The pro-Tibet movement continues to steal the spotlight from the Olympic torch relay.
In San Francisco, planned protests were substantial enough to back the city into a corner, and they pulled a last-minute route change. Although I can understand why protesters and spectators would be frustrated, I hope pro-Tibet organizers realize that they won the day. They are still the biggest news.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has joined German Chancellor Angela Merkel in her decision not to attend the Opening Ceremonies. He says it's not a boycott but nobody believes him.
And while the anti-China, pro-Tibet protests continue, a growing number of Canadians and Americans are outraged. But not about China - about the protests.
You can read their fist-pounding letters to the editors in your local newspaper, or find them on dozens of blogs. They're in a lather over the protesters turning into "thugs" and "resorting to violence". A commonly heard sentiment goes something like, "Now that the protests have turned violent and protesters are committing vandalism, I question my support for Tibet!"
You may recall my post about people who claim to be against the Iraq War, but who think war resisters should be deported and jailed because "they signed a contract". This is the same theme.
The authoritarian streak in so many ordinary people amazes me. Some people are so besotted with order that their moral code runs for cover when the voice of the people gets too loud. If you are in such a huff because a protest turned rowdy or (heaven forbid!) somebody's property was damaged that you would actually stop sympathizing with people struggling against an occupation, I have to question your core values. People clash with police over a protest against China, and the protesters are the "thugs"? Not China?
I don't expect everyone to share my belief that violence is sometimes a necessary and useful tool in a movement. And not everyone understands how the media portrays protester violence out of all proportion to reality, and how often violence attributed to protesters is actually instigated by police.
But are you so indoctrinated with order that when some people in a freedom movement become disorderly, you would rather support totalitarianism?
26 comments:
Yeah, news reporters right down to Hazel Mae are saying stuff like, "they moved the route for fear of violence." It's like, Hellloooo, the violence by China toward Tibet is what they're protesting! How can people be all uppity and say "oh, no, we can't have this..."?? How about, "we can't have what's going on in Tibet"?
As someone who is kind of upset about the protests, let me explain my reasoning.
I certainly don't support China's occupation of Tibet. But at the same time, I can't help but feel that a lot of the uproar around the world is because we're talking about China and not some other country.
What I mean is that it's a communist", non-western country. If this was Israel or Britain or America, do you think there would be talk of boycotts? I mean Britain and America started an illegal war with Iraq and continue to occupy it. But if this was an Olympics on American or British soil, would anyone not on the "fringe" attempt to extinguish the torch? They wouldn't dare! And politicians would be silent.
I know what you're going to say...that just because X is also doing something wrong, doesn't mean we should give Y a free ride for its crimes. And I would generally agree. That's why a part of me is glad that the international pressure is mounting.
But the whiff of hypocrisy about this whole thing bothers me enough that I find myself surprisingly torn and uneasy about something that on any other day of the year , would be black and white in my eyes!
China is good enough to trade with every other day of the year, but suddenly we act all outraged by their human rights abuses now that they have the Olympics? Please!
When the Olympics are over, and there are people still protesting en masse, I'll support them whole-heartedly. For now, I'm just disappointed that something that's supposed to be as pure as the Olympics (you know, if you ignore all those drugging scandals and such ;) is being overshadowed like this. I understand that that's the whole point of civil disobedience and protests...but my conscience isn't at peace with the timing, that's all.
I don't know if that makes sense to anyone else, but there you have it.
Hi Canrane, thanks for your comments.
It would never occur to me that the people protesting China do so because it is communist. Most of the protests come from the left end of the western political spectrum anyway.
You mention Israel. I think if it was Israel the protests would be 20 times as strong. Israel rivals only the US in global anger and hatred.
I guess I can't understand the Olympics as "pure" in any sense. The IOC is incredibly corrupt, and so are the organizing committees for every games.
China is *not* good enough to trade with every day of the year. But how are the people protesting responsbile for their countries' economic policies? It's not hypocritical unless it's hypocritical of me to protest the Iraq War.
The protesters are people, individual people who are angry. They're not representing countries. I don't understand the hypocrisy charge.
I appreciate your comments and your thoughts about this...but I must admit I don't really understand it.
"Now that the protests have turned violent and protesters are committing vandalism, I question my support for Tibet!"
I take it these same people condemn the US Founding Fathers for not settling their differences with Britain diplomaticly?
Also, it's not as if the US or Britain is officially protesting. That would be hypocritical. But it's a fair bet that most of the people in these protests are also against the war in Iraq. You can be against more than one thing at a time, no?
Okay, let's see if I can explain myself better...
You say that individual people are not responsible for their countries' economic policies... Well, I don't think they have to be in order to be upset about it. Anymore than they have to be responsible for giving China the games to be upset that they have it. If individual people feel that it's a travesty that China was rewarded with these games, then they must surely have felt that it was a travesty to trade with them too. But where was the anger anger then? If it was there, I certainly didn't see it.
And for that matter, individual people in China are not responsible for their government's oppressive policies in Tibet either. Yet, what should have been a source of pride, and a chance to showcase their accomplishments and culture on a world stage has been overshadowed.
Just because the US is in an illegal war in Iraq, it doesn't mean that there aren't things in the US to be celebrated. Its citizens still have lots of things to be proud of. And the same is true for China. So I'm saddened that their chance is turning out this way.
I also think it's easy to make China the bad guy through and through here because it's non-western *and* communist. It doesn't matter that people on the left are the ones up in arms. It's still politically more acceptable to raise this kind of a stink about a country that's safe to call "bad".
And even though the IOC is corrupt as hell, and the Olympic athletes are drugged up to their eyeballs, I'm idealistic enough to think that the spirit of it is still something to be honoured. If the Greeks could put down their weapons in the middle of wars with each other for this event, then surely we can, for two weeks, celebrate the good in China.
When the curtain falls on the closing ceremonies, by all means, let's go back to focusing on the bad. But no country is either pure good or pure evil. So it would be nice to see just the other side just this once.
I guess I just don't understand the hypocrisy complaint, no matter how many times I hear it. If I think something is wrong, I protest it. Everything else doesn't have to be right in order for me to do so.
You say that individual people are not responsible for their countries' economic policies... Well, I don't think they have to be in order to be upset about it.
Absolutely. I agree.
If individual people feel that it's a travesty that China was rewarded with these games, then they must surely have felt that it was a travesty to trade with them too. But where was the anger anger then? If it was there, I certainly didn't see it.
I feel that every day. Every day I see how all the western nations kiss up to China b/c of their economic power, I see the travesty. Mostly I feel utterly powerless to do anything about it. The Olympics is an opportunity to express that.
And for that matter, individual people in China are not responsible for their government's oppressive policies in Tibet either.
Very true. Hopefully most people who are protesting recognize that and have no issue with the people of China.
Yet, what should have been a source of pride, and a chance to showcase their accomplishments and culture on a world stage has been overshadowed.
I guess I don't see the Olympics as a way for the Chinese people to showcase anything. It's state run, people are being displaced for it (as always for the Olympics, not specific to China at all)... to me the idea that the Olympics is somehow "for" the people of the host country is propaganda, not reality.
Just because the US is in an illegal war in Iraq, it doesn't mean that there aren't things in the US to be celebrated. Its citizens still have lots of things to be proud of.
That's a tough one for me. Almost no one who opposes US foreign policy, outside of the US, makes that distinction. The US is mostly seen as all bad, and IMO, rightly so, as any good it might be doing is far outweighed by all the bad it is doing. As an American citizen, I feel nothing but shame, disgust, anger and saddness.
I also think it's easy to make China the bad guy through and through here because it's non-western *and* communist.
I guess I just don't get that at all. Wrong is wrong. China is a disgrace on so many levels, for so many reasons. Why should we sugar-coat it because they're not western? That shouldn't be a reason to hate them, but it certainly shouldn't be a reason to look the other way.
It's still politically more acceptable to raise this kind of a stink about a country that's safe to call "bad".
I think if anything, it's the opposite. More people are willing to see the US and Israel as "bad" and say "we can't criticize China until we clean up our own act... the west shouldn't criticize a non-western country" than criticize China because it's Asian or communist.
I don't know if you saw my piece on Common Dreams, but most of the comments were along the lines of what you are saying - western hypocrisy, no right to criticize. I think it's a very commonly held opinion.
Thanks for clarifying, though.
For me it feels very simple. I can't enjoy the Olympics in Beijing, knowing what I know about China. That includes Tibet, but it is also way more than Tibet. I feel that to participate in the Olympics in any way, including as a spectator, is condoning a very immoral regime. So I can't do it.
i dont get the fascination with the dalia lama. he and his religion are sexist and homophobic just like most other religions yet it seems that too many on the left give him a pass. theres seems to me to be a real preoccupation with tibet at the expense of others who are equally as oppressed. of course as you say one can be against more than one thing at a time.
i didnt mean to sound uncaring for the plight of tibetans, i just have a problem with organized religion and thought the dalai lama might be different until i saw an indepth interview in which he expressed clear anti-gay views.
"i dont get the fascination with the dalia lama."
I suppose many people's fascination with the Dalai Lama comes from his message of world peace and inner peace. People are clearly very attracted to his teachings.
"he and his religion are sexist and homophobic just like most other religions"
Are you sure about that? Buddhism is inherently sexist and homophobic? Or you heard him make homophobic comments Those are two different things.
One needn't be homophobic or sexist to be attracted to Buddhism. (Or any religion.)
But for more on that, you would have to ask a follower, which I am not.
"theres seems to me to be a real preoccupation with tibet at the expense of others who are equally as oppressed. of course as you say one can be against more than one thing at a time."
Focusing on one issue does not mean it is "at the expense of others". You can't get things done without focus. If you try to do everything at once, you do nothing.
It's not my main issue, but if no one made a free Tibet the focus of their activism, the world would never hear or know about it. Obviously, the Olympics give that movement a platform - and China brought in troops and tanks at the same time - so we're hearing a lot about it now.
And hey, you can always find the hundreds of blogs denouncing the Dalai Lama as a CIA operative.
When the curtain falls on the closing ceremonies, by all means, let's go back to focusing on the bad.
When all the cameras are turned off and the world's attention is elsewhere.
Although he is known for his tolerant, humane views, he is a surprisingly harsh critic of homosexuality. If you are a Buddhist, he says, it is wrong. "Full stop.
No way round it.
"A gay couple came to see me, seeking my support and blessing. I had to explain our teachings. Another lady introduced another woman as her wife - astonishing. It is the same with a husband and wife using certain sexual practices. Using the other two holes is wrong."
At this point, he looks across at his interpreter - who seems mainly redundant - to check that he has been using the right English words to discuss this delicate matter. The interpreter gives a barely perceptible nod.
"A Western friend asked me what harm could there be between consenting adults having oral sex, if they enjoyed it," the Dalai Lama continues, warming to his theme. "But the purpose of sex is reproduction, according to Buddhism. The other holes don't create life. I don't mind - but I can't condone this way of life."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1619118/posts
the above quote was from the attached website.
Tommy, you are quoting FREE REPUBLIC as a source??? Did you just out yourself as a Freeper or do you not know that 99% of what is found there is outright lies, and the other 1% is massive distortion?
There is great debate on the internet over whether or not the Dalai Lama is anti-gay. However, don't come to this blog using Free Republic as a source and think you have shown anyone anything. Keep that filth off this blog.
Full stop.
Free Republic makes Fox News look like Howard Zinn.
Geez, Tommy, what's next? Quoting Hitler on Jewish history?
obviously i'm not as internet savvy as yall. i got that off a google search. internet politcal blogs arent my thing. how would i know what the free republic is.i thought it was funny. the two holes thing. geesh lighten up.
You didn't post that to be funny. There's no joke there. You posted it as source material.
So you post a link but haven't checked out the reliability of the source. Then you get called on it, and you tell US to lighten up?
"how would i know what the free republic is."
Same way I know what it is. Same way you know what anything is.
Tommy, nowhere on this blog do I defend the Dalai Lama. I don't talk about him at all. My issues with China are much larger than that. And don't tell me about what I know and what I don't know. You don't have the slightest idea of who I am and what I know.
Go rant somewhere else.
Tommy, you might be interested in my latest post, and any comments it may receive.
I don't allow ranting and insults here, so unfortunately, you won't be able to participate.
Regional accents exist and there are those who sometimes write/spell in a manner which suggests what those accents sound like, but who actually types "yall"?
I mean, really.
For example, the Canadian-born posters on this blog don't type "eh" after every other sentence.
It was suspect, for sure. Do you see any indication that he posted the Freeper link as a joke? I sure don't. Y'all.
Do you see any indication that he posted the Freeper link as a joke?
Of course not. You can't see what's not there.
Turns out "Tommy" was "Magnolia_2000", the wmtc troll. Over and out.
Post a Comment