EPTWhy Muslim Uighurs are angry in China ? - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Polus
United States25 Posts
| ||
|
v1rtu0so
United States140 Posts
China really should not make the mistake US made years ago, but knowing their gov't, I know they will bulldoze through their agenda. What is noticeably different, however, is that, unlike the Americans who are not proud of this part of history, the Chinese population (the supposed "Hans") are so convinced and even proud that what they are doing is "magnanimous" and "for their good." | ||
|
Polus
United States25 Posts
| ||
|
Draconizard
628 Posts
| ||
|
asleepingpig
China75 Posts
On July 08 2009 14:46 koreasilver wrote: Aborigines? There are aborigines that originated from Hawaii and Alaska. What are you on about. Can they have their own countries? | ||
|
Polus
United States25 Posts
On July 08 2009 14:50 Draconizard wrote: He was being sarcastic. They were analogous, but perhaps it's too difficult to tell now that the people there have become so integrated? I'm sure it's ok, though; the natives there all wanted it. I missed the sarcasm because the analogy is so flawed to begin with. You're right, though, I'm sure many of those peoples didn't want integration. I guess that excuses a similar Chinese reaction to their 'native problem.' My mistake. | ||
|
themonkyguy
Australia149 Posts
On July 08 2009 14:40 Polus wrote: Okay, I agree with your last point. I never suggested reconciliation was impossible. You conveniently ignored the part of my post where I suggested integration begin in both the TAR and Xinjiang regions once those minorities have an actual voice in the CCP. Well, that depends on what you qualify as an 'actual voice'. I did not really comment on it because the 'actual voice' as far as aboriginese in Australia is concerned didn't really do much for quite a long time. The recent Northern Territory intervention here gone through despite alot of the 'actual voice' opposed it. | ||
|
v1rtu0so
United States140 Posts
Can they have their own countries? Yes, if they constituted the majority of people who resided in that land for many, many years AND strongly want their own nation/leadership. Neither, unfortunately, seems to be true for aborigines and Indians any more. Can we say there has been a successful eradication of culture? | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
They used to have their own countries until the Westerners pretty much just took the land when they wanted to. I still don't know what point you're trying to make. It's not that some of these aborigines don't want to live with complete autonomy, they simply can't, which is the case with some of these ethnic minorities in China. On July 08 2009 14:50 Draconizard wrote: He was being sarcastic. They were analogous, but perhaps it's too difficult to tell now that the people there have become so integrated? I'm sure it's ok, though; the natives there all wanted it. I'm sure all the natives in North America are just delighted that thanks to the American and Canadian government some languages and culture have been completely erradicated. | ||
|
asleepingpig
China75 Posts
On July 08 2009 14:47 v1rtu0so wrote: US certainly is not free from guilty of something like this themselves. Besides slavery, the dealings with native americans is certainly the biggest blemish in otherwise decent track record. Now that I think of it, there are uncanny parallels in the two situations. Indian casinos and affirmative action sounds A LOT like the type of preferential treatment that the minorities are getting in China in exchange for loss of autonomy. China really should not make the mistake US made years ago, but knowing their gov't, I know they will bulldoze through their agenda. What is noticeably different, however, is that, unlike the Americans who are not proud of this part of history, the Chinese population (the supposed "Hans") are so convinced and even proud that what they are doing is "magnanimous" and "for their good." Thanks for your explanation. I know Indians are well treated in USA now. But if there were millions of Indians in Alaska who wanted to be independent and attack the white madly, how will USA government do? | ||
|
asleepingpig
China75 Posts
| ||
|
v1rtu0so
United States140 Posts
On July 08 2009 14:58 asleepingpig wrote: Thanks for your explanation. I know Indians are well treated in USA now. But if there were millions of Indians in Alaska who wanted to be independent and attack the white madly, how will USA government do? If these millions of indians constitute the vast majority of people living in Alaska (no longer true) AND wanted to "attack the white madly" (unlikely, but OK), then US should let them be independent. Another important caveat is that these people need to have lived their for long time (effectively the land has been theirs), which is also no longer true. Tibetans and Uighurs, however, (with some reservations) seem to mostly meet these criteria. edit: damn i missed the proleague responding to this thread | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
v1rtu0so
United States140 Posts
| ||
|
asleepingpig
China75 Posts
Mongolia left China in 1940's because of the pressuare from Soviet Russia, and they lived very bad. China always provide some help to Mongolia. In 1995, Mongolia government shew that they wanted to join China. But China government refused it as Mongolia required China to be a federal government. | ||
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On July 08 2009 15:01 v1rtu0so wrote: If these millions of indians constitute the vast majority of people living in Alaska (no longer true) AND wanted to "attack the white madly" (unlikely, but OK), then US should let them be independent. Another important caveat is that these people need to have lived their for long time (effectively the land has been theirs), which is also no longer true. Tibetans and Uighurs, however, (with some reservations) seem to mostly meet these criteria. Nope. The US will not let millions of Indians be independent just because they don't want to be part of the US. Alaska is valuable US land. The US will send troops to Alaska to crush the rebellion and then arrest the rebellion's leaders. They'll say that the people who fought against the US troops are terrorists who threaten the Union. Remember the Civil War? The North didn't let the South secede. | ||
|
MK
United States496 Posts
If Uighurs and Tibetans leave China, I have to say they will live worse than now unless other countries can always provide international help. Mongolia left China in 1940's because of the pressuare from Soviet Russia, and they lived very bad. China always provide some help to Mongolia. In 1995, Mongolia government shew that they wanted to join China. But China government refused it as Mongolia required China to be a federal government. what what what ? how can you tell they will live a worse life being independent Oo | ||
|
v1rtu0so
United States140 Posts
On July 08 2009 15:16 T.O.P. wrote: Nope. The US will not let millions of Indians be independent just because they don't want to be part of the US. Alaska is valuable US land. The US will send troops to Alaska to crush the rebellion and then arrest the rebellion's leaders. They'll say that the people who fought against the US troops are terrorists who threaten the Union. Remember the Civil War? The North didn't let the South secede. That's because Indians do not have a good case for independence any more. Look at my requirements, and especially the caveat. Also, I have never claimed to say US is morally superior to China (although I think it is). I am just saying what China is doing is wrong. | ||
|
silynxer
Germany439 Posts
On July 08 2009 15:14 asleepingpig wrote: China always provide some help to Mongolia. In 1995, Mongolia government shew that they wanted to join China. But China government refused it as Mongolia required China to be a federal government. Do you have a source for that? I'm very interested to read about it and couldn't find anything at all after a quick search (yes I'm lazy). | ||
|
potchip
Australia260 Posts
There's no denying that China wanting to keep Tibet/XinJiang is not out of the kindness of the heart. The fact is, CCP can offer to be magnanimous, but will not tolerate dissent. Government wants the land and the implied resources, treating the people on that land well so there's no trouble is a mean not an end. Talking about representative in CCP is idealogy as it will never happen, democratically or not when you have a 90% ethinic majority. Problem is there's no agreed method to 'properly' assimilate an ethnic group. Governments do what they can. America can acknowledge there were mistakes all they want but we won't know what will work, or what state of affairs will constitude a successful assimilation. IMO independence is not for the utility of the people, other than the selected few in power. But people do get easily caught in the emotions. | ||
| ||
