their time partying.
Greetings
Ever since Jesse Owens ruined Adolf Hitler's little coming out party in 1936 its been clear that Olympics = Politics
Now we can ignore China's ethnic cleansing as they were prepared to ignore Germany's...
But a better plan would be to call them to account!
Enjoy the journey
WarLord
Crafted Resistance has CC'd vector art for the Tibetan flag as well as one called "Beijing 2008 Barbed" which depicts the Olympic rings in barbed wire. The last probably violates all kinds of copyright. If I recall only official orgs are permitted to use the the rings. So print it on your T-Shirt are be an outlaw. Arrggg...
I usually watch the Olympics, but you know what, aint gonna happen this year, if there was a petition of people who were not going to watch/support and avoid supporting any company who advertises as the official something supporter of these olympics, Id sign it. Boycotts don't have to be at a national level (granted it makes more of an impact that way) but can be at a personal level. Yep Id sign it.
how about signing a petition for a kidnapped child?
http://www.petitiononline.com/ftpl/petition.html
If you view the Olympics as a pagan ceremony (which I do)
FINALLY! A pagan ceremony with corporate sponsors!
I'm pretty certain that the running of the Torch will be phase out within the next few olympics. I can picture various political entities using it to draw attention to their own issues by barring the torch from coming through their country or even perhaps killing the torch bearer if he/she is viewed as a symbol of the west.
Kind of like the way Hollywood ego's use the Oscars to draw attention to their pet political causes.
Please do not wreck the Olympics for our athletes.
If I could, I would wreck it with a sledge hammer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkMcj4vQtRU
For some reason I feel like Boingboing only favors one side of the story. It only picked news about people who are against Olympics, or what the Tibetan have suffered. But I didn't see it talk about how some media around the world has been using the Nepalese policemen violent videos to mislead the audience. Nor did I see it talking about what damages have Dalai Lama done to the civilian.
I could be wrong, because I only read boingboing once a day. I may have missed some update, and I meant no offense to anybody. My point is just that there are always two sides of the story.
and in this case, the merit in the story rests with the Tibetan people.
Sorry DDAFENG, I read your earlier post. You have a credibility problem.
Greetings
There are two sides -
One is a well paid propaganda of the China political agenda enabled by corporate media and big business that carefuly overlooks any evils done by China while selling this fiction of non political Olympics and not incidently selling a shitload of slave labor logo merchandise...
I don't really think BB has to recap the avalanche of puerile pro-China press, leave it to Faux
Enjoy the journey
WarLord
http://www.tibetanfreedomtorch.org/
Maybe the people in the rally should bring water balloons and douse the damn torch. That will have a lot more effect than some peaceful protest China couldn't care about.
Or better than water they should bring some Purple-K extinguishers. That stuff will put out any fire. You can mix Purple-K with foam or water like they do to put out aircraft fires.
Let me get this straight. The riots were staged by the Chinese, who then beat the rioters to death and then reported it as Tibetans rioting?
Seems a bit far fetched. Tin-foil hat far-fetched.
Also, I think that the Dalai Lama PR machine is more well-oiled than the Chinese PR machine.
TAKUAN, I don't think I have a credibility problem. My earlier post was also saying that we should look at both sides of the story. The only thing changed after my earlier post is that I gained more knowledge about the Tibet issue, and that I know it's not a simple who's right or who's wrong issue. All I'm saying is that we should be open to different ideas, and the other side of the story.
Apparently, WarLord favors one side over the other, and that's fine by me. Just wanted to let my little voice be heard as well.
the video you posted says it all. I, on the other hand,am not being paid by anyone.
My earlier post was also saying that we should look at both sides of the story.
Maybe we could deny the Holocaust, too, while were being so broadminded.
Moon,
The idea of agent provocateur came from real life, not SF. But you know that already.
Tak-kun,
Post that picture of the soldiers again.
http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/chinese-orchestrating-riots-tibet.htm
I admit that the video I posted earlier was not objective. And that's the process I went through: first being angry about China's government, then being angry about the misleading media, and now after more knowledge trying to be fair, at least to myself. I never suspected you being paid by anyone. I totally understand that you have your own opinion. I was just protecting my own words.
Why mst ths trcty b hld n sch hgh prtst?
s t bcs th Tbtn ppl r ndrgng grt tms f sffrng, r bcs th ppl cmmtng ths cts f brtlty r th Chns.
nd why mst th lympcs n Bjng b th ft n th dr fr wrldwd prtst?
f tht s th cs, thn myb th nxt lympcs shld b hld n ny n f th frcn cntrs, hr thngs hvn't bn gng s wll thr fr qt whl.
First of all, the torch is making ONE stop in North America? Just one?
And of all of the places they could have chosen, they pick San Francisco? It's like they *want* protesters.
You know what? Fuck Tibet. Fuck China, fuck the whole thing.
If the Olympics were being held in Candyland, where everyone is happy and fulfilled and there are free butterscotch fountains for everyone, the Olympics would still be evil. They're not some dream of human athletic greatness that transcends our differences. They're nothing but a massive plague on the land that shows up every couple years like locusts, sucks massive amounts of wealth out of a city to give to the rich, and leaves destruction in its wake.
You want to see the Olympics distilled down to their essence: here it is.
yep, that's about right.One fight at a time. Right now, real blood is being spilled in Tibet. By real people. For the crime of being in the way of China.
Shall we start with that?
I'm saying this as I always do:
No matter Tibet's yours or not, China, you're doing things wrong, VERY WRONG.
Besides, China's way too big to fuck. There's no way I could score enough meth for that date.
Dear DDAFENG:
"I was just protecting my own words."
Do not protect your words. Do you want my words? Take them. Kill all my words. They are only words.
What I do say is: Stop killing people.
People are dieing and that should stop, agreed.
And then?
I want to know what the aim here is, what's the plan?
Is it to restore the Dalai Lama? Autonomy for Tibet? Few Tibetans speak any language other than Mandarin, and the Han Chinese have by this time settled their businesses and homes in the country. Not to mention the major industrial development that, while only marginally beneficial to Tibet, is the backbone of Chinese infrastructure, providing gas, coal, and power to the nation.
You know what? Let's muster the political will, let's save Tibet. I'll give Richard Gere any means he deems necessary. What exactly would he like to happen? The Han ejected? Government officials fired? China denied heat and power? And then what?
I know that we white do know how everybody else on earth should be running their lives, but for the love of christ this one time could we please think it through?
(once again they should stop putting down the riots violently, no argument there)
I think that we'd settle for an end to political repression of everybody in China, not just the Tibetans. And all ethnic minorities to have the same rights as the Han. I could live with that for now. Not really all that revolutionary.
why don't you start by reading this?
http://www.tibet.com/
"The Chinese have made sure that for a few hours, Paris will look like Tiananmen Square."
Robert Menard
Reporters Without Borders
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7333875.stm
The Olympics are an utter farce, corrupt through and through, from the lowliest doping athlete to the highest bribe-taking official. They don't benefit the host country or showcase true athletics, and are merely political grandstanding and profitmaking.
The Chinese government deserves them. They should be held every 4 years in Beijing.
Antinous @7 who said "The qualities necessary to win are (in theory) the same qualities that lead to spiritual transcendence. Some athletes, and I would guess a lot of the winners, do achieve that. But a lot of others take performance enhancing drugs, cheat and spend all their time partying."
I imagine Bacchus would have take the drugs and partied. A pagan might follow his lead.
I'm in.
If they were coming through NYC, I'd block the street with my own body.
Hey DDAFENG - The PRC censors the very web site you're somehow free to comment on because of BoingBoigs negative updates on they're behavior in Tibet. If seeing both sides of the story is important to you, you ought to be solidly condemning the PRC as brutal tyrants who won't let people think for themselves on pain of prison and torture.
But somehow you're not. Odd how that works for you. You get to claim you want to hear both sides, but the side you're defending is prohibiting it's citizens form doing exactly that.
This makes me think you don't really care about the people seeing both sides.
When Takuan says you've got a credibilty problem, this is only one of the reasons why. No one defending the PRC in it's oppression of Tibet can claim that pro-Tibet arguments need to show both sides. It's an imbecilic argument.
That billboard is awesome, I wish I were up in the bay area to see it.
For those interested, I noticed studentsforafreetibet.org had an sms alert system set up for the torch relay in sf:
"SMS Alerts for 4/9
Text SFTORCH to 41411"
Or you can enter in your cell number on the widget they have on their blog page, blog.studentsforafreetibet.org
Two things here. China's current government is certainly a repressive regime that has no respect for human rights or self determination, after all isn't that why they took over and subjugated Tibet in the first place? For this reason (and a whole host of others) I support dissent on the PDRC. Secondly, the autonomous government of Tibet is also not the most humanitarian regime. what I mean here is that the regular citizen of Tibet is beholden to the whims of the priest class and is subject to all sorts of repression as dictated by their superiors. Therefore this issue is not so black and white. I will grant that what is happening is horrendous but the liberation of Tibet should be seen in the light of best interests. I make no determination here as to what the best interest is. That is still unclear. What I can determine is that every person should be afforded the right to choose what they want and what form of governance best suits them. Question authority, and accept only those that can justify their authority.
Why is it necessary to destroy the good things the world has created in order to fight the bad?
I know, let's destroy the Sistine Chapel because of all of the foul things the Catholic Church has done.
Or maybe we should fight the problem at it's source and not make grand symbolic gestures that do nothing.
People and governments aren't so complex. Affect their bank account and they will change. Boycott Chinese goods. (If it is possible to do so and still find the products necessary for life.) Only a disruption of cash will make a government listen. That is the sole reason war works. It is hard to make money when your shit is on fire.
China will still have the Olympics. Tibet will still be under their thumb. Only monetary sanctions from cooperating governments all over the world or a worldwide boycott of Chinese goods will make them listen.
Tibet is also not the most humanitarian regime. what I mean here is that the regular citizen of Tibet is beholden to the whims of the priest class and is subject to all sorts of repression as dictated by their superiors.
You refer to a situation of five decades ago. The Dalai Lama has described himself as half-Marxist, which frankly makes him more Marxist than the PRC. He also supports a democratically elected government for Tibet. There's no conflict. Nobody supports a return to rule by monks. Just peace, equality and the right of Tibetans to speak their own language and maintain their own culture.
I'm taking my airzooka.
I know, let's destroy the Sistine Chapel because of all of the foul things the Catholic Church has done.
If they were currently using it as a torture chamber, I'd nuke it myself. I see your point, and I usually think that the Olympics are a positive tool for diplomacy. But not this time. By telling China to clean up their act in order to get the games, then doing nothing when they actually got worse is a big de facto endorsement. Too much carrot. Not enough stick.
Only a disruption of cash will make a government listen.
No argument there. Unfortunately, we've been so busy giving China economic incentives that we've screwed ourselves. We have a trade deficit, the repression is worse and now it's too embarrassing for Bush, Brown, Sarkozy to admit that we've been making a huge policy mistake all these years. I bet that individual citizens of France and Germany will make their protests with their purses. US and UK citizens, I wouldn't be so sure.
"By telling China to clean up their act in order to get the games, then doing nothing when they actually got worse is a big de facto endorsement. Too much carrot. Not enough stick."
Yes. But back to the original point. Why destroy the wonder and joy of the Olympics to punish China? It is a silly and flailing reaction.
It won't read as the teacher cancelling recess because China was being naughty. It will read as recess being canceled because the class tattle-tale couldn't follow directions.
It's as if we are smashing the carrot with the stick and then shoving the stick up our collective ass.
Why destroy the wonder and joy of the Olympics to punish China?
Some people can't experience any wonder and joy at the party when they know that their hosts are torturing people in the back bedroom. When you describe putting human rights and compassion ahead of sports and pageantry as a silly reaction, I think that you may have created some unintentional irony. The trampoline is silly. Being shot in the head by a soldier isn't.
Oh, stop it with the whining about "our athletes". They are professional sports product endorsers and the whole Olympics thing has gotten way too commercialized and politicized and needs to be held just in Greece, and be done with it.
If people cannot bring themselves to boycott the Olympics because they are too mired in moral equivalency, they can do just this much: refuse to confer legitimacy on the government of China at this time.
That means calling on Bush and other world leaders not to attend the opening ceremony. We can do that much.
"When you describe putting human rights and compassion ahead of sports and pageantry as a silly reaction, I think that you may have created some unintentional irony."
The silliness is in the means. If you have true compassion for the people whose lives are destroyed by a government you might want to do something that has an detrimental effect on the ability of that government to continue to function. Not scream and yell about that government's right to host a sporting event which is not a necessity for that government's operation.
If someone is dying of thirst I would think it lacking compassion to bring them a thimble full of water.
The unintentional irony may be your own.
Not scream and yell about that government's right to host a sporting event which is not a necessity for that government's operation.
ProkofyNeva @ 48 answers you quite eloquently. Either you're being disingenuous, in which case why am I talking to you. Or you really don't understand how this bolsters China's ability to squash human rights, in which case why am I talking to you.
Well, the head of the IOC finally said something about Tibet, and he said it in Beijing.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7333955.stm
But he keeps saying things like, Violence for whatever reason is not compatible with the values of the torch relay or the Olympic Games. Is there a whole, globally-meaningful value system built into the Olympics? Because I must have been sick that day in high school civics class.
lts knw nthng bt Chn stp syng nnsnss hr!
'm Chns nd 'm n Bjng RGHT NW!
Tbt blngs t Chn!
t hs bn, nd wll lwys b!
"Or you really don't understand how this bolsters China's ability to squash human rights"
What bolsters China's ability to abuse human rights is exactly what bolsters Russia's and Saudi Arabia's and North Korea's and ours. More money and/or more bombs than everyone else.
What strikes me as disingenuous or at least naive is the notion that disrupting the Olympics will have a detrimental effect on a government that DOES NOT CARE WHAT YOU THINK. If protests in a democratic republic like ours won't stop a war, what in the world is on your mind to think that protests will change the minds of a communist regime?
In addition, while some bad PR may bring a little light to the plight of the Tibetan people it is not going to take the gas out of the tank of such a massive machine. A symbolic gesture is nice as well. World leaders boycotting. Super. Meanwhile business after business all over the western world will be breaking their necks to take advantage of all that China has to offer. Warts and all. Feeding the gas tank of that machine.
I'm sure China could survive a boycott of the Olympics. I'm quite sure they could cancel the whole shootin' match and be none the less for it. Symbolism is fine, but without action it has no teeth. Change requires action. There must be something DONE.
This is the solution to such a horrible situation? This is what academics and free thinkers from all over the world have come up with? This is their best effort? Not watching a limited sporting event? Blocking a torch from going down a street?
Maybe next year we can boycott the Super Bowl and let all the families of the innocent dead in Iraq know how we have helped them by not watching football and commercials for a day. I'm sure they'll applaud our efforts with the same enthusiasm they have always shown for their "liberators".
Christopher Y,
You're a troll. Unless you have something substantial to say, go away.
clyne88,
If you have better idea, I'll be happy to read it when I get up in the morning. So far all that you've done is counsel us to do nothing. You mentioned a boycott of Chinese goods, then reviled us for suggesting a boycott of the games, which are a Chinese good. Get your story straight. You're just arguing in circles.
ntns
thnk yr bllshts r sbstntl?!
dt
Comparing 1932, 2008 is NOTHING! What a peaceful world we are living in! (And yes, those were bad times, honestly speaking.) All these countries should be boycott from 1932 Olympics:
1. Bonus Army: All countries should boycott the 1932 Olympics in Los Angeles, for the US used army troops to forcibly remove protesters from Washington DC. Some protesters were shot and killed, just 2 days before Olympics! The protestors burned down their own camps while the public says the army burned down the camps.
2. The Soviets should boycott the US due to its worse ideology (i.e. Marxism is way more advanced than the evils of Capitalism (well, this is my generalization, of course.)) and racial discrimination.
3. The Brits should be boycott for arresting a person named Gandhi.
4. Japan should be boycott for, um, invasion of China. (Wonder why USSR was boycott for invading Afghanistan... which eventually leads to 9/11)
5. Italy for Fascism.
What this is about is not destroying something beautiful to right something ugly and destroying something ugly by means that will actually work.
The Olympics are NOT a product of China. They are being held in China for one month. After that China will still be in Tibet. Boycott the games or not, Chinese troops are still in Tibet. Get a sizable chunk of the population of the western world to boycott anything made in China and they WILL do what you want.
Why let such good intentioned energy go to waste on a USELESS protest when it can be harnessed to actually effect change? Use the attention gained to engender support and let the games carry on as intended. As a display of the best we have. (I'm sure someone will say something about commercialism and steroids here. Way to be an optimist.)
The Olympics have always shown us we have more in common than differences, if only for a short time. It would be nice to keep it that way .
Plus hijacking the Olympics for political means has been done in the past. I don't recall that going so well.
Chck r hm t fnd t hw mch prdcts frm Chn r sng rght nw.
f rlly wnt t byctt, byctt r pnts nd shrts frst!
> boycott ur pants
I tried that, but my colleagues were not amused.
You'll be surprised, Christophery, but I actually do.
I'm also not buying Adidas or Volkswagen and I agree it's quite difficult to boycott things made in China, but it's still possible. I've even given up on my favourite Pai Mu Tan tea, which is a shame, but nicely replaced by Japanese tea. Granted, that only does something for my conscience, but maybe I'm not alone in this.
Antinous: "Unless of course, [athletes] shout Free Tibet from the podium, wear a Tibet tee shirt to the opening ceremonies or otherwise disrupt this disgusting, inhuman spectacle."
I'd love to see that too, but I just read that the IOC has promised to punish any athlete who raises a fuss during the games.
"Vazquez Rana, whose organization represents the 205 national Olympic Committees whose athletes participate in the Games, upped the ante, making it clear that while athletes are entitled to their opinions and are free to speak out on many issues, they can't cross the line politically.
'We want our athletes to have the greatest freedom of expression,' he said. 'But an athlete who steps outside the rules of the Olympic Charter is committing a mistake which he or she knows he should not do . . . and is subject to sanction.'
The charter states that athletes cannot make political statements within Olympic venues." - Apr 5th, 2008, canada.com
Vazquez feels that the whole Tibet thing is "China's problem." :-/
The older I get, the more appreciation I have for the extent of the "spectrum of informed opinion" as it applies to all things worthy of consideration.....and the more I am in (shock and) awe of the evolving power of the cancerous media to influence this very (re-)public opinion.
Yesterday my 5 year old daughter and I stopped by at a modest little shop that sells Tibetan imports on the Haight street near Ashbury. The elderly proprietors were visibly moved, if not overwhelmed by the stream of blessings and support they were receiving from people coming through. On leaving the shop, my daughter asked me why they were crying and blessing everybody (having intuitively recognized and understood the namaskara mudra "hands held in prayer" gesture as only a 5 year old can). I tried my best to explain things given my understanding of the crisis and in consideration of the aforementioned personal challenges. When I asked if she understood she reflected for a moment, then nodded and said, "I think they just know that people love them".
We live In San Francisco. On April 9th we are going to stand somewhere along the route of the torch bearing ceremony waving a Tibetan flag. Not because we champion nor condemn any of the -isms. Not because we are trying to wash our conscience nor our hands. And certainly not because we hold the magical decoder ring that is necessary to understand the politics, the economics, the conspiracy, the more significant principle nor nearly the real truth of the matter. But because my daughter explained to me that maybe sometimes the right(est) thing to do is to just lay down your damn weapons; be they smart bombs or stupid speeches, heroic action or active rhetoric, public protesting or private profiteering. Sometimes the very best you can do is to take advantage of a rare opportunity to be a tiny part of a global outpouring of love and support for a people whose long-suffering is etched into the lines on their weary faces.
Goddess Bless.
@53 "What strikes me as disingenuous or at least naive is the notion that disrupting the Olympics will have a detrimental effect on a government that DOES NOT CARE WHAT YOU THINK. "
This post captured my sentiment. People like to feel empowered, but we are not - it is an egostitical illusion to assume that any amount of public awareness will affect in a broad way Chinese policy in Tibet. They have too much at stake. Allowing any political protests to lead to any amount of autonomy could not possibly be tolerated.
The idea of democracy and "fairness" is a little bit la-la foo-foo fairy-land happy time. Guns and money. Awareness doesn't stop guns and money.
Dear Sproing:
Why live? We die anyway.
It isn't being defeatist to be realist. Live to enjoy. We don't need grandiose illusions to do that.
Sit down to your dinner. It is a good one. Nourishing, tasty, more than enough.
As you eat, you can hear the child in the next room being raped and tortured.
Bon appetit
Pragmatically speaking, how to lessen the rape and torture? "Raising awareness" is futile, and only makes us suffer empathically.
Breaking news! The torch has been extinguished!
If you don't even know it is happening, how will ANYTHING GET better?
On the other side of the coin,nothing facilitates evil better than ignorance, fear, inaction,lack of opposition and surrender before the battle is even joined.
Why not let Bush remain as President For Life?
and where is that, Hassan?
Lights Out for Olympic Torch in Paris
Of course pragmatic action requires awareness of the situation. I'm not advocating ignorance. I'm just saying that awareness, even omniscient awareness by 100% of the people, is not enough, and it is counter productive to act as if "raising awareness" were a politically useful act.
What would be productive is knowing how the system works and manipulating that system, if possible. I suggest that the system can't be manipulated, as far as autonomy is concerned, by any amount of rhetoric or action regarding the Olympics. I'm open to arguments to the contrary that demonstrate political savy.
They extinguished it,got on a small bus then relight
it, behind a cordon of riot cops.
I believe China will be less likely to simply execute any Tibetans presently in jail if they feel that the rest of the world will want to know what happened to them later.
That is pretty important to those held.
I also submit that there are a great many Chinese along for the the ride who do NOT like what their government is doing.
Sproing3, if our opinions don't matter, why do corporations and the government go to so much trouble to suborn them?
I distrust counsels that say we're politically powerless and shouldn't bother to act. For instance, "Don't vote -- it only encourages them" is completely backward. The them in that sentence are hugely encouraged when we don't vote, just like they're encouraged when we don't speak up.
I've never been preached at to give up some bit of political power when there wasn't some entity loitering there, waiting to snatch up what I put down.
ChristopherY, a hint: Chinese ESL speakers don't speak LOLcat.
Takuan, I'd also like to hope that China will temper their reactions to protests because of outside pressures. I can't see outside pressures or internal pressures leading to autonomy.
@77, I'm not advocating inaction, nor ignorance. I'm suggesting that raising awareness alone is not action. I'm suggesting that to be pragmatic requires more than that, and it is a trap to think that Free Tibet bumber stickers will do anything. It is more pragmatic to be more pragmatic. What, exactly, would move the followers and givers of orders in China to behave differently regarding Tibetan independance? People's reactions to the Olympics? Perhaps, but I'd argue that some other leverage would be needed to make a fundamental difference.
@77 and Takuan seem to be hearing me say that nothing can be done and lets forget about it and move on. I'm saying something more along the lines of, if something can be done then do it, and if not then don't. Awareness is not action.
I loathe the Chinese government, and really have a strong hatred for communism. I think that if Tibet wants to be free, they should be allowed. That being said what happened in Britain and now France is bad for the cause. The flame is not the Chinese governments tradition, it is an Olympic tradition. This type of action allows the Chinese government to say, "See, see, this is the type of savages we are dealing with." A better way to protest would be to stand on the sidelines wrists and knees bound blindfolded and gaged. Have a banner flying overhead that states "Free Tibet". Try to get to the front of the line, naturally, the more people that are doing this the better. It always helps the cause if the participants are respectful rather than disrespectful.
Sproing, you're the best person to know what would satisfy you, don't expect the rest of us to jump through hoops trying to figure out what will make you happy. Motivating the proletariate is hard; it's way easier to take advantage of whatever movement is already going on than to theorise about the perfect action that will bring about your goals and try to make that happen. Given that this is happening, and it's happening now, the question you should be asking is how to capitalise on it to produce a change, no matter how miniscule. Because even a small victory is a victory.
To more directly answer your question, it gives our diplomats something to work with. They can say (in appropriate diplomatese), "In just a few months a half-million visitors with digital cameras, laptops, PDAs, and flash-drives the size of a stick of chewing-gum are due to descend on your country. You aren't going to be able to control them the way you tried -- and failed -- to control the Tibetans. Wise up. Concede something to the Tibetans, have a few corrupt officials executed, kiss and make up, and everyone will be happy. Otherwise, those people will go home and talk to their friends and relatives about what a rotten country China is, and those friends and relatives will talk to their friends, and some of those will be in a position to make decisions about dealing with China, and they will decide not to, and without support from the outside world the whole lousy thing will collapse and fall and you've got the nineteenth and early twentieth century China all over again. And none of us wants that, do we?"
The Chinese invaded Tibet in 1950.
Hoping that Tibet will once again become Tibet controlled is like the Cubans in Florida hoping that they will control Cuba again.
It ain't gonna happen. The Lamas are just stirring up trouble for no purpose. The Dalai Lama is rich enough - he can bring all the rest of the Lamas out of Tibet if he wants to. I'm pretty sure China wouldn't object.
I'm not privy to what motivates Chinese politicians, so I'm probably just sharing my brain farts, but here are some very vague notions I have.
1) People with ideologies to protect, such as *ism or *ity, tend to be resistant to change.
2) Chinese leadership does not have a history of being responsive to opinion.
3) In general self-perpetuating-power structures are responsive to changes that affect them. I can't see how opinion affects the power structure that is the organization of China.
I wish I had some insight into what actually would motivate Chinese leadership to radically alter their entire world view and raison-detre and notions of personal and community power, such that they would accomodate more autonomy in Tibet, or elsewhere. I'd suggest that perhaps, just perhaps, we are approaching the whole issue with the wrong question, and therefore getting no answer. I think we need to approach it more along the lines of, how can giving Tibetans more freedoms make powerful Chinese bureacrats more money.
@80 "and some of those will be in a position to make decisions about dealing with China, and they will decide not to, and without support from the outside world the whole lousy thing will collapse and fall..."
This seems naive. This is the real world, not a popularity contest. The world simply can not function without Chinese factories - and business is about functioning. Corporations have no souls.
Moon It ain't gonna happen. The Lamas are just stirring up trouble for no purpose.
Freedom from tyranny is a noble purpose. true, if China has all the guns, and the Tibetan people have none, they can't revolt in a violent sense, but nonviolent protest is part of Buddhism.
And in a lot of ways, it's working. The PRC is intensely ashamed, angry, and unable to look like a reasonable adult nation.
They are losing face. Every time a protester causes an incident, the PRC's blood pressure rises, an they get more an more uncomfortable. Eventually, they start trying to dictate what the free world can and cannot do.
Millions of people will be going to the Olympics, and China is going to have to throw out or jail potentially thousands of protesters. Screening people ho might protest against the situation in Tibet is going to cause massive headaches for them.
No one can overcome China's force of arms. But we can poke incessantly at the image they've built up for themselves. If they want to be a part of the world, they're going to have to deal with public criticism inside of China during the Olympics.
Unlike Chinese citizens, they can't simply kill everyone who causes them to loose face, and kicking out everyone who disagrees is just going to cause them to loose more face.
With luck, this will be the largest PR debacle in China's history. I hope lots of foreign athletes show real courage and pack Tibetan flags to wave in protest.
@84, What has given you reason to believe that the authorities in China have any concern whatsoever with face? Does face affect their trade?
Follow the money, follow the power. Face is a distraction, a way to make you think you are a part of the process. That kind of thinking directly disenfranchises you, because of the false sense of power it givdes.
Power comes from money and inflence - noting more.
I'm suggesting not to watch the magicians eyes and listen to the patter, but to watch the hands. I'm suggesting that we are fooled by political mis-direction if we start to think that anyone cares what our opinions are. Politics is about power, not opinion. If one has political aims, one must figure out how to affect power. Opinion is most often futile.
@82, spronig3:
It seems like the point you're trying to make over and over is that power concedes nothing without being forced to. Also, I get the feeling you have a deep resentment towards "raising awareness", which you see as feel-good activism, done by naive hippies or whatever.
I can relate to that. Power definitely requires a serious military or economic threat before it will change its ways, and raising awareness alone will never present that threat.
However, I also think that in your rush to take a tough, radical stand against China's oppression (an admirable sentiment), you've overlooked the subtleties of building a powerful movement. Hitting China's economy heavily is probably ultimately the best bet to stop oppression, but it can't happen in a vacuum - a boycott by just you and your friends on BoingBoing has approximately as much practical effect as international Olympic protest. We're still at a pretty early stage in the struggle, and that means most people don't even really know there's a movement happening, let alone what it's about, what the demands are, and what they should do.
"Raising awareness" can become a cop-out when people stop there and do nothing more, but it's also a vital first step towards building a formidable movement. PR campaigns and attention-seeking protests are a very effective way to inject a meme into public discourse, and the more that meme is there, the more support builds behind the movement. There comes a point when it's time to move beyond the comfort of raising awareness and actually threaten power directly, but it would be truly naive to think that the Tibetan human rights movement is ready to make that move right now.
However, maybe if we support the efforts to use the Olympics as a tool to expose China's human rights abuses to the world, a movement able to threaten China's power directly will build sooner rather than later.
#87, I understand those ideas. They still strike me as naive. I seriously doubt it is possible for any serious boycott of Chinese goods. I'm not saying that it is unlikely, I'm saying that it is not possible.
If you can't stop the bulldozer, move the house. Seek solutions that work, rather than solutions that don't.
@88,
Well, don't be coy - I'm all ears!
A few points to add to the mix.
The Olympics have always been political. Pierre de Coubertin started the Olympic revival because the French lost the Franco-Prussian War and wanted to establish a way for countries to battle without war, he also thought they lost because they were out of shape.
The Olympic torch relay is a tradition started by Adolf Hitler for the 1936 Olympics in which he planned to show the world his master race.
If you personally have a sentimental attachment to the Olympics I am sorry you are being forced to deal with this. I have the same sort of feelings about the Wizard of Oz being broadcast on TV. I still watch it every year even though I own the DVD. Let's not kid ourselves with the idea that the Olympics are about the athletes. It's about money and clout. Any "for the athletes" credibility they might have had really went out the window when the "Dream Team" were allowed to compete.
If you are serious about changing China, I hope you can agree with this: the best hope we can have is not from whatever gestures we do outside China, but to make sure the younger generations in China will become more open-minded.
Unfortunately, so far the Lhasa riot/uprising and its aftermath have made the younger generations more nationalistic, and more suspicious of the motives of the international progressive movement. Many of them now consider liberals in the West as hypocrites, instead of people they can learn from to reform China from within.
In short, I suspect the protests going on are rather counter-productive. Your cause may be righteous, but the strategy is certainly failing miserably.
If you want to be effective, try to use a different way instead, preferably something more readily digestible by the Chinese youth.
@87 said "Also, I get the feeling you have a deep resentment towards "raising awareness", which you see as feel-good activism, done by naive hippies or whatever."
I don't resent feel-good activism quite so much as I see it a common flaw in thinking that the young are prone to. Youthful idealism seems to be about discovering the best Utopia, and striving towards that. It's impractical. Youthful idealism thinks being impractical is somehow thinking outside of the box that can gain traction through perseverence. People get confused between ideas and experiment, between religion and science.
I suggest that we need to respect the real life mechanics of the world as much as does the scientist. Most of it is unknown, but what we do know teaches us rules - rules that are not arbitrary or subject to our ideologies. The most compelling Utopia does not win.
It is a thinking style that I protest against, and only because I see it as a contagion of ineffectiveness.
The reason many chinese oppose to the independence of Tibet is that they are now enjoying the fruits of the twist of fate that have put them in the top of the game, today. So they can't really understand the need of the tibetans and chide them for their unwillingness to comply.
Wonder what were the sentiments of the english during the american revolution?
A true boycott can't be archived as it's the same situation for oil; a great part of the solution would be not feeding the economical model and that is the hardest part.
One protest I would like to see: a crowd of silent -or gagged- runners behind the torch bearer, carrying candles.
Ha ha! The torch has been put out in Paris! I am so proud of the French protesters. Too bad they weren't able to steal the torch and toss it in the Seine.
#93 "a great part of the solution would be not feeding the economical model and that is the hardest part."
Indeed. If you can't stop the bulldozer, move the house. Not everyone is able or willing to live outside the current economic model. I've chosen to live as an expat in an agrarian community with no vehicle and no refrigerator. It's not off the grid living and I'm not farming, but it's low impact and low resource living. I'm not a breeder. Self employed. To re-define the rules sometimes means just playing a different game altogether.
But if illusions of grandeur appeal to you, enjoy that then.
Shorter Sproing3: UR doin it rong.
#92 I suggest that we need to respect the real life mechanics of the world as much as does the scientist. Most of it is unknown, but what we do know teaches us rules - rules that are not arbitrary or subject to our ideologies. The most compelling Utopia does not win.
But the rules of the world are both arbitrary and subject to our ideologies - that's the maddening, illogical nature of social science. While a society can't all agree to make 2+2=5 or abolish gravity, they can pretty much arbitrarily change the rules of society and the way people can and do interact with each other. They can do this based on stuff as wacky and illogical as religion, idealism, or ethics.
Valuing practical solutions is a positive thing, but insisting on a hard-science approach to the subjective, muddy domain of social dynamics isn't much help until we have a useful scientific consensus on how social dynamics work.
It's an uncomfortable position to be in, because the hard, objective fact is that social reality really is created and controlled by the soft, subjective opinions and beliefs of the participants in society - and therefore the conventional hard-science approach we know and are comfortable with generally isn't really useful.
If the Chinese government doesn't care for face, then why do they lie about what's happening? Why not just say, "Yeah, Tibetans are worth less than Han Chinese, the Dalai Lama's an ineffectual fop, we don't care about pollution or human rights or anything other than power. So what are you going to do about it?"
Dear Sproing;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlsitMRQAdA
#97, I see your point about socially constructed reality, however I see a major flaw of the last several decades being an over-emphasis on the weight of this. As an example I give you how feminism tendds to want to overlook biological gender differences, and how it tends to have a difficult time with BDSM.
Even social structures have constraints. You can't get there from here if here is not actually here - you can't start at Utopia and then get to Utopia. No matter what you want to accomplish, you have to start with what is.
Asians don't have the same sense of individuality that westerners do. It is very naive to expect a strong sense of individual rights to catch on based on western support. There might be levers of power than can be pulled and pushed - pulling and pushing inefectual ones is a problem in that we aren't using our energy to search out levers that might actually do something.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2224/2395931713_9b54e3b3e4.jpg?v=0
I grabbed the semi-live webcam image from Bay Area's CBS 5 site. Protesters are/were climbing to the top of Golden Gate Bridge to hang banners.
If you're in the Bay Area and this is something you feel strongly about, get out there and pound the pavement, kids.
@98 - I'm no China expert, but from what I've read they are starting to notice and act on environmental concerns.
And as for what the Chinese government says, is it really important? I don't care if my girlfriend says she is not doing drugs and not cheating on me. I care if she is doing drugs and cheating on me. It may be expedient for her to say appeasing things, but calling her out on it won't necessarily change anything fundamental.
@99 High Hopes Pickle, I agree that optimists are happier, and that a positive vision for the future can be a force of good.
All I'm saying is, if you want to steer the car, know where the steering wheel is.
time for the tyres to mutiny?
While Bush and the US flag is burnt a thousand times throughout the world, one can make China/Chinese pretty angry when some singer whispers some words at the end of a concert.
This is where the general characteristics of the cultures differ: China, as it gets more and more "open" to the world, has won praises but also an equal dose of criticism - which is something nobody there had ever heard of before 1990s.
As Americans are abrased by criticisms and anger every day from all over the world on Microsoft to MacDonalds to war on Iraq, they had either developed much better A) immunity, or B) understanding of the rest of the world.
Meanwhile, the Olympics is probably the first time many Chinese show their faces in the world. Before that, other countries in the world are just... other countries that you don't speak to, or have ever heard from.
#91 is pretty much right on point. The protests probably wouldn't bring forth any changes to the human rights condition of current China, but it definitely would make the Chinese youth become aware of the voices around the world.
It would be a long process of interactions spent between millions of conversations between people from East and West in the next few decades to come. That is why I would think a boycott on Olympics will only set up a barrier for such interactions - it's relatively much easier for a Chinese and an American talking about democracy in a dinner, than a Chinese and an American screaming at each other during a pro-unity vs pro-independence protest. It does no good for the future of the world to make a rift when both sides haven't done enough research and understanding on each other.
Let's just say, has anybody even been to China? Stayed there for a year? Made any local friends?
(Honestly speaking, I haven't been to mainland China either.)
P.S. The local NBC affiliate has really incredible footage (sorry if the link expires or anything) of the bridge, in which the banners "One World, One Dream" and "Free Tibet" are clear and visible. Bonus: bridge workers on a precarious lift retrieving some very ballsy protesters.
perhaps one reason the Chinese government does not tolerate even the slightest voice raised against it is because they know that they ride the thinnest edge of the razor in keeping their seat.
What would happen in China if the government fell quickly and hard?
I question the legitimacy of the Chinese government.
"What is this Olympic 'Ideal' anyway?"
The UN having been gutted by US non-cooperation at every turn, the Olympics are the only symbol of international goodwill and cooperation left. It ain't about the sports.
Let's get over ourselves for a second here, and stop pretending that the rulers of countries like China (or Belgium, for that matter) give a shit about what people outside their borders think. They are sovereign nations, after all.
Why do I say this? Not to discourage people, but to remind them of two things:
1) China is a sovereign nation, which from its point of view is trying to stop the secession of one of its regions. It doesn't see a moral issue here, any more than we did when we fought the Civil War in the US for the same reason.
If you don't inderstand why it gets upset when people talk about freeing Tibet, then you're efforts to improve the situation are hampered by ignorance.
2) By all means, raise awareness, etc. All good things. But be aware that governments have to get into the act, or it's hopeless. And no, I'm not talking about forceful regime change, or anything military.
If only there were an international body that could address this sort of thing.... Wait, isn't there a United Nations or something?
Oh, right: see "gutted," above.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration, by taking China off the human rights watch list just in time for the Olympics, has shown exactly how significant IT sees human rights as being: i.e., not important at all, certainly nothing to get excited about when there's business to be conducted.
"China, as it gets more and more "open" to the world, has won praises but also an equal dose of criticism."
Can't imagine what these "praises" consist of. Congratulations, you only executed 100 factory managers this year, as against 150 last year? Go, China!
Spoing @102: That makes no sense whatsoever, either as a hypothetical situation or as a clarification of your positing that China doesn't care about face. I ask again, how does China care enough to lie, yet not care about appearances? How does that work?
During the Cold War years, the Soviet Bloc contained many peoples and nations that were de-facto "members" - like it or not`-.
That empire is gone now. Many former "members" are now free republics.
China is not one "nation". When the inevitable crash arrives, China will become many. Again.
The industrialized nations ignore Chinese government abuses because economies are intertwined. This is almost excusable since the degree of human suffering beggars imagination - should a global collapse happen quickly.
What is inexorable fact is that there are simply not enough resources to sustain the Chinese boom.
No matter what, there are still going to be almost a billion Chinese "left behind". Combine that with 70% of India also missing the gravy train.
The best that can be managed is a controlled crash. Control, to other governments,largely means letting the Chinese government do whatever it wishes to delay the inevitable and paper over the ugliest cracks.
Why then should we worry about rights in Tibet?
Because sooner or later, YOU are next.
some old news
"China mines Tibet's rich resources
The railway link to Tibet now appears to have been part of a broader plan to exploit vast deposits of metals in the disputed region, explains Fortune's Abrahm Lustgarten.
FORTUNE Magazine
By Abrahm Lustgarten, Fortune reporter
February 21 2007: 2:18 PM EST
(Fortune) -- When China opened its controversial new railway to Tibet last July, international critics howled at the prospect that the region's culture and environment would be ravaged in search of resources. China repeated a solemn refrain, its officials insisting that the $4 billion project was aimed not at plundering the disputed territory but at bringing prosperity and economic development to Tibetan society.
So much for that. Now China's Ministry of Land and Resources is disclosing monumental new resource discoveries all across Tibet, and it turns out the findings are the culmination of a secret seven-year, $44 million survey project which preceded the railway construction in the first place."
As far as I can tell, China worries more about its image than any other country on earth. They scream bloody murder at the slightest affront to their non-existent dignity. The whole Chinese political system hangs on the idea of pretending that nothing bad ever happens. The concern for 'face' might be incomprehensible to many westerners, but 'face' is what allows one to retain power. As protests ramp up, most of the world has their eyes on Beijing. As the government loses credibility worldwide, internal dissension will increase.
Sharpen the contradictions!
Free Tibet!
Vive la France!
Here's yet another logo to use, CC: http://lookingftrouble.googlepages.com/
Quite amusing to see the 5 handcuffs being used in a real prime time news a few days ago here in Germany.
The action here in Paris was really uncanny.
For example one could see French police taking away Tibetan flags from pacific protesters standing on the side of road. The Tibetan flag is illegal in Paris as much as it is in China it seems ...
Protesters were everywhere along the way, including members of the parliament who were under a massive pro human right banner (for some reason the police did not try to take away the Tibetan symbols those were sporting, go figure). In typical French political fashion, it's important to note that members of both the right and the left parties were present, which is a rare occurrence.
There was a lot of violence against the protesters, including blood & arrests, and lots of direct action against the torch were tried.
All in all, it looked really pathetic for the Chinese officials, who were afraid that the torch could be blown out by some protester and thus decided (twice) to turn it off by themselves.
The Free Tibet movement is a cause that almost everyone understands, and the economical interests beyond our government not protesting against China are also very clear. This protest goes to show that the people beg to differ !
So all i can say is GO U.S.A, now it's you turn !
This isn't about "freedom" for the people of Tibet. This is about the Lamas. And from what I've heard, the Lamas aren't exactly the greatest humans ever.
It's been 58 years since China invaded Tibet. The game is up.
Lamas = Hare Krishnas. But the guys at the top still believe in slavery.
Moon,
What's your malfunction? If you want to support China, be my guest. When you post comments that disregard the content of all the previous comments, you're trolling. If you would care to cite some credible references that the Dalai Lama is planning to reinstitute slavery in Tibet, I'd be fascinated to see them. If all you can come up with is name calling, put a sock in it.
I'm afraid I have to agree there. Devil's advocate is a useful and important role, but only if it brings something to the discussion.
Wanted to drop a quick note saying I'm in awe of CraftedResistance's Beijing Olympic rings graphic linked to above. Kudos to the designers!
"During the Cold War years, the Soviet Bloc contained many peoples and nations that were de-facto "members" - like it or not`-.
That empire is gone now. Many former "members" are now free republics."
This bring up quite a lot to discuss. 1) Are there similar internal tensions now in China that there were in the former Soviet Bloc, 2) are the former USSR members in reality more free now, and 3) has the uncontrolled decentralization overall given more, or less freedom. Freedom must of course include freedom from fear of the Mafia and freedom to eat.
It is a tragic act of nature that humans congregate into tribes, and wage warfare against other tribes over resources. I can't think of any territory on the planet earth that has not changed hands many times.
You say you want a revolution? Well, you know. You aint never going to revolute human nature away. They system, the underlying system is biological and must include tribalism and nationalism and insatiable greed.
Show me your plan that incorporates that, and explain to me how you get from this a to that d. If the middle includes a lot of question marks, then why do you suspect an outcome different from any other outcome from any other revolution? Why do you expect better than just another changing of the guard?
I do not offer world peace, or even local peace.
I do suggest that immediate murder cease.
As sure as humans survive on oxydizing the fuel of killed plants and animals, people are going to fight over resources, using whatever tools they have. Through non-violent social pressures, violent force, or economic might.
The real solution to this dilema, obviously, is to have less struggle over resources, which means using less resources, which means don't breed and live a life with a minimum land resource footprint.
People are driving cars to go over hang up resource hogging flags to protest.
In the meantime Iraquis are getting blown up over oil, and the US is torturing turban heads.
Stop using resources, the conflict stops. Don't stop using resources, the conflict doesn't stop.
OK then, how do YOU propose to get the whole planet to stop wasting stupidly?
I don't propose a method to get the whole planet to do anything. I'm not living in a lucid dream where I have powers of flight and morphing objects. In the world I live in, I have very limited effect on my environment. I limit my own resource use, study the world, and share insights and pleasures socially.
A false sense of power is not power - it is being duped into not really manipulating the system. An ineffectual vote disenfranchises more than no vote, because you think you've already given your input and done your part. That kind of politics is just make-up over pustules. The system, at this point, is a runaway train disaster, and the only solutions I can see are scaling back technology and population drastically, and that can only happen person by person. I am responsible for and affect me. I barely feed the economic earth eating machine.
Yes, there are minor victories here and there. Yes, torture and murder is bad. As long as you own a vehicle and consume imported goods, you are part of a resource war that can not stop.
in one breath you argue for the power of the individual to save the planet by limiting consumption, in the next you decry the futility of individual political effort....
Nuance is difficult to convey. I advocate voting. I advocate political action. I advocate being socially aware.
I also advocate understanding causes and effects, and not confuse magical wishful thinking and opinion with political change. In the opening credits of The Simpsons, who is driving the car, Maggie or Marge? Thinking you are somehow at the wheel when you are at a political protest is not effective.
Nuance.
Sproing,
Twenty (20) lengthy posts in one thread? It's not like you're citing sources and providing links. The other party guests are chugging their martinis and looking for their coats.
not me,me, I'm in the bathroom , tied off and slapping for veins.
what? what!? Everrry Scotsman does it!
And you have 17 posts. It's not like my blabber pure vacuum.
never mind how many posts, state clearly and simply a course of action
But mine are mostly brief and some have links or other content. You're just endlessly recycling your opinion. Perhaps if you linked to an article, quoted an expert... Technically you're in line, but you're the kind of party guest that doesn't get a second invitation.
Takuan is inviting me to state a clear course of action, Antinous is pointing out that rephrasing my views is boring.
Catch 22.
So I'll turn it back on the both of you. State how you see cause and effect working, and your part in it.
Protest. Boycott. Embarrass world governments into revoking China's preferred trade status. Loss of face and income lead to internal dissent and violence. Repression increases. Dissent increases even more. Party leadership fails. More moderate leadership takes power. Rinse and repeat every two decades.
Can you site historical examples of protests leading to trade status changes? I question the causal link.
Historical examples of regime change of societies with a similar social structure to China. What were the necessary causal conditions?
Historical examples of more moderate leadership arising out of leadership change forced by dissent.
Sproing,
Do your own homework. You sound far too much like Grima Wormtongue for me.
What I'm taking from Takuan is the mood that "well, we have to do something, if nothing else, at least keep the spirit of revolution alive!" Which has merit.
What I'm hearing from Antinous is that a country with the economic might of China, a country that owns the US debt, is subject political pressures that arise from protestors outside it's border. You say my opinions are overly negative, and you ask me to do homework when I ask you to back up your claims of understanding how power works in the real world. At least Takuan is clinging to feeling good, for the sake of optimism. You are sounding merely deluded.
Dear Sproing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzSzhHmhiOY
Takuan, I welcome links to outside sources of info, but I have a slow internet connection not suitable for you-tube, and prefer to read.
I'm also of the opinion that sources summarized by the reader render their potency more obvious.
my apologies, here then:
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
But you must try, try and try
Try and try, you'll succeed at last
Persecution you must bear
Win or lose you've got to get your share
Got your mind set on a dream
You can get it, though harder them seem now
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
But you must try, try and try
Try and try, you'll succeed at last
I know it, listen
Rome was not built in a day
Opposition will come your way
But the hotter the battle you see
It\'s the sweeter the victory, now
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
But you must try, try and try
Try and try, you'll succeed at last
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
You can get it if you really want
But you must try, try and try
Try and try, you'll succeed at last
You can get it if you really want - I know it
You can get it if you really want - though I show it
You can get it if you really want
- so don't give up now
I don't doubt, or in any way condone/support China's suppression of Tibet, but it seems like protesting the Olympics now won't do much good. At this point i think there is a .01% chance of the games being canceled, or seriously altered due the protests. If protesters had raised this much awareness soon after China was awarded the games I think it would have more likely changed the situation. I know people were protesting when China was awarded the Olympics but there is no denying it is getting much more coverage now than it did however many years ago. Again, I don't want to seem like i am against the protests, and i know the protests are doing good as far as raising awareness about Tibet's situation, but as far as attacking torch bearers, i don't see how that will help.
and what would you do?
I once attended a 30 minute silent tong-len meditation for Tibet. Mabye 10 years ago now.
That kind of wishful thinking is well and good, but it is political to the same degree that writing letters to Santa is economic.
"Hey, throwing money down that wising is innefectual."
"Oh ya? Well, what would you do?"
Snappy comeback, but it doesn't address the issue of throwing money down wishing wells.
We really do have many rivers to cross don't we. The issue really is wider than the Tibet vs China debate. Thought it is a current and vivid example of the current state of affairs in that part of the world; there is a bigger issue, namely what to do about China and it's treatment of human rights in general. It's not just the people of Tibet that are being oppressed (with the tacit approval of the west) but a huge swath of China's populace. We really need to address the bigger issue, look at the whole picture. And what can we do about that? Well, we can boycott, protest, argue back and forth but really what needs to happen is real change. So how do we accomplish that? Personally, I have a lot more respect for those that are actively trying to do something, anything. As with any sort of social change it's going to take a lot of effort and time to see any real results. But the little things we do today can have a huge effect tomorrow.
Someone up there said the chinese state would fall off in the long run -or something to that effect- as the preassure mounts, I don't think it's the case; in their mind they have a bussiness to take care and don't want negative publicity affecting the profits. This view is supported by the common man, who otherwise wouldn't earn it's meager pay which is better than none.
Social and political change -if ever- will come from a China transformed by the market, but I'm pretty sure this won't necessarely mean freedom for Tibet. Probably and it's not difficult to imagine, quite the contrary.
On the same vein of thought, yahoo reports the following on the SF protest as viewed by a chinese-american:
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - San Francisco's large Chinese American community is divided about the Olympic torch's passage through their city on Wednesday, with some saying protesting the symbol headed to their ancestral home could prove an embarrassing distraction.
ADVERTISEMENT
"A majority of Chinese Americans are proud of China in the way they have raised the standard of living," said Rolland Lowe, who practiced as a doctor in the city's Chinatown for 43 years before retiring two years ago.
"China used to be called the sick man of Asia and for them to be hosting the Olympics is something they take pride in," he continued. But then he mentioned the controversy over China's control of Tibet. "They put more money in Tibet than they take out. It's not like Tibet is full of oil."
As I said, the overall sentiment is like "I'm ok, they are getting better and everybody should be happy and comply". Sad.
I think the average Chinese HAS to be emotionally invested in the government propaganda not just because they will be jailed, tortured and killed for denying it, but because they know their ship is sinking.
Same way America let the Mafia take over, ordinary people just keeping their heads down,going along for the ride and hoping against hope.
It only lasts so long.