Tibet issue

[CardSharp]

It is not Wikipedia.

It is a scholarly treatise.

Given the rather uniformed attack, I am constrained to state that One must open the link, before opening the mouth!

To counter a chinese member's comment that you didn't know anything about Chinese history.

No he probably did earnestly try to learn about Chinese history but he went into it looking for evidence of Chinese capriciousness and evils that he sees in Chinese communism. This is something no true student of history would do and really no honest person would do. He found hate first then went looking for reasons to hate.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I appreciate your comment.

I honestly do.

However, I don't think I am consumed by hate. I am but a citizen of a country and my hating another country or its people would be a sheer waste of time since I do not make policy and my hate or love is immaterial as it is of any citizens in formulating Govt to Govt policy.

Therefore, to hate or love is waste of time.

When I see hate as the statement of 'drums of human skin' which is the usual staple to decry Tibetans, I think it is unfair. Therefore, I thought my reply would suffice to state that Hamam men sab nanga. I really don't know how to translate that.

All countries have history that is best forgotten, I wonder if there is any country that has a long history to have a squeaky clean image.

So, to do justice, one finds it fair to tell all that Hamam men sab nanga hai!

No offence meant!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Card Sharp,

There is a discussion in HK over this (same status to Tibet as HK and Macau) too.

A lawyers' magazine wanted to discuss this and it was cleared for publication, but at the last minute it was stopped. I have the link, but why raise it?

The truth is that while HK and Macau are Hanised totally and will be totally with the Mainland, it is not so in Tibet.

Therefore, for China not give the same status is understandable.

Nothing embarrassing or wrong about it, for after all, it is realpolitik.

And realpolitik governs international equations as it does internal policies.

 

[cross1993]

I appreciate your comment.

I honestly do.

However, I don't think I am consumed by hate. I am but a citizen of a country and my hating another country or its people would be a sheer waste of time since I do not make policy and my hate or love is immaterial as it is of any citizens in formulating Govt to Govt policy.

Therefore, to hate or love is waste of time.

When I see hate as the statement of 'drums of human skin' which is the usual staple to decry Tibetans, I think it is unfair. Therefore, I thought my reply would suffice to state that Hamam men sab nanga. I really don't know how to translate that.

All countries have history that is best forgotten, I wonder if there is any country that has a long history to have a squeaky clean image.

So, to do justice, one finds it fair to tell all that Hamam men sab nanga hai!

No offence meant!

If a country can survive to the present, it is certainly has a bloody hand.
Chinese people are no exception.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

No offence meant!

Very disingenuous.

The truth is that while HK and Macau are Hanised totally and will be totally with the Mainland, it is not so in Tibet.

Another strange statement.

Hong Kong Chinese, are almost entirely Han Chinese.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

By year 2047, Hong Kong will become a normal city in China, just like a direct-controlled municipality like Beijing and Shanghai.

 

[CardSharp]

I appreciate your comment.

I honestly do.

However, I don't think I am consumed by hate. I am but a citizen of a country and my hating another country or its people would be a sheer waste of time since I do not make policy and my hate or love is immaterial as it is of any citizens in formulating Govt to Govt policy.

Therefore, to hate or love is waste of time.

When I see hate as the statement of 'drums of human skin' which is the usual staple to decry Tibetans, I think it is unfair. Therefore, I thought my reply would suffice to state that Hamam men sab nanga. I really don't know how to translate that.

All countries have history that is best forgotten, I wonder if there is any country that has a long history to have a squeaky clean image.

So, to do justice, one finds it fair to tell all that Hamam men sab nanga hai!

No offence meant!

I hope you live a long long life and live to see China 20, 30, 40 years down the road, as it overcomes, lives and prospers even when by your logic it would fall. I have no doubt that Chinese citizen will enjoy more economic and political freedom than India as we approach the mid point of this century.

I really hope that you and your schadenfreude are around to see it on that day. I really do.

 

[cross1993]

Card Sharp,

There is a discussion in HK over this (same status to Tibet as HK and Macau) too.

A lawyers' magazine wanted to discuss this and it was cleared for publication, but at the last minute it was stopped. I have the link, but why raise it?

The truth is that while HK and Macau are Hanised totally and will be totally with the Mainland, it is not so in Tibet.

Therefore, for China not give the same status is understandable.

Nothing embarrassing or wrong about it, for after all, it is realpolitik.

And realpolitik governs international equations as it does internal policies.

Your logic is confusing.
Known, separatism is wrong, it should be eliminated.
Known, there are some separatists in Tibet, it should be eliminated.
Known, allow Tibet to become a SAR will only encourage separatists.
Known, the correct approach is more stringent supervision and control, strengthen the fight against separatists.

 

[Tractor]

Mostly correct.
Ancient Chinese Civilization called the "华夏"civilization.
"华" means beautiful clothes.
"夏" means great courtesy.
Now, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, etc, these countries all belong to "华夏"civilization.

further explanation:
夏= 横目之民means people featuring transverse eyes as a symbol of kindness ,this refer to east asian people including tibetan.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

I hope you live a long long life and live to see China 20, 30, 40 years down the road, as it overcomes, lives and prospers even when by your logic it would fall. I have no doubt that Chinese citizen will enjoy more economic and political freedom than India as we approach the mid point of this century.

I really hope that you and your schadenfreude are around to see it on that day. I really do.

I am not a internet warrior to feel that by posting on fora, a country will fail or prosper.

There is no chance of China failing, now or in the near future.

An analysis of the CNP would indicate that such a idea is but a day dream if someone feels China will collapse.

However, political and individual freedom as is visualised in the West and in democracies, to visit China, will be a far cry. Of course, none can stop your yearning for the time when there is political and individual freedom since the right of man cannot be suppressed forever.

Only internet warrior exhibit schadenfreude.

I rather see issue thorough the prism of realpolitik.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Your logic is confusing.
Known, separatism is wrong, it should be eliminated.
Known, there are some separatists in Tibet, it should be eliminated.
Known, allow Tibet to become a SAR will only encourage separatists.
Known, the correct approach is more stringent supervision and control, strengthen the fight against separatists.

Thank you.

Very honest appraisal.

That is precisely the point and nothing wrong in it either.

One cannot let one's country collapse and that is the Gospel Truth.

Amen to that.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Very disingenuous.



Another strange statement.

Hong Kong Chinese, are almost entirely Han Chinese.

Nothing disingenuous.

It only meant was that it was not meant to ruffle feathers, but just a statement on Han Culturalism and that it maybe unsavoury, but there was no rancour that was underlining it. It was merely a statement of facts.

Hong Kong and Macau ethnicity could be debated. Historically speaking, the forced assimilation and the humiliation that was doled out to those who were non Han made them accept the Han label and Han values.

That is why 97% are Hans. Obviously, the whole of China as it is now, was not Han at the outset. It is the wars of the various dynasty and the expansionism towards the South and the reasons mentioned above caused people to classify themselves as Hans. The fact that the Chinese govt made simplified Chinese proves the point that what is known as Chinese language is a whole lot of languages which are mostly mutually unintelligible to varying degree.

Chinese speak Mandarin (about 850 million), followed by Wu (90 million), Cantonese (Yue) (70 million) and Min (50 million) and these languages are Mutually unintelligible.

Even their cuisine is different.

Therefore, that all Chinese have a common linguistic, cultural and ethnic link is an exaggeration that is excellent otherwise to promote a one country identity.

Factually, the efforts being made in Tibet and Xinjaing to Hanise or Sincize them, is an indicator of the mode of assimilation practices in the earlier time to make all the people, be they the inner or the outer people, civilised or barbarians, into Hans.

The fact that the Tibetans and the Uyghurs are resisting becoming Hans is why the same status given to HK and Macau cannot be given to Tibet or Xinjiang as so wisely and honestly said by Cross.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

The fact that the Chinese govt made simplified Chinese proves the point that what is known as Chinese language is a whole lot of languages which are mostly mutually unintelligible to varying degree.

You are very confused.

You're confusing spoken Chinese with written Chinese.

 

[no_name]

That is why 97% are Hans. Obviously, the whole of China as it is now, was not Han at the outset. It is the wars of the various dynasty and the expansionism towards the South and the reasons mentioned above caused people to classify themselves as Hans. The fact that the Chinese govt made simplified Chinese proves the point that what is known as Chinese language is a whole lot of languages which are mostly mutually unintelligible to varying degree.

Actually the Han identity was not established until after the founding of Han dynasty in 2nd cent BC. Before that people living in china addressed themselves as descendants of the Hua Xia tribe.

In the spring autumn/warring state period people actually addressed themselves as the citizen of the state they are from, ie a chu person, a zhao person. Back then their bond to their respective state is even stronger than their identity as 'chinese'

The reason why 97% are Hans is simply because there are more people. Infact if you take Han majority regions and overlay them with maps of Han dynasty they mostly match. The area of china where non-hans dominate are areas where lands were less fertile and weather harsh.

Regarding the forced assimilation - you would find it is often the other way round, that non-han groups desired the more fertile lands and advanced economy and goods that were generated by chinese dynasties. The fact that they moved into han territory and were assimilated overtime is mainly of their own doing.

Regarding simplified chinese - you got it mixed up. Simplified chinese is not a new language, it is a simplification of the traditional chinese CHARACTERS which were used across china - in an effort to boose literacy after founding of the PRC. People speaking different sinic languages uses the same sets of characters in written communication, and meaning of the characters were pictoral - meaning that it is independent of the way that the character were pronounced (like math symbols, music notations and arabic numerals).

If we want to force people to use the same language there would not be cantonese speakers today, nor wu, nor hakka or any other language. They have existed for thousands of years.

"Even their cuisine is different."

lol, if they are the same are you going to say it is forced assimilated too?

 

[no_name]

I think you should stop making up theories that you think describes the chinese people in you own head. If you take your theories to normal chinese, they will laugh at you. And you also gives people who otherwise don't know about china the wrong impression.

I'm havn't make up my mind whether you're simply talking black to white, but the trend is worrying.