Kunming,+Lijiang,+Mengzi.JPG)
While I generally adhere to a strict personal policy of not engaging in futile debate attempts with Chinese people about sensitive political issues, I did end up voicing my option about Tibet in one of my classes this week. I think having nearly five years of China residence and experience as well as being a student of history and international relations gives me legitimate grounds to say that I see both sides of the issue. Plus, I've been to Tibet. My students listened intently to my opinion and seemed to take what I had to say into account. I wouldn't go as far as to say that I had a "breakthrough" with them but I think what I had to say did make an impact or else they were at least willing to consider an "outsider's" take on the situation. I wish I could say a whole lot more because I could write pages about my thoughts on this issue and the observations I've made while talking to Chinese people, but I'd rather not have my blog deleted so I'm trying to not be too vocal. However, I do want to point out something that I read this morning:
There was a movement this morning in Honolulu by native Hawaiians who consider themselves the legitimate government of the Hawaiian islands and who are seeking Hawaiian independence. The group seized control of one of the former palaces, now a tourist attraction. As many as 60 people may be arrested. Is this a case of a double standard? I'm not saying that the U.S. would deal with protests in Hawaii the same way in which China deals with any sort of uprising; however, I find myself hoping that none of my Chinese students or friends read about this because I might have a hard time explaining how most Americans support Tibetan independence but would balk at the idea of Hawaiian independence. Admittedly, I am still quite ignorant on the topic of the Hawaiian independence movement and need to do more reading about it before I can fairly make any comparisons to Tibet (perhaps comparisons can also be made with Taiwan?), but it did catch my attention since it was just a day after my frank discussion in class with my students.
Anyone have any thoughts? Leave me a comment . . .
Here's the article that I read this morning.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I haven't done research myself, but when in Hawaii, I got think I remember them saying that the Hawaiian government choose to join the USA mainly for protection purposes. WWII really freaked them out and they had no means of defense. Did Tibet voluntarily join or was it a conquest? That would make a difference - I think!?
The Hawaiian Monarchy was overthrown by the United States in the 1880's. The queen had been held prisoner in her own house which is the palace that is now a tourist attraction. Hawaii was annexed and became a territory of the United States. 1n 1959 the people of the territory, who were registered voters chose to become a state.
register voters i bet that wasn't "Hawaiians" and this Tibet thing is bull. Foreigners don't know the first thing about Dalai Lama so quit talking like you're all saviors. I recall that US land isn't even their land to begin with. It belongs to native americans. How much land do they get? Their total land barely adds up to a state. So go do some research before you talk about China.
China can at least say that there HAVE been periods in history when China ruled Tibet, or when Tibetans acknowledged some sort of allegiance to rulers in Peking. This does not excuse modern Chinese Communist brutallity towards Tibetans, or mean that Tibet should not be free.
The outmoded 19th century (and earlier) way of thinking which prompts countries to expand and absorb can be seen at work in the China-Tibet conflict. This way of thinking was also the norm in America for years and years as well. We did take Hawaii from the Hawaiians, Texas from Mexico, and mistreat Native Americans. This makes our finger pointing at China (or at Russia re: incursions into Georgia) look lame. We can't change our history, but neither should we expect other nations to come to political or social understandings based on OUR experiences and progress. To illustrate, the American colonies broke from England for very noble reasons, yet England itself was governed by noble sentiment and ideals. England wasn't "bad". America wasn't "good". Both had legitimate positions and both evolved beyond where they were 200 years ago.
Hans
Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani was ousted by the advocates of a Republic for Hawaii in 1893. These people were mainly from the West who went there in doves and before long took control of Hawaii. Sad story.
So, Hawaii has a right to regain its independence.
http://www.uic.edu/depts/owa/history/liliuokalani.html
Post a Comment