Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You assume a lot.
I've taught World History for 32 years, and have visited more than half of the countries in the world, most of them repeatedly (China 3 times). In 1978, I was one of the first foreigners to visit China on a tourist visa. I don't get my history from CNN/New York Times. I have a degree in the subject and read scholarly articles, regularly.
If you ever visit Tibet, you will see what I am talking about. There are anti-riot fences everywhere for crowd control, and a huge Chinese military presence on the streets of Lhasa, even at the temples. China is resettling Han Chinese to Tibet in massive numbers. Soon there will be fewer Tibetans than Chinese there.
I didn't say that it was all bad, either. China has done some great things for Tibet. My point was that the Tibetans don't want them there, and it's not just the Dali Lama and a handful of his followers either. Every time riots break out (annually) China closes Tibet to outsiders to prevent news about repressive measures from leaking out. If you believe most Tibetans don't want independence, you've drunk the Kool-Aid.
I don't believe Tibet will ever be independent again. In another 50 years, it will be just one more Chinese province, with a quaint ethnic minority. Just more globalization.
It does seem telling that access for visitors to Tibet is very restricted. But yeah, I think this is what I'm worried about. China doesn't have to do it this way but I guess they still are. Of course I'm not saying people from the east of China shouldn't move there at all, but the massive resettlement schemes. But you're right, unless the PRC collapses or there's a 'civil war' or war or independence (of course the Tibetans would need external aid) it probably won't happen.
You assume a lot.
I've taught World History for 32 years, and have visited more than half of the countries in the world, most of them repeatedly (China 3 times). In 1978, I was one of the first foreigners to visit China on a tourist visa. I don't get my history from CNN/New York Times. I have a degree in the subject and read scholarly articles, regularly.
If you ever visit Tibet, you will see what I am talking about. There are anti-riot fences everywhere for crowd control, and a huge Chinese military presence on the streets of Lhasa, even at the temples. China is resettling Han Chinese to Tibet in massive numbers. Soon there will be fewer Tibetans than Chinese there.
I didn't say that it was all bad, either. China has done some great things for Tibet. My point was that the Tibetans don't want them there, and it's not just the Dali Lama and a handful of his followers either. Every time riots break out (annually) China closes Tibet to outsiders to prevent news about repressive measures from leaking out. If you believe most Tibetans don't want independence, you've drunk the Kool-Aid.
I don't believe Tibet will ever be independent again. In another 50 years, it will be just one more Chinese province, with a quaint ethnic minority. Just more globalization.
It is not really "China is resetting Han Chinese...", but Han Chinese move their to do business voluntarily.
I don't want to sound politically incorrect, but the truth is Han Chinese are usually much more hardworking than ethnic minorities (due to their culture and social status etc.) and they seek every opportunity...
In Xinjiang, some Uyghurs are even too "lazy" to pick the cotton and they have to hire immigrant workers from other parts of China (sounds like Mexicans in the US huh?), though Uyghurs are unemployed.
I don't blame them though. Many people in the world do not want to work 10 hours a day for a "better life". It just happens that many Chinese do.
You assume a lot.
I've taught World History for 32 years, and have visited more than half of the countries in the world, most of them repeatedly (China 3 times). In 1978, I was one of the first foreigners to visit China on a tourist visa. I don't get my history from CNN/New York Times. I have a degree in the subject and read scholarly articles, regularly.
If you ever visit Tibet, you will see what I am talking about. There are anti-riot fences everywhere for crowd control, and a huge Chinese military presence on the streets of Lhasa, even at the temples. China is resettling Han Chinese to Tibet in massive numbers. Soon there will be fewer Tibetans than Chinese there.
I didn't say that it was all bad, either. China has done some great things for Tibet. My point was that the Tibetans don't want them there, and it's not just the Dali Lama and a handful of his followers either. Every time riots break out (annually) China closes Tibet to outsiders to prevent news about repressive measures from leaking out. If you believe most Tibetans don't want independence, you've drunk the Kool-Aid.
I don't believe Tibet will ever be independent again. In another 50 years, it will be just one more Chinese province, with a quaint ethnic minority. Just more globalization.
Chinese people wear western clothes, live in western buildings, and adopt a lot of western ideologies too... All Chinese are forced to learn English as well.
food population show respect where its due
dear sir would you be kind enough to enlighten me about the nature of indian and chinese relations and its historical flow if its not a bother that is
I don't believe Tibet will ever be independent again. In another 50 years, it will be just one more Chinese province, with a quaint ethnic minority. Just more globalization.
amen to that
the but being as long as you are not hungry yourselves then history and values come into play if you know what ı mean
reason I asked such a question is I found the sources that were named sources to be well a bit embellishing 2 of the biggest countries in the world they have so much in common historically that is and they have been very chummy does not add up
the popular notion is that the chinese are the all knowing wise ancient mystic warriors and the indians are a great civilisation but more serene and peaceful because of being the birth place of buddhism (which is humor at its finest considering that indian hand to hand combat weapons are more suited to close quarter combat) but I digress they have cheaper work force than my country so uncle to them really
If Tibet is free and liberated how come there is a heavy military presence in the capital since it been supposed to be 50 years since Chinese liberated Tibet? How come there is also a constant military presence at Chinese Liberation statues there? Are all Chinese cities like that with the constant heavy military presence?
Well, i thought China claimed almost every country in asia under them?
Did the word CHINA exist before 20c? Just curious
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just more globalization.
