These days I was thinking how to make a unbiased and just reply to you, and I was debating with myself on what you said and what I used to believe.
Quote:
|
Truth is, their rioting is no more violent than many protests here in the west (burning of cars, breaking of windows, etc.), but we have the common sense not to instill martial law and shoot them down dead.
|
Problem is what they've done is far beyond your descrption。 Aside from that, hey killed ordinary people, they beated and teased young ladies on the road, they burnt school buildings, there are enough reports and videos to prove that; I've also heard that they cutted the flesh of hurted policeman, as for this , I don't know it's true or not.
Quote:
I would say the same thing to you. Do you honestly think your so-called "Communist" government reports the news with an honest journalistic integrity?
If only your government didn't censor western news websites, or websites that have certain information that might make your government look a little bad.
|
So anything to do with communist government or a capitalist one? There is a probability that my government tried not showing complete truth to the people. However if the U.S has a population of more than 1 billion you would think it a second time to tell the whole story or not, esp. with the majority of the people very-poor-educated and illiterate, who are easy to be charmed and taken advantage of by domestic and external evil forces.
Quote:
|
It doesn't matter how much your government modernized Tibet; Tibet is Tibetan. Your occupation of Tibet is no more valid than the imperialist Japanese in Korea or China. Korea was a primitive nation prior to Japan's invasion; they brought a lot of modernization to Korea, but does that mean the Koreans don't deserve their own country?
|
Does the case you mentioned perfectly match with the Tibetan one? I say no. Since 13th Century(Yuan Dynasty) Tibet is undoubtedly and officially one part of Chinese territory. "Thanks to" the separatists and external "capitalist forces" there, Chinese territorial integration was severly threatened. In the Chinese civil war period, less attention has been paid to Tibet issue thus the local situation worsened. Then, in the 1950s, Chairman Mao and his army liberated Tibet, on a peaceful and democrate basis. Personally, it's the religion and ethnic minority that add far more complexity to the Tibet issue. I have to emphasis that my comments last time on modernisation, ethnic policies and people's well-being were based on the fact that Tibet is definately part of China, but not the to say it's the reason that Chinese government can "invade" Tibet, in your preferrence of words.
Quote:
|
If you're 19 or younger you probably don't even know about the Tiananmen Square Massacre unless you heard of it from strictly word of mouth. But then again that's another story.
|
Actually I'm 21 and I've heard about the political accident but not so-called "Massacre" which reminds me of what the Japanese invaders and soldiers have done in the territory of China, esp. the well-known Nanjing Massacare where I was born. I don't want to avoid the fact that the government tried to brush it off from people's memory, which is a work in vain. I don't know exactly what has happened but I believe there are students that have been killed. It's not just the Chinese government should be blame for, not mentioning the global condition, is your VOA innocent from that? Again, I have reason to believe if the riot and emergency escalated that time without an effective and tough measure to put it down, there would be another 10 years like in the 1966 to 1976.
--------------------------
Due to my short of vocab and inablity to use accurate words to describe and express, my reply is hard to understand and easy to misunderstand. But I do hope to exchange my views with you, to clearify what my government has not done and what it has been charged innocently, in a way not only away from narrow nationlism that seems quite popular these years in China, but also reasonable and just. I don't fear to debate with you, now that the forum is in the title of "debating politics online", nevertheless, it's important to view China and Chinese government in an unbiased way, that's the only way to make sense. Words like "Communist government" is nothing more than the heritage of a sterotype conception of the Cold War. It's not the type of the goverment that makes a country doomed to be bad or lack of common legitamacy or authority. On the opposite, in fact, it's only when the people don't believe their government that it is losing or has lost it's authority. The people of China uphold, advocate and surpport their "communist" government, and they are able to say it's good or bad, that's enough. On another hand, every nation has it's respective unique way to develop, to democratize. To transplant a democracy mode into another nation can hardly reach success, the situation in the Iraq say it aloud.
To say a few words a little bit away from our topic, many things have two sides of a coin. Like in the U.S, you have rights to buy guns, but innocent people died of gun shots, on campus or in the district. So where's the protection and guard of the victims' rights to survive and to live? In my view, Chinese government puts overwhelming emphases on the rights of people to survive, that's its logic. If those people in Tibet were not shot down(if it's true), more policmen and local people will die from the riot and will have no home to live. Every responsible nation and its government will not let such things happen without doing anything but debating on whether they could shot the killers dead, or not.
I'm looking forward to your reply and further discussion.