That would make the UK a theocracy.

But that doesn't mean that's what "Free-Tibeters" in the West want, and it's extremely unlikely ever to occur in reality.

__________________
No Fear No Hate No Pain No Broken Hearts

Who took away all the slaves from southern landowning aristocracy in the US......Abraham Lincoln....and he was a Republican. You mean the Republican party? whose stronhold is now decendent of these aristorcrats and whom are generally hated by black decendent of slaves????
Yeah, historical precedents have little influence over current values.
I might just as well say most Chinese farmers hate the CCP because of the Great Leap Foward which made their poverty much worse.
There's absolutely no way to tell what these people want unless there are elections and referendums. Why don't we ask the people? Oh that's right, the CCP feels too threatened to do that.


Yes, the Canadian government is in shambles because of this riot. 16 people arrested, no deaths; forceably the government is about to be overthrown by warlords, anarchy is emminant and economic growth is completely stuffed.
What a far cry from what's happening in China. And if this is the price for a stable government, one that is responsive to citizen's demands, then I'm willing to pay it; especially considering the minimal violence and frequency of such events.

I don't believe Tibetans as a whole to be any less civil as a whole than anyone else. Anti-government mobs are hard things to start, and require a strong anti-government concensus amongst the populace. Sure, stop the violence. I have nothing against it. But find the source of what cause the mob and fix it in a CIVIL MANNER (by responding to the needs that created this mob in the first place). Main thing here is not who's right, but how to prevent it.

__________________

There's no justification outside referendums. Historical possession (more like a default tributary vassal accorded by the British during the Qing Dynasty) mean nothing. Germany used to own Shandong, we should give it back to them, without just cause, just because of what happened in history
This relies on a giant nationalist contingency.

__________________

First off, elections are held in district levels upwards. There is more than one party although the Chinese Communist Party is dominant. Democratization process in the west took thousands of years. We know that the economic, social and cultural conditions differ from country to country. Many less developed countries collapsed because they could not cope with simultaneous economic, social and political "modernization" following the western model. Gorbachev's Glasnost failed and USSR disintegrated because it was not ready. You need to get the economy right, feed the people before, provide employment, educate them, one step at a time. Rome is not built in a day. Patience. Many countries are impressed and looking at China as the model for development, not "democracy". Note that USA supports many autocratic regimes such as the Saudis and Saddam Hussein before they fell out, and they are not democratic.

German did not own Shandong! China was carved like a watermelon by a conspiracy of western powers. Don't even bring this up as my Chinese friends will be infuriated by this part of history. By the same token the Nazis did not own Europe. However, China has historically governed and had sovereignty over Tibet for a thousand years, and never once did Tibet claimed indepedence even though there were civil wars and skirmishes. The British must not have forgotten that they signed an agreement in 1906 that recognised China's suzerainty over Tibet.

oneworldtalk :: View topic - British and Americans have their share of massacres

If Free Tibet has a claim to independence, then Canadian and American natives, Scots, Irish, and many others could do the same.

Of course. Are you saying that the Scots and Irish have no right to independence, if they want it?

__________________
No Fear No Hate No Pain No Broken Hearts

Surely, everyone can cause upheaval and claim independence for fairness.
Going by Mikado's argument, "the' scots, "the' irish and "the" tibetans want independence, they can all declare and achieve it by all means, violent or otherwise, it is all justifiable?

Problem is, "the" does not represent majority of the scots, irish, native americans, tibetans.

Fact is : the majority of the above do not want independence and could not be economically viable unless there's another strong patron propping it up.

Perhaps, China secret service could one day support native americans, scots and irish independence just as CIA has been clandestinely supporting the free Tibet, Taliban, Kosovo. How's that for a switch and equality?

You're misrepresenting me - I didn't say "all means" were justifiable.

Problem with the Tibetans is that independence cannot be freely discussed in Tibet, therefore it's impossible to know what the majority of Tibetans want. In Scotland there's a democratic process by which Scots can move to full independence if they want.

There's plenty of examples of countries supporting independence movements - USA, GB, Australia, USSR (& Russia), Iran, Saudi, etc, etc, etc. China has supported independence movements in South East Asia. I daresay that as China's wealth and overseas entanglements increase so will China's interest in certain independence movements.

Whether support for an independence movement is "right" or morally justifiable must depend on the circumstances. I think it'd be morally difficult to support Taliban fighters that behead and disembowel teachers, for example, on account of their methods. It'd be difficult to support violent Scottish nationalists (if such existed) since there's a peaceful route for Scotland to become independent if Scots want. Taking Tibet, I think it'd be morally impossible to support burning Han Chinese to death, but possible to support non-violent protest aiming at increasing human rights and autonomy in Tibet.

__________________
No Fear No Hate No Pain No Broken Hearts

Are you referring to UK in the Middle Ages? That was close to theocracy. That was Tibet before the 1950s under serfdom - like Europe in the Middle Ages.

We don't know whether the "reality" some western governments, NGOs and campaigners wish for can come true, most probably not, because we know that the free tibet comprise of some violent, terrorist, extremist and religious fundamentalist groups. The Tibetan Youth group has publicly threatened "suicide bombing" to gain independence. The foreign supporters should awaken and realize the sort of people the west is dealing with.

Now, was mujahideen what the west really "wanted"? Supported to pressure Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan regardless of long term strategy, the Taliban has become what it is today. Now it is tough trying to get rid of their own creation. This is the "reality" we are talking about.

The US and its allies supporting free Tibet will once again turn out to be a disappointment if they do not learn from past lessons and reflect on their excessive interference. Investment in disruptive forces could backfire because they are likely to get out of their control.

thanks very much for this post, what you said is just what our people want to say and let the west world know. In fact most of the separatists in Tibet are monks and the posterity of former Tibet slave owners and lords, because in old Tibet controlled by Dalai Lama had slavery and integrated constitution of religion and politics, Dalai is the toppest political leader and also the religious leader, monks were the ruling class having many privileges, but CCP changed all, CCP liberated the serfs and gave serfs lands, and crackdown some evil slave owners and lords, CCP acknowledged the monks as Buddhists but rip off their privileges, monks are still respected by Tibetan but they have no ruling previleges, so they are hostile against CCP and Han Chinese.
I think most of ordinary Tibetan support our gov.

__________________
借我三千虎贲，复我浩荡中华! 汉旗指处，望尘逃遁！敢犯我中华天威者，虽远必诛!

Where? Can you provide some independent source for this?