Copper on BBc tonight re: potential Tibet protests...

[CharlieAddict]

it is. what do you think the word means you tit?

re·gime also ré·gime (r-zhm, r-)
n.
1.
a. A form of government: a fascist regime.
b. A government in power; administration: suffered under the new regime.
2. A prevailing social system or pattern.
3. The period during which a particular administration or system prevails.
4. A regulated system, as of diet and exercise; a regimen.

ummm...why don't you go to china and see how this 'regime' works?
it's more modern and civilised than you think. not all this bias bullshit westerners are forced to believe.

you so don't have a clue. wanker.

 

[nosos]

You have no idea what I think or don't think about China.

I'm just pointing out that the "westerners" you're sneering at who think China is a "regime" are right given that, well, it is.

Could you expand on what "bias bullshit westerns are forced to believe"?

Also could you explain how on earth you purport to know what the entire western world thinks about China?

 

[nosos]

I've come across loads of people making this sort of argument online:

They seem to have picked up a painfully simplistic representation of China through the media, gone there and realised that (shock horror!) it wasn't true then started condemning everyone in the west who does criticise China because they presume those people hold the same simplistic view that they themselves used to hold.

Consequently leading them to sneer at the westerners who think China is a 'regime'

 

[Lea]

That said, I would advise any Tibetans to steer clear of Chinatown on the day - The Shaolin Fists martial arts group will be providing security, I hear, and the Snakeheads wouldn't take too kindly to anything that disrupts business (they are paid much money to provide 'protection' after all). Plus the sight of White, British protestors screaming anti-Chinese slogans probably won't go down too well either.

LOL! You are joking right?

Also the Snakeheads are only into human trafficking so it's got nothing to do with them. You might mean the triads though.

 

[CharlieAddict]

I've come across loads of people making this sort of argument online:

They seem to have picked up a painfully simplistic representation of China through the media, gone there and realised that (shock horror!) it wasn't true then started condemning everyone in the west who does criticise China because they presume those people hold the same simplistic view that they themselves used to hold.

Consequently leading them to sneer at the westerners who think China is a 'regime'

ummm i'm chinese.
i grew up listening to my Chinese dad going on about western propaganda of china for years.
and most people in the west do have a simplistic view of china.
i mean look at all these threads on U75 even.
and what the fuck is PaulOK's thread about?

china is changing. it's 'free-er' than what is was.
and btw - i went 1st time in '89. the same year my cousin protested in the riots...

 

[CharlieAddict]

I'm just pointing out that the "westerners" you're sneering at who think China is a "regime" are right given that, well, it is.

Could you expand on what "bias bullshit westerns are forced to believe"?

'regime?' oh please. history of human rights abuse?
westerners should seriously look at their own countries before they disapprove of others.
double standards all the way through.

bias bullshit? it's in the news - i explained a couple on another thread.
how (in tibet) different news agencies depict chinese ambulances as squad vans. how a person taken into care was in fact taken to a hospital.
i've been watching the same snippets of information as everyone else and was surpised to see.

propaganda...yeah whatever - take your pick.

 

[nosos]

But what are they actually saying that's so utterly false? Obviously western governments have a strategic interest in having a stick to beat China* and this can filter into the media, likewise the way these issues play themselves out in the mass media is going to tend to simplify matters somewhat. Even so, this doesn't mean that everyone in the west is a passive and unthinking dupe of western propaganda. I don't think there's actually such coherent, sustained and fabricated propaganda. The accusation that the western media can be simplistic and one-sided (no shit) can all to often serve as a way of shutting down debate on issues that need to be debated.

*Though this can be over-stated. It's a member of the WTO, a vast market and an economic friend, albeit an increasingly intimidating one, of western governments.

 

[nosos]

oh please. history of human rights abuse?

Do you think that, say, Amnesty fabricates its reports out a desire to wage a propaganda campaign against the Chinese? By all means argue this but please actually provide some evidence for it.

westerners should seriously look at their own countries before they disapprove of others.
double standards all the way through.

You think the kind of people prone to comdening human rights abuses abroad will tend to uncritically accept the actions of their own government? I mean this is bullshit logic of the highest order: people in the west who criticise the Chinese goverment are unjustified given that their own governments do bad stuff too?

 

[Lea]

You think the kind of people prone to comdening human rights abuses abroad will tend to uncritically accept the actions of their own government? I mean this is bullshit logic of the highest order: people in the west who criticise the Chinese goverment are unjustified given that their own governments do bad stuff too?

Well at least governments should stop harping on about human rights in China if their own house isn't in order.

 

[nosos]

What constitutes someone's house being in order?

I think there's definitely an important point to be made about double standards when it comes to governments. However you can overstress it.

Even so, Blair destroyed what little moral authority the UK government had.

 

[Lea]

What constitutes someone's house being in order?

What I mean is if a government can say that he has no issues with human rights in its own country then it can go ahead and criticise the Chinese government. I dont think that any government could say that they have no human rights issues within its own country.

 

[nosos]

I dont think that any government could say that they have no human rights issues within its own country.

Thus no government can criticise another on human rights and therefore the concept is rendered worthless in international politics. That's why I have a problem with this position. If we see our government having double standards we should call them on it and attempt to hold them to account rather than trashing the standards all together.

 

[Lea]

Thus no government can criticise another on human rights and therefore the concept is rendered worthless in international politics. That's why I have a problem with this position. If we see our government having double standards we should call them on it and attempt to hold them to account rather than trashing the standards all together.

Just saying that each government should look at its own country's problem first before criticising another. It is double standards to be criticising another country when your own country is far from perfect. But you do have a valid point in that we the people "should call on them to account on it".

 

[CharlieAddict]

fuckin' working and U75 sucks.
been writing this for friggin' ages. here goes.

Do you think that, say, Amnesty fabricates its reports out a desire to wage a propaganda campaign against the Chinese? By all means argue this but please actually provide some evidence for it.

did i say that? history of human rights abuse? America and the UK makes china look as harmful as the teletubbies.

You think the kind of people prone to comdening human rights abuses abroad will tend to uncritically accept the actions of their own government? I mean this is bullshit logic of the highest order: people in the west who criticise the Chinese goverment are unjustified given that their own governments do bad stuff too?

i argue and slag off the Chinese government all the time.
as i do with the UK.

but one thing i don't get is how the west go on about 'freeing tibet.'
when was it independent? cos i reckon the problem in tibet is more of a economic than a cultural one.
and the most chinese folks do believe that the Lama is half twat and half muppet though his teachings is pretty good.

But what are they actually saying that's so utterly false? Obviously western governments have a strategic interest in having a stick to beat China* and this can filter into the media, likewise the way these issues play themselves out in the mass media is going to tend to simplify matters somewhat. Even so, this doesn't mean that everyone in the west is a passive and unthinking dupe of western propaganda. I don't think there's actually such coherent, sustained and fabricated propaganda. The accusation that the western media can be simplistic and one-sided (no shit) can all to often serve as a way of shutting down debate on issues that need to be debated.

*Though this can be over-stated. It's a member of the WTO, a vast market and an economic friend, albeit an increasingly intimidating one, of western governments.

i hope people in the west aren't too passive.
cos much to me partner's amusement, i've been wearing my chinese communist top of late and been getting a lot of dodgy stares.

 

[nosos]

history of human rights abuse?

Apologies, I thought you were saying there wasn't a history of human rights abuses in China.

America and the UK makes china look as harmful as the teletubbies.

On what time scale? I'm not going to get into some ridiculous America vs China "who's the worst government" slanging match but denying the scale of repression that's gone on in China over the last century is just silly. Both countries have followed policies that have led to millions of deaths. In America's case primarily abroad.

but one thing i don't get is how the west go on about 'freeing tibet.'
when was it independent?

From early 1900s till 1950s? It was basically an entirely independent state, the Chinese military went in forcefully, violently suppressed the movement towards self-determination. Hence why people want to "free tibet" because they're arguing that the Tibetans have the right to control their own destiny.

 

[In Bloom]

it's funny but westerners do see china as a 'regime.'

Dear oh dear

 

[nosos]

You're one of them aren't you!?

 

[Das Uberdog]

America and the UK makes china look as harmful as the teletubbies.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4743414.stm

Poland banned them too, actually. Subversive stuff.

Not too relavent, but anecdotal all the same...

 

[frogwoman]

Thus no government can criticise another on human rights and therefore the concept is rendered worthless in international politics. That's why I have a problem with this position. If we see our government having double standards we should call them on it and attempt to hold them to account rather than trashing the standards all together.

absolutely

 

[Squatticus]

Iraq

 

[nosos]

Pig

 

[frogwoman]

Fucking Excellent.
Give these Tibetan, Pro CIA Racists a good kicking!

twat

 

[CharlieAddict]

From early 1900s till 1950s? It was basically an entirely independent state, the Chinese military went in forcefully, violently suppressed the movement towards self-determination. Hence why people want to "free tibet" because they're arguing that the Tibetans have the right to control their own destiny.

tibet was part of china well before the 1900s.

(the dalai lama was introduced to tibet as the political and spiritual leader by the mongol empire that ruled china).

i'm not proud of the chinese cultural revolution cos it destroyed china's heritage - their arts, culture, people and this includes tibet.

 

[CharlieAddict]

On what time scale? I'm not going to get into some ridiculous America vs China "who's the worst government" slanging match but denying the scale of repression that's gone on in China over the last century is just silly. Both countries have followed policies that have led to millions of deaths. In America's case primarily abroad.

timescale? 300 years say?

yeah, comparing the crimes of both countries is ridiculous.

 

[CharlieAddict]

LOL! You are joking right?

Also the Snakeheads are only into human trafficking so it's got nothing to do with them. You might mean the triads though.

shockingly stereotypical...
i hope s/he isn't serious also.

 

[Lea]

tibet was part of china well before the 1900s.

Tibet has been part of China on and off over the centuries so they have been independent before the 1900s. It's difficult to say whether they should be part of China today or be an independent country. What I will say is that both the Tibetans and Han Chinese's lives have vastly improved over the last couple of decades or so and that can't be a bad thing. The ordinary Tibetans were literally living as slaves under the feudal system before Tibet was re-integrated into China. I think that if Tibet were to become independent it would become a poorer country without China's support.

 

[audiotech]

As Mao once said: 'little fat men shouldn't play the concertina.'
*goes off to read on Lenin and the National Question*

 

[CharlieAddict]

Tibet has been part of China on and off over the centuries so they have been independent before the 1900s. It's difficult to say whether they should be part of China today or be an independent country. What I will say is that both the Tibetans and Han Chinese's lives have vastly improved over the last couple of decades or so and that can't be a bad thing. The ordinary Tibetans were literally living as slaves under the feudal system before Tibet was re-integrated into China. I think that if Tibet were to become independent it would become a poorer country without China's support.

poorer? come
on...oil, oil and more oil.

 

[Lea]

poorer? come
on...oil, oil and more oil.

Oh well it's OK for the Americans and other countries to lend their continued support for an "independent" Tibet. Free Tibet!

 

[nosos]

tibet was part of china well before the 1900s.

Yeah that's why I said from...