Tibet issue

[Tigershark]

Indians feel anxious when people talk about the Kashmir insurgency, so they try to make themselves feel better by talking about unrest in China.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Indians feel anxious when people talk about the Kashmir insurgency, so they try to make themselves feel better by talking about unrest in China.

The difference of course, is that China has NO active armed insurgencies at all.

Whereas India has too many to count. Kashmir insurgency, Maoist insurgency, the many insurgencies in NE India, etc.

 

[no_name]

China only has armed insurgencies - against unarmed civilians, like in 2009.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

China only has armed insurgencies - against unarmed civilians, like in 2009.

I get what you mean, but I'm talking about "insurgencies" rather than ethnic riots.

 

[no_name]

I was being partly sarcastic.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I was being partly sarcastic.

I know buddy.

 

[ephone]

It is sad that the world turns a blind eye to the Tibetan issue - as China continues to illegally occupy Tibet.

What do you suggest the world should do?

 

[ephone]

China only has armed insurgencies - against unarmed civilians, like in 2009.

I do not think that can be classified "insurgencies". I think it is just "riot".

 

[GameSparta500]

the funny thing with the "free tibet" people.. is that

the DL and most tibetians, still want to be apart of China, but have more general autonomy...

they do not want independence... but just greater autonomy

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Chinese is more of a nation united by culture and common values instead of genetic or blood reasons. Sinicization is a processing that never stops happening over the past 30 centuries, whether you like it or not or with or without an 'attempting'. It is happening and will not stop.

Just look at the Manchus. They were the ruling ethic hundreds years ago but even the emperor soon lost the interest and patient to conserve their mother tone only decades after they set up in Beijing.

Or maybe the indian can be educated with their own example, the Khanate which concured india before the British. How would Akbar thinks of himself, an Indian or Mongol?

Akbar has something called Deen i Ilahi.

I hope you know that.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

No one claimed there are absolutely no difference between Tibetan and Han, but we are still brothers in blood.

And no one forcing Tibetans to be sinicized, some are willing to be sinicized, while some other can stay with their primitive way of life.

Same with the Manchus, they are willing to adopt the Han customs because they believe the Han culture is more advanced.

That is just the point what I was stating about Han cultural arrogance which was how forced assimilation into being Han occurred.

Humiliate all.

Use animal radicals before their names and call them 'primitive', 'savage' and 'barbarians'.

Yes, brothers in blood - in the blood that flowed in the various conquests.

No doubt about that!


And once again, it is reiterated that India has officially stated that 'Tibet is an autonomous part of India'.

One is only saying let it remain 'autonomous' and maybe the same status as HK would go a long way.

 

[oceanx]

Or maybe the indian can be educated with their own example, the Khanate which concured india before the British. How would Akbar thinks of himself, an Indian or Mongol?

Probably more "Persian" than anything else is my guess ...

 

[oceanx]

... what I was stating about Han cultural arrogance which was how forced assimilation into being Han occurred.

...

Use animal radicals before their names and call them 'primitive', 'savage' and 'barbarians'.
...

I agree that the northern Hans were a bit like (and in fact mixed in) with the proto-Turks (various Tujue tribes) particularly in the hundreds of years after Han and before Tang ... and "naturally" at certain times adhered to "different standards" when it came to "assimilation". Anyways, southern Chinese weren't even Hans until a few hundred years ago ... so the assimilation was gradual and mostly cultural south of the Yantgze River.

South Indians, OTOH, for how long have they been Indians?

Anyways, this ain't no Peal Buck novel ... how about writing a few such characters for us with animal radicals so we can analyze them? And maybe I could learn something, too ...

 

[cross1993]

That is just the point what I was stating about Han cultural arrogance which was how forced assimilation into being Han occurred.

Humiliate all.

Use animal radicals before their names and call them 'primitive', 'savage' and 'barbarians'.

Yes, brothers in blood - in the blood that flowed in the various conquests.

No doubt about that!


And once again, it is reiterated that India has officially stated that 'Tibet is an autonomous part of India'.

One is only saying let it remain 'autonomous' and maybe the same status as HK would go a long way.

Ancient China has to do that.
Now Chinese people do not do that.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I agree that the northern Hans were a bit like (and in fact mixed in) with the proto-Turks (various Tujue tribes) particularly in the hundreds of years after Han and before Tang ... and "naturally" at certain times adhered to "different standards" when it came to "assimilation". Anyways, southern Chinese weren't even Hans until a few hundred years ago ... so the assimilation was gradual and mostly cultural south of the Yantgze River.

South Indians, OTOH, for how long have they been Indians?

Anyways, this ain't no Peal Buck novel ... how about writing a few such characters for us with animal radicals so we can analyze them? And maybe I could learn something, too ...

Both Northern Chinese and Southern Chinese share the same Y-DNA, which is Pro-Sinic. Both only have different local mt-DNA because expanding Sinic men marry with many local women.