What's Wrong With China?
Better yet, what's wrong with America?
So many countries have condemned what Chinese authorities are doing to the Tibetans. And yet the Bush administration and most members of Congress remain silent.
Do we really want to be in the same category as China and Pakistan on this issue? I thought we were supposed to be encouraging the spread of democracy. Or are we only interested where our interests lie and to hell with everyone else?
Our country is no longer a leader in human rights. Our own record is deplorable. Our administration is a joke.
What do some prominent Americans have to say about this issue?
Barack Obama: "I condemn the use of violence to put down peaceful protests, and call on the Chinese government to respect the basic human rights of the people of Tibet, and to account for the whereabouts of detained Buddhist monks."
Good. Forceful. Hot.
"I deplore the violent crackdown by Chinese authorities and the continuing oppression in Tibet of those merely wishing to practice their faith and preserve their culture and heritage," said McCain, the Republican presidential candidate.
You deplore them? Okay...
Haven't heard Hillary's thoughts on the matter.
And some guy over at the State Department is "concerned."
So I suppose, like always, it's up to the rest of us.
Contact your member of Congress and tell them to condemn the atrocities in Tibet.
posted by kate @ 9:37 AM
12 comments
12 Comments:
Well, here's the thing. While it's quite possibly deplorable what China's doing, is it really our business? For years, one of the arguments used against the Iraq occupation (and a pretty convincing one, in my opinion) is that the U.S. is not the world's police. Many inside the U.S. have said it as well as many outside the U.S. saying a much more pointed version, "Keep out!"
Words are useless unless they're backed up by action or at least the threat of action. At this point, there's really nothing we can "threaten" China with. So any statement is nothing more than words, which China knows, and which the rest of the world will just see as more U.S. interference.
We don't have to have a position on every crisis affecting the world. In fact, we've been told very pointedly by that world to mind our own business. Currently at home we're facing devastating energy prices, soaring food prices, a shrinking job market, natural disasters on a worrying scale, an exhausted military and any number of other domestic concerns which are, quite frankly, more pressing and immediate to us than what's been going down for years between China and Tibet.
Shouldn't we do what the rest of the world has told us to do for a good long while now and just sit this one out?
Funny how a good fuck can lead to intimate understanding.
I am with Quakerjono on this one.
The world hates us. Our own hate us. No one trusts our government. "Somebody lies so everyone dies." According to many, our government killed the 3000 in the twin towers, they are killing our soldiers on a false premise, and they are killing the innocents in a far off country only for corporate greed for oil. These same people promote policies that continue our dependence on foreign oil.
When government leaders are found out beyond any doubt that they are lying, it's none of our business. When conspiracy theorist come up with "hate america" rhetoric and connect delusional dots, it's considered reason for impeachment and pleas for "cultural understanding" and "America has it coming".
So, I and Quakerjono agree to stay home and the let the rest of the world fuck themselves.
However, since our political system is more about how one party can fuck the other one and intentionally sabotage good plans, we don't need the rest of the world to speed our demise. We are doing it ourselves.
unless you want to bomb china, they are gonna do what they want. or we could arm the buddhist but i dont think they would take the weapons.
it deplorable though.
two things:
boycott the olympics.
buy american.
QJ - I respectfully disagree. Words can and do create change, which is a mighty big deal. Barack Obama is using the bully pulpit and I'm proud of him for condemning the Chinese actions. I think that if our officials speak truth to power and start advocating for the oppressed and powerless, we'd go a long way toward improving our world standing.
You're right in that other nations want us to butt out militarily. But the brutalized Buddhist monks would most certainly like to hear that Obama is on their side.
I agree with Anon 1:34 - buying American will also help.
But never underestimate the power of the pen or a well-spoken word. It can make quite difference. And a positive one at that.
I seriously doubt that a bunch of monks in Tibet even KNOW about Obama being on their side, and doubt further that they even care. What are the words of an American candidate for office going to do for them? Nothing. They're worried about Chinese bullets, not Obama's rhetoric generated only to get him into office. Until it hit the news, he didn't care one whit about what was or wasn't happening in Tibet.
What a bunch of nonsense.
What a little research can do.
Following the links, we find that
"Lhadon Tethong
Lhadon is Tibetan-Canadian. She has been an outspoken Tibetan independence activist since the moment she learned to talk, and she founded the first SFT chapter at the University of Kings College. After graduation, Lhadon moved to New York to begin working for SFT. Her many accomplishments include taking on BP Amoco and ExxonMobil at their shareholder meetings,...."
so, the people who want us to send them money in the name of monks also have other agendas.
And they make it pretty clear that members have to pay their dues in order to particpate in their process.
send in the money, because "Students for a Free Tibet (SFT) currently has four full-time staff working at the International Headquarters in New York City and many nearly full-time volunteers. They live to make life difficult for the Chinese government, so that China understands that the occupation of Tibet must end. The job of the staff is to support the efforts of SFT members worldwide, by providing leadership on campaigns and organizational strategy, and by coordinating training opportunities, like Free Tibet! Action Camp."
I wonder if they will lie down in front of a tank for their cause, or at least have a picture moment.
Kate, we're talking about more than just words here. We're talking diplomacy and politics. In those arenas, unless the words have a real backing to them, they're no better than politicians crying about the environment while flying around in jet planes owned by oil companies.
Besides, I look around at our nation and I see many things that are in desperate need of attention. They're in need of more than words, but actual plans and action. I would far rather think Obama, McCain and Clinton are spending their time formulating those plans than releasing pat condemnations of a foreign sovereign power.
I think that if our officials speak truth to power and start advocating for the oppressed and powerless, we'd go a long way toward improving our world standing.
Um, we certainly wouldn't one half of the world's biggest emerging superpower grouping. And we've already pissed off the other part of that duo by recognizing Kosovo, much to the displeasure of Serbia and, by extension, Russia, as well as the missile defense shield in Eastern Europe and our actions with Iran.
Fact is, whatever political diplomatic cache or goodwill we might have once had, we've squandered. The rest of the world doesn't particularly care about our condemnation other than as it affects their export numbers or comes down to us threatening to nuke them.
You're right in that other nations want us to butt out militarily. But the brutalized Buddhist monks would most certainly like to hear that Obama is on their side.
I'm going to have to go with anon 2:42 in that they neither know nor care about Obama's soundbite. And I don't notice the rest of the world making a whole lot of distinction between keeping to ourselves militarily and just keeping to ourselves. They want our purchasing power, that's pretty much it and, now that said power is eroding, they've pretty much no use for us at all.
We could profit from a few years of isolationism and let the rest of the world figure out its problems amongst itself.
It would be great if we could act remotely consistently. In order to intervene militarily anywhere, we need to create a moral high ground, like Bush, Sr., did by essentially inviting Sadam to invade Kuwait, then bitch-slapping him when he did. "Remember the Maine" "Remember the Alamo" (check out howard zinn's report on that. apparently, we baited Mexico into attacking us by camping on their side of an undisputed part of the boundary. not to degrade the valient efforts of sam bowie, sam houston, davie crockett, et al.) "Remember Pearl Harbor" (okay, that one was just), all excuses to impose our will on others. Fine, but if we're going to be policemen, let's be consistent. I'm no fan of China (though it'd be nice if they had enough money to by more of the stuff that we pay their people to make), and I'm an Obama fan (see, you might not agree with him, but what he said was more substantive than McClain's statement, which was basically "how sad, what they're doing"), but I'm kinda, sorta with QJ and anon on this one. so is Merle Haggard.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6jrHPjm4qKM
'Course, if you rephrase it to "a foreign state lead by an authoritarian government wants to commit genocide against practitioners of a particular religion", well, then we need to send in troops to stop them.
I suppose we're just going to have to agree to disagree - again.
I remember very well. Apartheid for instance. And how we all raised our voice against what was going on in South Africa. And it worked.
You're never ever going to convince me that words don't motivate others to action and that we can therefore make a difference.
Thanks anyway though.
That Apartheid thing only worked when we raised our voices in the classic film "Lethal Weapon 2" when Riggs (Mel Gibson) and Murtaugh (Danny Glover) realize they're embroiled in a case of international intrigue that involves an evil South African albino and a criminal plot.
Then, and only then, did we truly grasp the evil of apartheid ...
Lethal Weapon 5: Riggs and Murtaugh must uncover an evil Chinese plot involving a humorous Tibetan monk (Gary Coleman) and a clever American diplomat (Joe Pesci) to bring down an unjust system.
Now that's a Mel Gibson movie even I could get behind.
Whatchootalkin'bout Riggs?
Post a Comment
<< Home