undefined | Better HN

0 pointsDominikR10y ago0 comments

> But Tibetians are much more numerous and they've lost their independence much more recently

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know the majority of Tibetans were before the Chinese slaves in an absolutist monarchy/theocracy that used extremely cruel torture and punishments. (amputation of limbs, skinning, cutting off ears/noses)

Let's be honest here, this whole Free Tibet business is just about pressuring the Chinese government and nothing else.

If it advances the US governments strategic goals then they will even support barbarians like ISIS.

Unfortunately for the US the Chinese government is quite resilient.

They are not even trying to stir something in Tibet anymore, that one has failed. Currently they are trying hard in the Muslim Uighur regions, but apparently it doesn't work any better.

The Chinese will just crush any externally supported resistance, they don't give a crap. Nor do the Russians.

0 comments

notahacker10y ago

The Free Tibet movement in the West has always had more to do with counterculture than the US government.

I suspect most Tibetans were rather worse off during the Cultural Revolution than in the quasi-feudal system that existed before. I'm not entirely convinced they're necessarily worse off today, but the Tibetan refugees risking their lives walking across the Himalayas into an exile where they get to "meet the Lama" couldn't really be any less focused on geopolitics...

I'm not aware of any parallel Cherokee diaspora.

I don't think the Uighurs' preferences for their own cultural practices is anything to do with them paying any attention to the US either.

DominikROP10y ago

Sure, I don't doubt that these people really want to secede, but undoubtably some rather large component of this is created by external support.

Throughout history nationalism, religion and ethnicity has always been used to destabilise countries, this is nothing new.

I don't put any extraordinary blame on the US for this, it's what most powerful nations are doing in their quest for even more power.

About the Cherokees: Don't know if it is due to their low numbers, or simply because the US is powerful enough to prevent this from happening. Maybe the Cherokees are happy as it is or the right people are payed off by the government.

In general this can be exploited best when a country is in severe economic trouble. For example Chechnya after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The US is not even remotely in a comparable state.

notahacker10y ago

I think it's palpable nonsense to suggest that the US or other outside forces are behind all or indeed many of the world's regional minority groups desires to speak their own language, practice their own religion and run their own region in their own way.

What evidence do you have to back up your insinuation the US is backing the various Uighur factions? Frankly, it's pretty insulting to their culture to imagine they'd be freely and happily assimilating Han Chinese culture if it wasn't for the nefarious plotting of Uncle Sam.

2 more replies

guard-of-terra10y ago

"nationalism, religion and ethnicity has always been used to destabilise countries" They were also used to create countries in the first place.

Remove nationalism, religious and ethnical union from a country and it starts to fall apart, just like Jugoslavia did.

1 more reply

maus4210y ago

Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

For the US government, whatever it does is always about its interests, because that's what governments are about.

However, that's just the reason why being a small nation sucks, like any resident of a small country can tell you. Sometimes their plight even manages to gather some popular sympathy[, but as Dalai Lama can tell you, it doesn't help much anything]. The lucky ones are who happen to succeed at gaming at least two great powers against each other, instead of being surrounded by one large or its sphere of power, who will merrily invade you if it strikes their fancy.

vinceguidry10y ago

> Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

It doesn't persuade you. Those of us who've been watching various forms of autocracy spring up and get overthrown throughout history appreciate progress where we can get it.

The situation in Tibet has a historical precedent. Hebrews living under Roman rule in the kingdom of Judea. Both were theocratic countries whose populations were really, really invested in traditional rule. Both had constant foreign interference from bigger and more powerful states. One had their entire population massacred and their places of worship burned to the ground.

The Romans were pragmatic and tolerated the eccentricities of the Judeans for hundreds of years, happy to take tribute and let them live the way they want to live. But the Judeans wanted more, and declared independence from Rome.

It's tough as an imperial administrator to know where to draw the line. By historical standards, the CCP is remarkably patient with its wayward sons.

legulere10y ago

It persuades people that are told that Tibet should get the old Dalai Lama as dictator system back.

China is criticized as an oppressive regime in tibet by people that at the same time cater to a wannabe dictator.

justin6610y ago

>It persuades people that are told that Tibet should get the old Dalai Lama as dictator system back.

It'd be interesting to know who is telling people that, since it sounds like a straw man. Not even the Tibetan government in exile advocates that.

DominikROP10y ago

I agree with you except for this line:

> Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

I do not care in the slightest about the Chinese government, so I'm not trying to convince anyone about their goodness.

No government will justify itself before anyone, not even their own citizens.

Sure, certain persons and parties might change democratically but the power structure and elite behind them will fight tooth and nails against anyone threatening them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

notahacker10y ago

The Free Tibet movement in the West has always had more to do with counterculture than the US government.

I'm not aware of any parallel Cherokee diaspora.

I don't think the Uighurs' preferences for their own cultural practices is anything to do with them paying any attention to the US either.

DominikROP10y ago

Sure, I don't doubt that these people really want to secede, but undoubtably some rather large component of this is created by external support.

Throughout history nationalism, religion and ethnicity has always been used to destabilise countries, this is nothing new.

I don't put any extraordinary blame on the US for this, it's what most powerful nations are doing in their quest for even more power.

In general this can be exploited best when a country is in severe economic trouble. For example Chechnya after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The US is not even remotely in a comparable state.

notahacker10y ago

2 more replies

guard-of-terra10y ago

"nationalism, religion and ethnicity has always been used to destabilise countries" They were also used to create countries in the first place.

Remove nationalism, religious and ethnical union from a country and it starts to fall apart, just like Jugoslavia did.

1 more reply

maus4210y ago

Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

For the US government, whatever it does is always about its interests, because that's what governments are about.

vinceguidry10y ago

> Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

It doesn't persuade you. Those of us who've been watching various forms of autocracy spring up and get overthrown throughout history appreciate progress where we can get it.

It's tough as an imperial administrator to know where to draw the line. By historical standards, the CCP is remarkably patient with its wayward sons.

legulere10y ago

It persuades people that are told that Tibet should get the old Dalai Lama as dictator system back.

China is criticized as an oppressive regime in tibet by people that at the same time cater to a wannabe dictator.

justin6610y ago

>It persuades people that are told that Tibet should get the old Dalai Lama as dictator system back.

It'd be interesting to know who is telling people that, since it sounds like a straw man. Not even the Tibetan government in exile advocates that.

DominikROP10y ago

I agree with you except for this line:

> Justifying a tyrannical government by virtue of the previous government having been a tyranny too doesn't persuade anyone.

I do not care in the slightest about the Chinese government, so I'm not trying to convince anyone about their goodness.

No government will justify itself before anyone, not even their own citizens.

Sure, certain persons and parties might change democratically but the power structure and elite behind them will fight tooth and nails against anyone threatening them.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse