Dubstepforum.com

Nevalo wrote:

nicenice wrote:What does tibet want?

Theres your problem, no one cares what they want.

tr0tsky wrote:

nicenice wrote:Free Tibet reeks of Western arrogance and patronisation.

Fucking STINKS of it.

tr0tsky wrote:Do you even believe in democracy, Steph? .

tr0tsky wrote:No, I present a political scientist's view of Tibet. A political scientist who has been to Dharamasala for fuck's sake.

Have you ever even met a Tibetan before? .

tr0tsky wrote:

noam wrote:

alien pimp wrote:i see the need of taking the chinese out of tibet as separate from the need to have a decent tibetan regime in independence

have you changed your mind on this yet?

The first part of that sounds uncomfortably like ethnic cleansing.

alien pimp wrote:meant it earlier like does anyone has any idea what's behind cameron's newfound love for tibet? any speculations in the press or wherever?

stephisaint wrote:

Nevalo wrote:

nicenice wrote:What does tibet want?

Theres your problem, no one cares what they want.

The way I see it, Tibetans want what all people want:

An acceptible freedom/safety ratio, food, health, happiness.

This is not being provided by the Chinese right now, whatever your political slant. I was not asking for the world, I know what politics is like. The petition was aimed at creating more media coverage, hopefully aimed NOT at complete tibetan independance but "greater autonomy". This does not mean complete autonomy. It means maybe the disbanding of the work camps, providing the people (not just the imported chinese shipped into the cities to create a good image for tourists) with food, stopping the "re-education campaigns", stopping torture and unjust imprisonment.

To assume "greater autonomy" always must mean complete independance and a return to the old political systems is idiotic.

This is an assumption and to be honest exactly why I didn't want to get into a "debate" on an internet forum. The problem is the "anti-free Tibet campaign" ALSO reeks of arrogance, thinking they know what the people over there want and deserve, and to be honest in certain cases probably have more to do with the political support of the Chinese, rather than caring what's happening to the people.

Annnnnnd standard questioning of MY ability to know what I'm talking about based on no facts whatsoever.

noam wrote:

alien pimp wrote:meant it earlier like does anyone has any idea what's behind cameron's newfound love for tibet? any speculations in the press or wherever?

i dont know about Tibet but i would assume if he has any 'care' for them its from an anti-chinese standpoint

same as UK's position with Mongolia. as far as i can tell in a time when its next to impossible to claim refugee status in this country and its almost as hard to emigrate to it, Mongolians have been allowed to pass through our borders en masse. i can only assume there is some diplomatic deal to do with china and/or oil. in manchester its really surprised me how many and how easily mongolians have been granted full work visa's.

noam wrote:free your mind maaaaaan

hackman wrote:you really think david cameron will pay attention to a petition, let alone convince the chinese of anything?

dey is all in teh cahootz innit fam

tr0tsky wrote:

stephisaint wrote:
Have you seen the more recent free tibet campaigns? That postcard from 2002 could be seen as a little dated don't you think? Was it designed by Tibetans or could it maybe have been designed by Western supporters to grab the attention of 'anti-communist' America?

2002 wasn't all that long ago really. Not that it has anything to do with the fact that resorting to Mr Woo the crazy chink stereotypes is bang out of order.

And I don't think it was designed by Tibetans, it was designed by the Free Tibet organisation, the same one you're asking us to support.

Anyway, you made me laugh when you suggest above that Tibet campaign would want to grab the attention of America - that bastion of democratic and anti-imperialist values. Do you see why I think this all stinks of hypocrisy?

Should probably add in here that I read quite a lot on buddhism and the portrayal of the Dalai Lama as a "religious dictator" is questionable but I'll have a read around and see if I can see where you're coming from.

Okay well it's good you've read about Buddhism, though I've been to Dharamsala [which is where the Lama and the Tibetan Government-in-Exile reside] and truth be told most Tibetans I've met there are just regular folk. Who wear jeans. And listen to shit rock music. I got proper pissed in McCleod Ganj with a bunch of Tibetan lads.

And besides, Buddhists are just as capable of committing violent atrocities, just look at the bloody history of Cambodia, Korea, Sri Lanka, Tamil Nadu, Japan, Thailand, Vietnam and China.




As much as I have problems with the political stance of Spiked magazine they're uncharacteristicly on-point with their coverage of the Chinese/Tibetan issue:

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/ ... icle/9196/

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/ ... icle/9187/

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/ ... icle/5170/


Have a read of some of that, and in the meanwhile...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oc ... w-citizens

The Israeli cabinet today approved a bill requiring new non-Jewish citizens to swear an oath of allegiance to Israel as a "Jewish and democratic state", in a move that has brought accusations of discrimination against Israel's Arab minority. One dissenting cabinet minister referred to a "whiff of fascism".

The bill, originally promoted by the rightwing foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who has made the issue of loyalty a hallmark of his political career, was passed by a big majority despite the opposition of Labour party members.

The loyalty oath will be required of non-Jews seeking to become Israeli citizens, mainly affecting Palestinians from the West Bank who marry Palestinian citizens of Israel.

The latter, who make up 20% of Israel's population, have vigorously criticised the proposal – which needs approval from the Knesset before becoming law – as provocative and racist. It has also drawn protests from Israeli Jews, including those in the cabinet.

Isaac Herzog, the social affairs minister, told Israel's army radio: "There is a whiff of fascism on the margins of Israeli society. The overall picture is very disturbing and threatens the democratic character of the state of Israel. There have been a tsunami of measures that limit rights ... We will pay a heavy price for this."

Lieberman campaigned in last year's election for a loyalty oath to be required of all existing Palestinian citizens of Israel. The bill put to the vote today drew back from that, applying only to future citizens. "I think this is an important step forward. Obviously this is not the end of the issue of loyalty in return for citizenship, but this is a highly important step," Lieberman said.

At the start of the cabinet meeting, the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said: "The state of Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and is a democratic state in which all its citizens – Jewish and non-Jewish – enjoy full equal rights ... Whoever wants to join us, has to recognise us."

It was suggested that Netanyahu backed the bill as a quid pro quo for support from rightwing parties within his coalition government should he bow to US pressure to extend the freeze on settlement construction. The moratorium, which expired two weeks ago, is threatening to scupper talks on a peace deal with the Palestinians.

Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli-Arab member of the Knesset, condemned the cabinet's decision. "The government of Israel has become subservient to Yisrael Beiteinu [Lieberman's party] and its fascist doctrine," he said. "No other state in the world would force its citizens or those seeking citizenship to pledge allegiance to an ideology."

The speaker of the Knesset, Reuven Rivlin, also criticised the proposal. "This law will not assist us as a society and a state," he said. "On the contrary, it could arm our enemies and opponents in the world in an effort to emphasise the trend for separatism or even racism within Israel."

Likud cabinet members Dan Meridor, Benny Begin and Michael Eitan opposed the bill along with Labour ministers.

Writing in today's Haaretz, liberal commentator Gideon Levy said: "Remember this day. It's the day Israel changes its character ... From now on, we will be living in a new, officially approved, ethnocratic, theocratic, nationalistic and racist country."

Support the Palestine Solidarity Campaign here: http://www.palestinecampaign.org/

metalboxproducts wrote:Haha. Can't believe you are posting links to Spiked. Well well, things are looking up.

tr0tsky wrote: As much as I have problems with the political stance of Spiked magazine they're uncharacteristicly on-point with their coverage of the Chinese/Tibetan issue: