China, Tibet and Olympics: debating the debate

Here are two different perspectives on this debate, or rather debate about the debate.

The NYT article talks about the reaction of Chinese students to the discussion/row. And here is a legitimate complaint that has infuriated a lot of Chinese.

No matter what China does, these students say, it cannot win in the arena of world opinion. ?When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet. When we tried limiting our numbers, you said it is human rights abuse,? reads a poem posted on the Internet by ?a silent, silent Chinese? and cited by some students as an accurate expression of their feelings. ?When we were poor, you thought we were dogs. When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts. When we build our industries, you called us polluters. When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming.?

I think that while these complaints about hypocrisy are very legitimate, this does not really address the issue of Tibet. From my own discussions with several other Chinese, (as also reported in this article) I find the same refrain

Students argue that China has spent billions on Tibet, building schools, roads and other infrastructure. Asked if the Tibetans wanted such development, they looked blankly incredulous.

The Washington Post article looks at a slightly different angle (also hinted in the NYT): the PR impact of the rally against the Tibetan rallies. It seems to me a clash of cultures, the democratic world is used to a particular form of protest (i.e. the ones which are peaceful, neglecting the ones which often get violent), and the styles and tactics adopted by the Chinese students at the rallies is being seen as stifling or obfuscating any dialog reminding them more of an authoritarian regime.

From all this what lesson do we think that China will learn? Will China feel that they can't win no matter what and hence abandon cultivating "soft" power? Or will they feel that a serious rethinking of their policies is necessary to become a leader that others would follow?

Please do post your comments on the message board.

I avoid getting embroiled in a certain Chinese spin, which is tantamount to that 'straw man.' Tibet is not about democracy, west, nor even good or evil, nor how accurate are journalists. Western journalists have a track record, FAR from excellent, but generally the truth is reported. Chomsky may be right that truth is buried, but it is available.

Chinese Marxists are attempting to build their Empire at the expense of Tibetans and Moslem Uyghyurs. It is the same as apartheid in Africa, genocide anywhere, including Darfur, and local self-rule.

In particular, this Chinese Govt invasion of Tibet has proceeded similar to UK importing Scots to Northern Ireland, to destroy culture, religion & language.

Let's hope & pray that China Govt will react constructively to the world's opinion that human beings ought be treated with dignity. Noting that merely spending money is not sufficient to maintain that dignity, if it demeans the individual's rights to pursue life as he wishes, provided he does no harm.

So many of these bloggers serving the Marxist elite are merely protecting their own elitist future, ethnically Chinese, prioritising MANDARIN, just like CCCR Russified its subjects, & UK anglicised.

They claim that this is the way the world has always worked. Perhaps true, but there were always those moral exceptions, and we hope to avoid the abuses of the past.

China can regain the status it once had when it understands that the world has evolved, and that means peoples, often identified by religion & language, should be tolerated, not restricted.

So many of these bloggers serving the Marxist elite are merely protecting their own elitist future, ethnically Chinese, prioritising MANDARIN, just like CCCR Russified its subjects, & UK anglicised.

I think you meant England Anglicised ;)