U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-07-2015, 06:46 AM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,738 posts, read 10,639,149 times
Reputation: 19923

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
But nobody ever mentions that Hawaii was forced to become part of the US
Because modern Hawiians for the most part don't care and because they aren't rebelling or being tossed in jail because they want independence. There are groups of Texans that are far more vocal with their threats to start procedures to break off from the union than any other citizens, including Hawaiians. Sure, if you look you can find some here and there in Hawaii, just like every other state (including ones right in the middle of the country) but everyone else basically rolls their eyes and goes about their daily lives.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.Moderator - Arkansas & subforums, Asia, Kentucky & subforums, Military Life, and P&OC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-07-2015, 07:00 AM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,738 posts, read 10,639,149 times
Reputation: 19923
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
BBC run a story 5 days ago just on that.
Aloha to the US: Is Hawai'i an occupied nation? - BBC News
What they are looking for is not annexation from the United States but indigenous people status like Native Americans and Native Alaskans. I agree that they should be granted it.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.Moderator - Arkansas & subforums, Asia, Kentucky & subforums, Military Life, and P&OC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2015, 07:02 AM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,273,499 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
Because modern Hawiians for the most part don't care and because they aren't rebelling or being tossed in jail because they want independence. There are groups of Texans that are far more vocal with their threats to start procedures to break off from the union than any other citizens, including Hawaiians. Sure, if you look you can find some here and there in Hawaii, just like every other state (including ones right in the middle of the country) but everyone else basically rolls their eyes and goes about their daily lives.
and you think things are different in Tibet how? Most people roll their eyes and go about their lives too.

And it is a far stretch to assume asking for secession is a legal right. The fact America (which is a more loosely United federal system) is liberal about it doesn't mean all nations need to allow it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2015, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Guangzhou, China
9,780 posts, read 13,365,753 times
Reputation: 11309
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
and you think things are different in Tibet how? Most people roll their eyes and go about their lives too.

And it is a far stretch to assume asking for secession is a legal right. The fact America (which is a more loosely United federal system) is liberal about it doesn't mean all nations need to allow it.
To their credit, they didn't explicitly say that they supported Tibetan independence, just offered a response to the Native Hawaiian/Native American comparison.

I don't really have a dog in the fight, as they say. They got dealt a **** card, over a hundred years ago. Sucks, but it's the way of the world... and if one was to fully right it now, it would happen at the expense of the rights of many individuals who were also born, through no fault of their own, into lives and citizenship on soil that used to belong to these native tribes.

I don't think Tibet would be in better hands if it was autonomous, judging by a) its past, slaveowning leadership, and b) its utter lack of a viable, current leadership system to supplant CCP rule. Sort of like the whole Israel/Palestine thing... the same people who rail against Israeli "occupation" of Palestine most likely wouldn't support the Islamist theocracy that Palestine would become if the Israelis pulled out 100% and didn't mingle in their affairs whatsoever, but man, does it ever feel good to support an oppressed people! Look at how well supplanting dictators with democracies in other parts of the historically non-democratic Middle East worked out
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2015, 02:59 PM
 
1,379 posts, read 1,815,839 times
Reputation: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k View Post
To their credit, they didn't explicitly say that they supported Tibetan independence, just offered a response to the Native Hawaiian/Native American comparison.

I don't really have a dog in the fight, as they say. They got dealt a **** card, over a hundred years ago. Sucks, but it's the way of the world... and if one was to fully right it now, it would happen at the expense of the rights of many individuals who were also born, through no fault of their own, into lives and citizenship on soil that used to belong to these native tribes.

I don't think Tibet would be in better hands if it was autonomous, judging by a) its past, slaveowning leadership, and b) its utter lack of a viable, current leadership system to supplant CCP rule. Sort of like the whole Israel/Palestine thing... the same people who rail against Israeli "occupation" of Palestine most likely wouldn't support the Islamist theocracy that Palestine would become if the Israelis pulled out 100% and didn't mingle in their affairs whatsoever, but man, does it ever feel good to support an oppressed people! Look at how well supplanting dictators with democracies in other parts of the historically non-democratic Middle East worked out
The big difference China and Israel is that all Tibetans are Chinese citizens and have the same rights as the Han. As awful as China has been to the Tibetans, the crimes that the Han Chinese committed towards each other are far above and worse than anything that the Han have done to the Tibetans. This is NOT the case for Israel, Palestinians are NOT citizens of Israel and Israel has absolutely no plans to give them citizenship and the crimes that the Israelis have a rule that "Jews do not harm other Jews" while this is obviously NOT the case for Palestinians. Tibet and Palestine are not comparable simply for the fact that the Palestinians are not citizens of Israel while Tibetans are citizens of China.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2015, 07:48 PM
 
919 posts, read 603,731 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by X14Freak View Post
The big difference China and Israel is that all Tibetans are Chinese citizens and have the same rights as the Han.
I am not sure about that. I don't think the Han has to learn Tibetan language, say when they go to college.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2015, 08:34 PM
 
4,665 posts, read 2,644,150 times
Reputation: 3342
A test that I like to think of is, would the areas rebel if not military occupied. Tibet would revolt and violence would ensue if the Chinese military left. Now, I'm sure some Tibetans have assimilated into Chinese culture since their annexation in 1950 and many Han Chinese have relocated to Tibet, so Tibetan culture is no longer as strong as it once was. China is also reversing and relaxing restrictions on religion and minorities cultures.

But, also consider it is impossible for foreign journalists to travel to Tibet. As a foreigner I have to get a special visa to visit Lhasa and another military granted visa to visit other cities outside Lhasa. Even after all that 90% of Tibet is off limits to any foreigners and even Chinese nationals. My wifes friend traveled to Tibet 2 years ago and she couldn't believe all the military checkpoints and everywhere she couldn't go. Plus an "official" travel guide has to accompany tourists at all time. Thats not comparable to any US territory or state. Even when Hawaii was illegally annexed by the US it didn't take military occupation, most Hawaiians were fine with it, Hawaiian rule at the time wasn't good. Native Hawaiians did get screwed out of their Native lands, but I believe this will be fixed in the next few years. At no time was Hawaii off limits to journalists or foreigners.

All that said, give China 50 more years and I think Tibet will be vastly more open. China is heading in the right direction as a country. Mao is dead, but it will take China a long time to repair the damage he did to their country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2015, 12:39 AM
 
Location: Guangzhou, China
9,780 posts, read 13,365,753 times
Reputation: 11309
Quote:
Originally Posted by X14Freak View Post
The big difference China and Israel is that all Tibetans are Chinese citizens and have the same rights as the Han. As awful as China has been to the Tibetans, the crimes that the Han Chinese committed towards each other are far above and worse than anything that the Han have done to the Tibetans. This is NOT the case for Israel, Palestinians are NOT citizens of Israel and Israel has absolutely no plans to give them citizenship and the crimes that the Israelis have a rule that "Jews do not harm other Jews" while this is obviously NOT the case for Palestinians. Tibet and Palestine are not comparable simply for the fact that the Palestinians are not citizens of Israel while Tibetans are citizens of China.
The Tibetans also never tried to elect terrorist factions as leaders, or put large-scale public support behind terrorism towards the Hans...

But I digress: my point remains the same, that were the Palestinians, Tibetans, Basque, Hawaiians, etc granted full sovereignity, they do not have any viable leadership organizations to take over and offer their citizens a drastically better life. Israel may not treat the Palestinians well, but all the potential government bodies that exist are sectarian militant groups which engage in the murder of their own people all the same. The Tibetan "government in exile" are all former slaveowners who maintained a class that was utterly subjugated with no rights, and the average Tibetan doesn't hardly suffer at the hands of the Han Chinese. If the Palestinians dropped the militancy, they would enjoy far better lives under Israeli rule than under that of any of their current potential ruling bodies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2015, 03:10 AM
 
1,424 posts, read 736,377 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yanagisawa View Post
I am not sure about that. I don't think the Han has to learn Tibetan language, say when they go to college.
Only a few languages in Asia are really used in advanced education, especially in sciences and engineering.
Universities in India use English, so do universities in Hong Kong and some Southeast Asian countries. In central Asia Russian is used.
East Asians can do that because they translated/created most basic terms in their native language (many by Japanese). Chinese are still doing that even now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2015, 11:11 AM
 
12,719 posts, read 14,093,600 times
Reputation: 34860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
interesting example. Part of the Iroquois Nation is in Canada, too.
Interesting analogy. The Dalai Lama and thousands of ordinary Tibetans fled their homeland to live in India. And since then the Dalai Lama has become an international figure.

Though the Iroquois had spread their military influence throughout the U.S. northeast and into the St. Lawrence valley, the heartland of their nation was New York State, from Albany west to Lake Erie. And the new U.S. nation attempted to exterminate the Iroquois in NYS in a campaign of warfare and starvation in 1789-90. At the war's end Joseph Brant and his sister and other leaders and common people joined the Loyalists in Canada.

Joseph Brant remained an active figure in the politics between British America and the new United States.

The fate of the Iroquois in the U.S. , many of them neutral during the American Revolution, was to suffer the destruction of their nation and in many cases forced relocation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top