Will Tibetans ever get their country back from China? (names, time, westerners)
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.
Actually there is. And I'm not sure if most Tibetans would not accept being part of China under certain conditions. Tibet is sparsely populated, as was Siberia. It would be easy to demographically overwhelm it.
Not sure what the first sentence refers to. There is a large independence movement in Hawaii or Russian Siberia?
What's the point of this whole Tibetan Independence thing except for some overly indulged and under-motivated college kids to wrap their unwashed heads around a 'cause celebre' and feel good about themselves before they start worrying about finding a real job....
Tibet, whether historically or practically, will always be a part of China. It should count itself lucky that the Chinese didn't take a page out of the good old American Indian Removal method! Talk about a pot calling a kettle black! If China had followed the American method of dealing with rowdy natives, there would be no "Tibetan Question" today. The Dalai and his friends need to stop their whining because it's getting so tired and nobody is buying it except for the guilt-ridden white folks who know that their ancestors have done plenty of killing in the past, and now they want to be holier-than-thou crusaders against the "evil" Chinese. Give me a break!
I still remember a trip I took to NYC during graduate school days when I encountered a bunch of wailing Tibetan women crying about how China "oppressed" them on a street corner near the UN building....after a few minutes of crying and screaming themselves hoarse, they move to the next street corner and repeat their dramatic performance. All the while, a bunch of white dudes were filming all of it to be made into their "historical documentary"! What a joke!
Vietnamese are culturally closer to Chinese than Tibetans are. Some Vietnamese are actually ethnic Chinese too, or have some Chinese blood.
There are only a few million Tibetans in total, less than the population of a major Chinese city. so it won't serve anything either.
Yes and well, there aren't really that many Tibetans to start with, are there? Not compared to nearly 90 million Vietnamese.
Yes from what I know Vietnamese culture is so Chinese, it's hard to think of things that are uniquely Vietnamese, aside from food and language (which are both heavily sinicised).
What's the point of this whole Tibetan Independence thing except for some overly indulged and under-motivated college kids to wrap their unwashed heads around a 'cause celebre' and feel good about themselves before they start worrying about finding a real job....
Tibet, whether historically or practically, will always be a part of China. It should count itself lucky that the Chinese didn't take a page out of the good old American Indian Removal method! Talk about a pot calling a kettle black! If China had followed the American method of dealing with rowdy natives, there would be no "Tibetan Question" today. The Dalai and his friends need to stop their whining because it's getting so tired and nobody is buying it except for the guilt-ridden white folks who know that their ancestors have done plenty of killing in the past, and now they want to be holier-than-thou crusaders against the "evil" Chinese. Give me a break!
I still remember a trip I took to NYC during graduate school days when I encountered a bunch of wailing Tibetan women crying about how China "oppressed" them on a street corner near the UN building....after a few minutes of crying and screaming themselves hoarse, they move to the next street corner and repeat their dramatic performance. All the while, a bunch of white dudes were filming all of it to be made into their "historical documentary"! What a joke!
Yeah of course what we hear on the news about it is also negative and anti-Chinese, I'm sure there are a variety of opinions about the Tibetan themselves. On one hand, it's true that the Chinese have in some ways threatened their old way of life, but I suppose that comes with modernisation, and there are Tibetans who say things are better under the Chinese/PRC than the old Llama regime. Of course, the best that can be hoped for is for the Chinese to respect Tibetan autonomy, whether they're independent or not. I think 'His Holiness' has changed his tune, maybe because he realises it's futile, but yeah the whole 'Free Tibet' thing just reminds me of Hollywood stars who want to appear holier than thou.
Not sure what the first sentence refers to. There is a large independence movement in Hawaii or Russian Siberia?
Yes, there is a pretty big independence movement in Hawaii, and one in Siberia too. Some believe Hawaii's exit from the union is just a matter of time, but I think like in Tibet, it would not benefit them economically. Plus the US annexed Hawaii around the same time Chinese troops invaded/claimed Tibet.
Yes, there is a pretty big independence movement in Hawaii, and one in Siberia too. Some believe Hawaii's exit from the union is just a matter of time, but I think like in Tibet, it would not benefit them economically. Plus the US annexed Hawaii around the same time Chinese troops invaded/claimed Tibet.
Well, as far as the Hawaiian independence movement goes... less than 10% of Hawaii's population is of Native Hawaiian ancestry; the two biggest groups are Asian (38%) and White (23%), with a very large number of multi-ethnic people (24%). There are about 30,000 members of Hawaiian independence movements, and the population of the state of Hawaii is just shy of 1.4 million... although 30,000 is a lot, that's a very low percentage of people, and the chances of the US ever willing to give it up are basically nil as it serves an extremely important role in its Pacific fleet, which also won't be going away any time soon.
The only two things that could lead to the US abandoning its claim on Hawaii are the erosion of the United States to a very high degree (doubtful within our or our childrens' lifetimes), or the devastating physical erosion of the islands due to climate change (also doubtful; the higher land areas would still be there and still be used).
The Tibetan independence movement gained a lot of its momentum because of European and American celebrities jumping on its cause, but IMHO it was never realistic to assume that pressure from around the world would sway the Chinese government any more than a popular movement to give land back to the Native Americans would sway the US government or the majority of its people.
Well, as far as the Hawaiian independence movement goes... less than 10% of Hawaii's population is of Native Hawaiian ancestry; the two biggest groups are Asian (38%) and White (23%), with a very large number of multi-ethnic people (24%). There are about 30,000 members of Hawaiian independence movements, and the population of the state of Hawaii is just shy of 1.4 million... although 30,000 is a lot, that's a very low percentage of people, and the chances of the US ever willing to give it up are basically nil as it serves an extremely important role in its Pacific fleet, which also won't be going away any time soon.
The only two things that could lead to the US abandoning its claim on Hawaii are the erosion of the United States to a very high degree (doubtful within our or our childrens' lifetimes), or the devastating physical erosion of the islands due to climate change (also doubtful; the higher land areas would still be there and still be used).
The Tibetan independence movement gained a lot of its momentum because of European and American celebrities jumping on its cause, but IMHO it was never realistic to assume that pressure from around the world would sway the Chinese government any more than a popular movement to give land back to the Native Americans would sway the US government or the majority of its people.
Well 30,000 members. One would have to do a poll of Hawaiians to see how many supported the idea.
Yep, pretty much. Unfortunately for them people can always go back and point out what the US did.
Well, as far as the Hawaiian independence movement goes... less than 10% of Hawaii's population is of Native Hawaiian ancestry; the two biggest groups are Asian (38%) and White (23%), with a very large number of multi-ethnic people (24%). There are about 30,000 members of Hawaiian independence movements, and the population of the state of Hawaii is just shy of 1.4 million... although 30,000 is a lot, that's a very low percentage of people, and the chances of the US ever willing to give it up are basically nil as it serves an extremely important role in its Pacific fleet, which also won't be going away any time soon.
The only two things that could lead to the US abandoning its claim on Hawaii are the erosion of the United States to a very high degree (doubtful within our or our childrens' lifetimes), or the devastating physical erosion of the islands due to climate change (also doubtful; the higher land areas would still be there and still be used).
The Tibetan independence movement gained a lot of its momentum because of European and American celebrities jumping on its cause, but IMHO it was never realistic to assume that pressure from around the world would sway the Chinese government any more than a popular movement to give land back to the Native Americans would sway the US government or the majority of its people.
Geographically, Tibet is in a very difficult situation. The Himalayas presents a huge barrier to any kind of economic infrastructure so Tibet is highly reliant on China for development. China has the easiest access to Tibet out of all of its neighbors and even if Tibet were independent, it would still be under China's mercy. That's why independence is out of the question for Tibet and why it is unfeasible due to Tibet's precarious geography.
As you mentioned, Hawaii is crucial as it serves an extremely important role for the Pacific Fleet and Tibet isn't any different since it protects China from any invasion from its southwestern flank. Think of Tibet as China's Golan Heights. The watersheds in Tibet are also important since it provides water for irrigation. This is why China will never give up Tibet since it is such a strategically important region.
Part of the problem is the Chinese rivers have their source in Tibetan mountains. If Tibet is ever free from China they could cut of china's water supply.
It's going to get cut off anyway, because the glaciers are melting at an accelerated pace. All that coal dust China's spewing into the air only makes that worse.
Tibetans aren't united on what they want. The Dalai Lama is for internal autonomy. Most other Tibetans outside of Tibet are for complete independence. We'll see what happens after the DL passes away.
Vietnamese are culturally closer to Chinese than Tibetans are. Some Vietnamese are actually ethnic Chinese too, or have some Chinese blood.
There are only a few million Tibetans in total, less than the population of a major Chinese city. so it won't serve anything either.
Han Chinese who go to other places in SE Asia like East Timor and Indonesia often marry out.
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.
