Christina Chan Waving Tibetan Snow Lion Flag

[eikin]

Everyone today is under certain exposure to limited and deliberated information. As much as each person will like to push forward his/her point of views, more than often based on incomplete information, accusations resulted from such condition directed against any individual, group, party, race, nation are examples of irresponsible behaviour (definitely so when people make such postings in the cover of anonymity) and are not allowed in this forum.

We don't want to keep reminding users here that the use of this forum is a privilege itself and there are terms of use to follow http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63954

Since the discussion has not developed into a flame war, and taking the nature of the pictures into consideration, thread will remain open for now. Anymore postings attempting to spark hatred or forward political agendas will result in the closure of this thread and infractions to members involved.

 

[barracuda]

There are many vastly different so-called 'facts' about Tibet, whether it had obtained independent status after the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, etc, etc, but one basic fact no one can denied is that before the communists went into Tibet, majority of the land was owned by the monastries and high lamas, and Dalai Lama & Panchen Lama being the head & deputy of the ruling power. Ordinary Tibetans led a slave like life.

If you considered write-ups by ethnic Chinese are too biased, then how about the 'objective' westerners? Here is link to what a westerner described about Tibet before 1950.

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

There is also a documentary on life of Tibet before 1950 from National Geography channel. A video clip of that documentary was previously available at YouTube but had since been removed after the recent riot in Tibet. The documentary is eye-opening, and you may realise how vastly different the Tibet depicted and what has been described by certain people.

No doubt we should respect human rights, culture and heritage, but if human rights means a small group of people leading a luxuary life whilst the majority leading a slave life, don't you think something is wrong?:dunno:

 

[waileong]

Yes indeed, life in Tibet before 1950 was vastly different. But does that mean they should be colonised? By China? Or any other neighbouring country?

And if Tibet were to go independent today, would the people want to go back to being slaves? I have no doubt that they would still revere the Dalai Lama (if you understand Tibetan Buddhism, he is someone who has been reincarnated again and again and is the spiritual leader) but I doubt that His Holiness would even think of a 50's rewind.

The world has changed, and He knows it.

There are many vastly different so-called 'facts' about Tibet, whether it had obtained independent status after the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, etc, etc, but one basic fact no one can denied is that before the communists went into Tibet, majority of the land was owned by the monastries and high lamas, and Dalai Lama & Panchen Lama being the head & deputy of the ruling power. Ordinary Tibetans led a slave like life.

If you considered write-ups by ethnic Chinese are too biased, then how about the 'objective' westerners? Here is link to what a westerner described about Tibet before 1950.

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

There is also a documentary on life of Tibet before 1950 from National Geography channel. A video clip of that documentary was previously available at YouTube but had since been removed after the recent riot in Tibet. The documentary is eye-opening, and you may realise how vastly different the Tibet depicted and what has been described by certain people.

No doubt we should respect human rights, culture and heritage, but if human rights means a small group of people leading a luxuary life whilst the majority leading a slave life, don't you think something is wrong?:dunno:

 

[zoossh]

Lack of knowledge. Try digging up some Xinhua Press historical records of the revolution in 1911 up to the open-up in the 1980s. No need to read a lot. Just check out why these above interventions must be done. After that you come back here and tell me whether you are historically more enriched. If you still hold the same view, I respect that. I won't try to change your opinion.

it is not lack of knowledge, but based on different beliefs and values, different people interprets things differently. as for the "why" parts, they are not knowledge, but are theories made for justifications, upheld by a group of people, rather than universally accepted. there is probably no further need to convince each other of the "knowledge" part becos what separates many people are the faith decided before knowledge rather than conclusion made after knowledge, and this happens to simply too many people and even the intellectuals. some of the democrats in china does jump back to the chinese defence when it comes to issues regarding ultranationalism, something that is deeply embedded and cannot be sorted out. i do remember that the movie that portrayed the soong sisters, well whether true or fictionous is something really intriguing - that is when the 2nd sister decided to get married with her father's friend, Sun Yat Sen, and the father of the song sisters, Charlie Soong, became adamant against the decision and find a conflict between what he believes in the western values and now what he didn't expect himself to be entrenched in, something that by right he should accept but he can't.

so often sentiments are being played on by politics, by media and by everyone. people are all trying so hard to tell their side of the stories, and it now seem that any pictures or videos that is unfavorable to the belief of one party will immediately be denied as fabricated first, followed by digging out of reasons and evidences to support that, and not the other way round. it is not surprising that nowadays people who knew nothing about photographic basics and probably not used photoshop, can speak at length and without reservation, of whether a photograph is doctored. this is how the advance of communication in the form of TV and internet giving one many sources, has helped to breed a new generation, sparking off many conspiracy theories that is shaped by nothing except what one wish to see. a lot of things are painted, and the naked truth rarely exists as naked - which is only known once to me, one of the spokeman for the pro-union forces in east timor claims that they will start a massacre should the election turns in favor of independence, and true enough, they did so after almost 80% of east timorese chosen independence despite of the threat. this is a rare and undisguised violence made without claims that most timorese does not want independence

anyway, i think the west does believe that tibet may one day be like india breaking away from the british empire, and believes that by shaming one with values, they can make such influence. whether that works, most of us here if not all, are asians, and we should know better.

 

[huaiwei]

So sad isn't it, that even people in free Hong Kong don't understand the real Tibetan issue.

The Tibet thing is the saddest thing in China today (next to Taiwan). The basic issue is not so difficult to understand-- the Tibetans are totally different from the Han Chinese. The language, culture, food, dress, way of life, beliefs, everything-- there is no reason to associate Tibet as a part of China. Except for the assertion that the Mongols conquered China in 1362 and included Tibet in their empire, thus Tibet was a part of China since then.

The real reason why China fears the Tibet issue is so simple-- they don't want to end up like the Soviet Union. Because apart from Tibet, there's Xinjiang, there's inner Mongolia, etc. all of whom are also totally different from Han Chinese. They're really afraid that if Tibet goes, the whole country will break up.

So for that reason, Tibet must be a part of China despite everything your eyes tell you when you are there. And thus anyone who advocates Tibetan independence is a traitor. And China will pay any price, crack down in any way they feel necessary to quell any kind of demonstrations, because the unity of the motherland is at stake.

Singapore is a country with quite alot of people who look "totally different" from each as well. Shall Singapore therefore split itself up for each community?

This concept of "difference" as a reason for independence is as old as mankind, especially when one feels their rights trampelled on by the other. The Chinese community party officially recognises 56 ethnic groups in China, including Tibetan, and proudly states this fact numerous times. Do they fail to recognise that the Tibetans are ethnically different from the Han Chinese? Not at all. Do they fail to accord them equal rights? Actually they do in the general sense, because the CCP expects everyone, including all minorities, not to place religion above the CCP, nor recognise anyone else as their leader other than the CCP. But it is the later two which has caused the biggest problems in Tibet, and because of this, they feel their rights and their way of life under threat. The CCP, for their part, proceeded to try to annihilate any signs of "disloyalty" towards the CCP, and it is this which I am personally most critical about.

So enough of the "they are different" nonsense. Try telling that to the Scots, the Northern Irish, the Hawaiians, the African Americans, etc etc etc!

 

[huaiwei]

Yes indeed, life in Tibet before 1950 was vastly different. But does that mean they should be colonised? By China? Or any other neighbouring country?

If the inhabitants of any tract of territory fail to prevent another from entering and stacking a claim to it, why should they not deserve to be occupied, annexed, or "colonised" as you choose to put it?

 

[LazerLordz]

There are elements of the current generation of PRC citizens that need to check their ego and "face" at the door if they want to engage the international order and succeed.

Seriously, if you check out the language they use to advance their cause of Chinese nationalism in forums, on street protests, the general feeling is that akin to spoilt kids yelling that they deserve their lollipops because they're kids.

Then again, that's what decades of nationalist indoctrination does to a population.

 

[LazerLordz]

If the inhabitants of any tract of territory fail to prevent another from entering and stacking a claim to it, why should they not deserve to be occupied, annexed, or "colonised" as you choose to put it?

Failure to defend does not grant an ad nauseum right for others to claim it as terra nullius.

There's no right of occupation that can be granted just like that.

 

[zoossh]

nonetheless, she does appear rather photogenic. so if someone say she is a model, she has that natural attibutes. she dun appear "happily" on the phone to me, although she appears to be dissociated or unaffected by the fiery responses. maybe she is on the line asking for help when she is to be taken away.

and as long as they are not combative, i feel that a gracious society should accept their presence, and as well, the presence of photographers. and it will be nice to see a more complete narrative of the event and its process. i think the coverage by actionman in san francisco is great.

#1


Hong Kong : 2 May, 2008 - Hong Kong University student Christina Chan Hau-man (陳巧&#25991 wrapped the Tibetan snow lion flag around her body and later began waving it during Beijing Olympic torch relay in Hong Kong.

#2


Several onlookers heckled Christina Chan, shouting "What kind of Chinese are you?" and "What a shame!" In the end, she and some of the protesters were taken away against their will by the authorities via a police vehicle for their own protection.

from Christina Chan Waving Tibetan Snow Lion Flag / Hong Kong Digital Vision

 

[zoossh]

This concept of "difference" as a reason for independence is as old as mankind... So enough of the "they are different" nonsense.

the concept of being similar and thus must be together, is just as along the same line as the concept of being different and thus must be independent against the will of those made independent.

nationalism is when each other identified with each other, and agrees to be together. ultranationalism is when one forces an identity on another person, and wants to be together against one's will.

we may argue till the end of the world, but the answer will only be founded when two criteria are met.
1. responsible and mature free international media, built on the idea of journalistic corroboration.
2. when referendum are allowed without threat of violence or economical coercion.

 

[zoossh]

why should they not deserve to be occupied, annexed, or "colonised"?

we are all speechless at the above statement which needs no further explaination.

but anyway let's keep our discussion sensible so that the true reportage spirit and its purposes are served through the pictures, rather than getting it locked because of obvious reasons.

 

[tokrot]

Today China is not just for ethnic Han. Modern China is make up of 56 ethnic groups. Moreover, Tibet has been part of China for more than 600 years, older than some nations like Australia, New Year and even USA! Don't forget China was a victimized nation of 19th century and early 20th century. (Civil wars,opium wars and WWII). It was split into many areas controlled by warlords. In fact, this is what most Chinese won't like to see. A stable China is definitely good for the whole Asia region.

I think whoever wanna understand more about China why it should not be split again should read "Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795-1989". Over 200 battles waged!