Free who?
Okay, I need some help on this one...
Why is Tibet special?
Yes, I get that Tibet was invaded in 1950-something and has become part of China by complete force. That sucks, but many places have been invaded since time immemorial and... honestly... we just have to get over it... We can't really return all the lands to their rightful owners, there's simply too many people (Can you image 5 billion people trying to squeeze into Europe? Meanwhile in No-man's-land USA, 50,000 people live... one person for every 100 square miles...)
I get that China is abusing human rights. They need to stop. I have no question about that. That's part of the International Community's domain. And we are working on it (Slowly... China is a rather large monster to be fighting, but we have been and continue to make progress).
Why Tibet? Why disrupt the Olympics? The only time that the world (Or at least the ones who are willing to play nicely) get together in peace? The only world activity that really doesn't involve guns and tanks (biathalon (or is it Triathalon?) notwithstnading :D)
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm angry to see that the Olympic torch, a symbol of peace, getting snuffed out because of one little country which has (rightfully) been wronged.
Is this what our future is all about? Snuffing out peace until everyone is happy? This could be a loooooonnnnng time, then.
The thing that makes me so mad is that people seem to be resigned to the concept that we will always kill each other off, and that we might as well all take a collective sigh and grab a gun and shoot someone, because it's just inevitable...
The world isn't perfect. We all know that. As we grow things will become even more testy, should we really just cancel the Olympics and go back to killing each other like civilized people?
Anyway, I digress... someone tell me what makes Tibet so special as to disrupt peace?
Labels: Politics
posted by Aabh @ 5:01 PM
2 Comments:
I understand your question and have no good answer.
However, I think that it is better to pick _a_ cause and fight for it, then to stand idly by, not doing anything about _any_ cause.
And I am one of the people who has a huge problem with the Olympic games being in China. I don't think that they should have been awarded to that country to begin with precisely because of their track records regarding human rights violations (be it with respect to Tibet or their own people). The Olympic torch may be a sign of peace, but the Olympic Games, as Pierre de Coubertin intended them to be, were to show off moral principles.
If the Olympic Games were truly only about sports, maybe it would be ok for China to host them. But the Olympic Games have never been (and I'm glad that there are still people out there who, like me, still believe that they never should be) only about sports.
And sure, Guy, there are several countries (if not all of them) in this world that could really step up their game when it comes to "moral principles", but I think that most people would agree that China is definitely towards the bottom of that ladder.
-- Mal.
Two words:
Dalai Lama.
Essentially kicked out of his homeland by the Chinese. What if the Brits had forced Ghandi from India or the Southern Whites evicted Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.? Wisemen should be wise for their people, not referred to as a dissident...
Post a Comment
<< Home