Who should Atheists support in Tibet?

[roger]

You criticize a skeptical podcast on the issue because -- get this -- they have the audacity to present the full picture, both past and present, and consider their conclusions within that context.

I did not say that in the least.

I found the podcast very, very simplistic. "Don't listen to hollywood". Well, duh.

It's an enormously complicated region, with a complicated past. As RandFan points out, we do not stay up on all issues. I suggest Dunning is not very knowledge about Tibet. Just google Tibet and China and you will find very informative coverage of all of the nuances.

To put this in a context where it may resonate for all of us, imagine we were discussing psychics, and somebody offered a podcast that said, basically "don't believe Montel, there is another side to the story". Well, yes, we'd all agree with that, but it isn't exactly a major contribution, unless we were all posting about 'oh, that montel, he's so smart, there must be something to psychics". Which we wouldn't be.

Likewise, to bring it back to this thread, there are really great resources out there on the subject of the China occupation of Tibet. That podcast isn't one I'd ever reach for.

As for Tibet's past, obviously they weren't a democracy. The question in this thread is - should we support Tibet or China in this matter. For that, I argue that yes, the past of Tibetan rule is not a factor. We (USA) used to have slavery, and back in the 50s we had Jim Crow laws - I would hope that any international decision made today would not be factoring that in. It's the past. That's not whitewashing our past, if you want to have a history discussion our Jim Crow laws and Tibetan king rulers are all on the table. If you want to discuss how the countries should be treated now and in the future, not so much.

RandFan, I thought I made it obvious where I disagreed with Dunning. It is not good for the Tibetans now. The Tibetans, and I refer to the people, not the government, have been oppressed for a long time now, as Wolfman has said. First by their own government/rulers, now by the Chinese. Sure, if you want to strart doing a compare/contrast you can point out some things that the Chinese have done that was an improvement over how things were in the past. But, it's still oppression. I argue that people should have the right to self determination, and that's the slant to take. My aim is not to vilify the Chinese or their acts. I do wish the current situation would change. Perhaps I didn't give the podcast a fair shake, because as I admitted it irritated me a bit, but saying things are 'better' is in no way an implication that they are now 'good'. We have to judge the current Chinese position based on the current conditions, not based on the past.

We (the US) face a very similar thing in Afganistan and Iraq now. Okay, we tried to make things better for the civilians, and in some ways we have, but each day our presence there must be reevaluated. If we oppress the people, we should leave, period. If we are being unfair, we should stop. "But mom, they started it" isn't a sophisticated response in the playground, and it isn't any better in international disputes.

Finally, Wolfman, I do not seek to gloss over what Tibet has done in the past. What I left out of my post is a very real concern that if China was to leave Tibet, what would happen. Let me be clear - it worries me considerably. It's not entirely left out, as I used the term self-determination, which to me at least implies some kind of democracy - I certainly understand why other posters would miss that . Still, to answer the OP, I argue we should support self-determination; the past abuses of the Tibetan government does not bear on that, though they existed, nor does the past and current good things that China has done bear on that, though they exist too. It's probably naive, but I see people oppressed, and I think "that should stop".

Finally, I value your contribution to this thread Wolfman. I believe the disagreement here is merely one of interpretation of words and intent. I seek only to try to answer what should happen to Tibet from here on out - we both agree the previous situation isvery complicated, that the Tibetans were oppressed by their rulers prior to China, and that by some measures things have improved. n.b., I was born in NH, where the state motto is "Live Free or Die" - something that is rather ingrained in me. In that context, a blithe statement of "things are better now" (which I attribute to the podcast, not Wolfman) rubs me the wrong way. You're oppressed by a foreign government, but hey, you've got schools now! No. No. No. In my world view, liberty and self-determination is the most important thing that we have, and must be gained, and then protected, at all costs.

Is that clearer?

 

[RandFan]

Is that clearer?

Meh~ It's really not worth the debate. I hope nothing but the best for the people of Tibet. I don't know what the answers are. The pod-cast helped me better understand the issues and you've further enlightened me as to the plight of the Tibetans. Wolfman also. I don't have a dog in the fight. I only champion peace and self determination for people everywhere.

Thanks,

RandFan

 

[Dancing David]

Meh~ It's really not worth the debate. I hope nothing but the best for the people of Tibet. I don't know what the answers are. The pod-cast helped me better understand the issues and you've further enlightened me as to the plight of the Tibetans. Wolfman also. I don't have a dog in the fight. I only champion peace and self determination for people everywhere.

Thanks,

RandFan

Awesome.