Tibet:China:Olympics2008 -Augur of deeper consequences?

[tsugomaru]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

Okay, no one has I suppose, but I don't believe that China shouldn't be allowed to host the Olympics because we disagree with their policies. Justifying our reasons because they have a communist government that hurts people wouldn't make sense to anyone. Especially if America is telling them this. Sports and politics should be separate and I highly doubt that China is going to abuse the Olympics to hurt others.

~Tsugomaru

[Maid]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

Okay, no one has I suppose, but I don't believe that China shouldn't be allowed to host the Olympics because we disagree with their policies. Justifying our reasons because they have a communist government that hurts people wouldn't make sense to anyone. Especially if America is telling them this. Sports and politics should be separate and I highly doubt that China is going to abuse the Olympics to hurt others.

~Tsugomaru

Olympics is not just about sports. It holds a larger meaning, thus people protest.

Justifying our reasons because they have a communist government that hurts people wouldn't make sense to anyone.

It makes perfect sense to me. What you said is quite illogical.

[bmah]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

Olympics is about sports and the world community. It isn't about anything else; people just use the event to bring attention to specific issues, especially in regards to politics.

Also, you must look at the point of view of most Chinese citizens. People here on this side of the Pacific believe that communism is an oppresive method of running a country, but most people in China fully support it because they believe that a rigid framework is required to keep their society in place - otherwise, it would fall apart.

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

I'm also not sure where anybody brought the fact that China is a communist state into anything they've been saying.

China has a long track record of outright human rights abuses that remain systemic and incredibly severe. Huge numbers of -chinese- citizens came out to protest the bid for Beijing to host the olympics, saying that their own country had too many serious internal problems to be allowed to host an event like the olympics.

I've said not one word about their style of government having anything to do with why they shoudln't be hosting the Olympics. The incredible corruption of their government, the pathetically unjust legal system, overuse of the death penalty, and mistreatment of women, to say nothing for their continued oppression of Tibet are all reasons why I can completely understand the massive international protest to China hosting the olympics.

[rzr]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

So, why don't they just move it?

I agree that China [currently] is no place for such an important event as the Olympics.

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

"Just move it"?

Even given all of the controversy and issues surrounding the selection of Beijing for the Olympics, the IOC decided to hold it there anyway. I'm pretty sure no amount of protest is going to make them simply "switch" to somewhere else, for not the least of which reasons, China has put a huge amount of money into creating appropriate infrastructure to host the Olympics, and even if it weren't basically a kick in the teeth to their economy to say "Yes, we'll make you invest all this money into something and then simply leave instead of letting you recoup your investment" I really can't think of anywhere they could go to on such short notice except a city who already hosted who had been maintaining all their facilities.

What is much more likely to happen is that a number of countries will boycott attending, and there will just be a really crappy turnout and a bad Olympic Games.

[bmah]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

I'm also not sure where anybody brought the fact that China is a communist state into anything they've been saying.

China has a long track record of outright human rights abuses that remain systemic and incredibly severe. Huge numbers of -chinese- citizens came out to protest the bid for Beijing to host the olympics, saying that their own country had too many serious internal problems to be allowed to host an event like the olympics.

I've said not one word about their style of government having anything to do with why they shoudln't be hosting the Olympics. The incredible corruption of their government, the pathetically unjust legal system, overuse of the death penalty, and mistreatment of women, to say nothing for their continued oppression of Tibet are all reasons why I can completely understand the massive international protest to China hosting the olympics.

Of course it's understandable, to the Western world. Despite being Chinese, I was appalled too, but that's because I've been living in a very different world from people living in China.

However, as I've said before, China's society is very different from the West in that, to maintain a country with billions of people, a more structural form of government is required. The strict rules are the product of having to manage a very active country with so many citizens, and to most Chinese, these rules are quite justified (don't know where your sources about Chinese citizens protesting came from). China would fall apart without such formalities. It certainly isn't falling apart now - just look at it's booming economy.

I've talked about this to my Chinese grandfather, and he stated the same thing. He has a laissez-faire attitude of "leave China alone"; the economy will take care of itself. It should be noted that China has fared a lot worse several decades ago, and it's certainly not doing a bad job so far at improving it's economy and government. "Maybe the West is just jealous of the rate that China's economy is booming."

I don't approve of what the government does (my first post rants about that) but what I've described above are the majority of opinions for most mainland Chinese and Chinese living overseas.

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

I'm sorry, but going to trial with no lawyer, with the death penalty for non-violent if not outright petty crimes? Exeuctions being handed down in cases involving forced confessions and pre-determined findings of guilty verdicts? It being illegal to practice any religion but the four authorized ones? A law requiring that all news published be 80% positive or face being fired from your job? Facing torture, and other civil and human rights abuses with no charges being filed, for months at a time if not longer?

I don't care how large your country is, these behaviors are simply not defensible. And they are absolutely not in keeping with the intended message of cooperation and good spirit inherant in the Olympic games.

[redskulll]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

You shouldn’t always dwell on the past; yes China has a long record of civil crimes, human rights violations, etc. And the Olympics is a privilege and not a right but if you did not include china in this it could had lead to something much worse and China not booming really atm if u look into some things such as there cost of food and other simple standard goods, one thing China is good at is lying and have a tendency to lead ppl into a dark tunnel of half truths. So china shouldn’t be hosting the games for several reasons,
1) There tossing to much money into what there building for the games and other major projects, were that money could go to the people instead and help with food prices more and other ascetics
2) By allowing China to hold the Olympic games your supporting there ways of doing things
3) If several major Countries in the west are against it and also trying to stop it, then maybe you should because if this continues on the same path on which it is on it could lead to several countries not attending or not giving there full support (Canada).
And with the Tibet thing the west is kind of blowing it out of the water, like right now America you could say is doing the same in the east. Yes it is bad but by giving it more attention there be more protesting and more violence and yea china gets bad press from it but still press is press. And China will most likely lead into a form of civil war of one kind and will have to come out of communist at some time with the pressure being placed pone.



~red~

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

You shouldn’t always dwell on the past;

I'm not. These things are all ongoing, today, right now, as we speak.

but if you did not include china in this it could had lead to something much worse

China is welcome to compete, but I have issues with their being selected to host.

China not booming really atm if u look into some things such as there cost of food and other simple standard goods

Actually the Chinese economy is booming objectively as fact. They have the largest surplus financial balance with the world bank of any country in the world, they are increasing their technological infrastructure at a rate that hasn't been near matched since the Industrial revolution in the United States. A booming economy doesn't necessarily correspond to an easier standard or even a much improved standard of living for the common peasant.

1) There tossing to much money into what there building for the games and other major projects, were that money could go to the people instead and help with food prices more and other ascetics

I have no idea what you meant by "and other ascetics" since an ascetic is a type of person who lives a very simple and minimalist life. But yes, there are plenty of places China could be spending that money that would be better for the common person. The fact that they don't seem to see a problem with that is a good mark against them.

And with the Tibet thing the west is kind of blowing it out of the water, like right now America you could say is doing the same in the east.

IF we equate what China is doing to Tibet with what America is doing in the middle east, then I think we can't possibly overestimate how significantly bad what is going on is.

[bmah]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

Sorry devonin, but despite how inexcusable China deals with its people, it's progressing pretty well from where it was back in the 20th century - the people in China aren't complaining*. The rigidity of the government is absolutely necessary to these people in order to maintain China's infrastructure. But I do agree that China still has a long way to go in regards to improving its social record. It certainly doesn't match up with the Olympic spirit, but main purpose of hosting the Olympics was probably about helping the already strong economy. The Olympics wouldn't bring a change to the government's behavior overall.

Also, if you ever delved into a little bit of history about Tibet, you'll find that it was a part of China, and a backwards province at that. The Tibet issue is kinda like Quebec's in a sense. It is an issue however that IS blown out of proportion according to many Chinese. "Focus on the Olympics they say, not this minor issue" is something I hear a lot from Chinese people; I don't know what are the bigger issues are, so I can't say anything about that. I do agree, however, that politics should not be mixed with the Olympic games, even though such a big event is a perfect opportunity for activists to bring attention to whatever issues they have.

*If you're interested, there's a Globe and Mail article about a journalist walking into the typical Starbucks in Beijing and asking random people on the issue of Tibet and how China treats its people. Their opinions largely reflect the opinions I presented in the previous post.

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

the typical Starbucks in Beijing and asking random people on the issue of Tibet and how China treats its people.

I argue that someone sitting in a starbucks in the middle of the day in Beihing is not remotely close to representative of the average Chinese peasant any more than walking into a Canadian starbucks and asking about how the conservative government treats the unemployed or homeless is especially representative.

Also, if you ever delved into a little bit of history about Tibet, you'll find that it was a part of China, and a backwards province at that.

Um...Tibet was ruled as a free and independant kingdom for hundreds of years, it actually -lost- a large amount of land that it controlled -to- the Chinese in the 700s. As late as the 800s AD, Tibet and China were seperate, with Tibet wholly independant from China.

Tibet was one of may parts of Asia to be conquered by the Mongols in the 1240s, which is about the earliest there are -any- Chinese claims to ownership of Tibet.

What it functionally boils down to is the Mongols conquered a whole mess of lands. In the aftermath of those invasions, China tried very hard to -keep- control of as much territory that had been Mongolian as possible, and that included Tibet, but for a span of at -least- 500 years there are records and blatant historical facts showing that Tibet was a free and independant nation, so no, I disagree with your statement that "Tibet was a backwards part of China"

In fact, "delving into the history" as you suggest, it wasn't until 1950 that Tibet was fully incorporated into the PRC, after it was invaded militarily and forced to sign an agreement allowing their presence and control over Tibetan soveriegnty. I'd hardly call Tibet "A backwards province of China" when it's had 58 years of formal Chinese soveriegnty and 500 years of being a free and independant state.

The Tibet issue is kinda like Quebec's in a sense.

Not really, I mean Canada has repeatedly granted the status of a seperate culture to Quebec, and the Canadian constitution allows a huge degree of flexibility in the way laws and legislation work in Quebec. Also, we don't exile or torture or imprison members of Quebec seperatist parties and organisations, and we've already given the province a free and open democratic vote on leaving the country.

[bmah]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

Tibet is backwards in the sense that, after China claimed the state, it became unclear as to who truly ruled it. Tibet became officially a part of China, but the people saw the Dalai Lama as their political (as well as their religious) leader. This is akin to the intermingling of the church and state. It's understandable in that sense that China wants a firm grip on control of Tibet. Tibet is "backwards" depending on how you look at it, and yes, if you go back hundreds of years ago, it was a free and independent state - it's not "backwards" in that sense.

[devonin]

Re: Tibet:China:Olynmpics2008 -Auguration of deeper consequences?

The term "backwards" when used to describe a nation is a perjorative and comparative term implying that the "backwards" nation is less advanced, or somehow toward a less advanced state; retrogressively or behind in time or progress; late; slow, to use a few dictionary definitions.

It's also usually a term used by white Europe and the "West" to describe those quaint cultures that preexist any of theirs by hundreds or thousands of years, but because they aren't modern technological capitalist states, must somehow be dumb and ignorant.