I'm still confused. Are you saying we should boycott the olympics because China is occupying Tibet? If so, then should we also boycott any future olympic games being held in the US, in Russia, Australia, Turkey, Spain and Israel (just the countries I can think of at the top of my head)?
I'm not saying the situation is anything but grim in Tibet, but as I understand it the Chinese consider Tibet a part of China which would make the Tibetan nationalists rebels. What I'm trying to get at is that there's always (atleast) two sides to an issue, and from what I've gathered the west has chosen to highlight and support the Dalai Lama's plight with strong propaganda against China. Apparently, the situation before the Chinese invasion wasn't any better than today, and while it in no stretch justifies murder like what we witness in the video, I think boycotting the olympics because they're held in China makes little sense.
First of all, it's not like they chose to hold the games there because the Chinese (in our perspective) occupy Tibet nor because they've commited human rights violations. Instead, they chose that particular country because it proved it was able to successfully hold the event, properly set up the various arenas and make sure the games were covered adequately.
Second of all, and this will be my last point, if we should decide on boycotting the games for above mentioned reasons then I'm afraid we'll quickly run out of countries to hold them in. I guess we could hold them on Iceland, but that's kind of self-defeating since the whole idea (as I understand it) is that every country that participates should have a chance of holding the games, and that should be the only thing relevant to the people watching the olympics in my mind. It's completely detached from any of its participating countries' internal policies, and it should stay that way.

Free Texas or leave? WTF? I live in Texas, i grew up in Texas. There isn't a single person I know or have ever heard of who wants Texas to leave the US. Texas has a proud history as a independent Republic and becoming free from Mexican rule, but that doesn't mean Texans thought or do think being part of the US is a bad thing.
The difference is that the majority of people in Tibet would like to be independent from China. And frankly after all these years of being treated as 3rd class citizens to the Chinese dynasties, then a period under British rule (which wasn't nearly as bad as this video makes it out to be), I can't blame them at all for wishing to be free to make their own choices and mistakes.
China is a fascist regime, and while it isn't the most oppressive or violent form of fascism it's still unpoular throughout the rest of the world. I believe that China has a amazing history to draw enlightenment from and the current "peoples'" China is a shadow of the great country it could be.

What a bizarre mix of insipid forum asshatery and slick video production.

All I can say is, if the people of Tibet want to be independent from China, say by a 2/3 or 3/4 majority, then they should be allowed to separate. Anything else is exploitation, and simply immoral.

BTW, I would have said the same thing during the American civil war. The use of force to maintain a political structure is unacceptable.

It's not a matter of how LONG Tibet has been 'part' of China or of Tibet achieving national independence, but one of the systematic steps the Chinese government has been taking over the past 50 years to dilute Tibetan culture and language, flooding the area with non-Tibetan immigrants and giving the Tibetan people little say in the management of the region. This "Chinese Apartheid" is the reason why disenfranchised Tibetans are rioting.

The maker of this video is a real ass with his hate-based assertiveness and states many obvious facts of history as if people don't know general Chinese history while being derogative.

I think you summed it up best uhohzombies... it's no excuse to imprison, torture and kill the people of Tibet as they've been doing for a long time now. He's not going to persuade anyone with a grain of common sense in this manner. Watch the "Tank Man" documentary... it will give you a very good insight to today's Chinese imperialistic totalitarian methods and ruthlessness against it's own people.

The people of China deserve to have the Olympics in their country however I think that thier government doesn't deserve any praise for it... especially since it's been known that they've displaced many people without due compensation, they maintain political imprisonment of individuals, information blockage/disinformation and heinous acts of oppression in Tibet.

>> ^quantumushroom:
Anyone who thinks China is still Red is fooling himself.
Mass executions, forced abortions, no real freedom of speech, no right to a fair trial, free market yoked to totalitarianism, limited quality control on exports, accepting few imports, stealing US military tech (Clintons wrapped with a red bow), improved missile tech, subduing Taiwan, enslaving Tibet.
When they end their one-baby-per-household law and their population explodes the real fun will begin.
Communists don't call themselves reds anymore. Now they're progressives. Just kidding. Who wants to be arrested for a liberal hate crime in "the land of the free as long as you don't hurt anyone's self-esteem."


mass executions = not Communist
forced abortions = not Communist
no freedom of speech = not Communist
no right to fair trial = not Communist
federal market = not Communist (but Socialist)
limited quality control on exports = not Communist
accepting few imports = not Communist (but Socialist)
stealing US tech = not Communist
improved missle tech = could be anybody
subduing Taiwan = not Communist
enslaving Tibet = not Communist

You're equating Communism to the Soviet Union, which is entirely erroneous. The arms race and totalitarianism of the CCCP had nothing to do with the tenets of Communism.

Anyone who thinks China is still Red is fooling himself.

Mass executions, forced abortions, no real freedom of speech, no right to a fair trial, free market yoked to totalitarianism, limited quality control on exports, accepting few imports, stealing US military tech (Clintons wrapped with a red bow), improved missile tech, subduing Taiwan, enslaving Tibet.

When they end their one-baby-per-household law and their population explodes the real fun will begin.

Communists don't call themselves reds anymore. Now they're progressives. Just kidding. Who wants to be arrested for a liberal hate crime in "the land of the free as long as you don't hurt anyone's self-esteem."

Free Tibet! (with purchase of 2nd. Tibet of equal or greater value).

It's of course not China's fault-they are merely a billion plus new players in the game, growing stronger everyday as fodder. If anyone is to blame, it's the wide-asleep masses who have all the power and give it away, having been groomed to do so. I frikkin' love China, fer crissakes, that wall, as much blood sweat and slavery that went into her construction, is tits. Their time-honored medicinal and healing arts and their understanding of the subtle systems that constitute a human's waterbag, no match exists, save that of Tibet's. Even here-tell they got em some bitchin' pyramids, that make Khufu's look like outhouses....best we all bone-up on mandarin/cantonese

Tags for this video have been changed from 'lama, buddhist, tibet, tibetan, monk, monastery, mandala, buddha' to 'lama, buddhist, tibet, tibetan, monk, monastery, mandala, buddha, hoe, ewe' - edited by my15minutes

Tags for this video have been changed from 'lama, buddhist, tibet, tibetan, monk, monastery' to 'lama, buddhist, tibet, tibetan, monk, monastery, mandala, buddha' - edited by my15minutes

"When I was in my teens and early twenties I read a lot of books about Buddhism, mysticism and similar subjects as I searched, like you do, for some deeper meaning to life than was being peddled by the consumer culture in which I had grown up. One recurring subject in many of these was Tibet, a mysterious country full of priests and monks, secret traditions and spiritual understanding, which was always written about in almost mythical terms as if it were more a legend than a real place somewhere north of India. I was fascinated by this ancient and inaccesible land where initiates could apparantly fly and yogis would be buried alive for days only to be dug up again alive and well after practising ancient techniques of bodily control, and I started to search for more books about the country, it's people and their beliefs."

- Banco De Gaia

Continued at http://www.banco.co.uk/tibet/

Ah. I see where our misunderstanding lies: When I said something about "nations clamoring for independence," I was referring only to Chechnya, Tibet, etc., NOT China, nor Russia. The only changes I would like to make in those countries is to stop their human rights violations, by I-don't-know-what-method, but certainly not by imposing democracy from the outside. That clearly doesn't work.

More civic power in certain culturally different areas of a country leads to demands for rights and independence, which either leads to actual independence, or to violent oppression. In these cases, it was violent oppression, and that's what I don't like. When I say that it's human rights violations that are holding those two countries together, I mean that human rights violations are forcing Chechnya and Taiwan to remain part of the country, not that the whole country would fall apart.

In reply to this comment by legacy0100:
It's because

1. Russia actually DO want Putin to stay in power. Despite what Kasparov says there, the general Russian public does have a strong support for Putin. Especially young Russians support Putin with much optimism and vigor.

2. If released Chechnya, other states with private militaries would start demanding the same thing. Many of them being remnants of instability since the collapse of USSR. So even though Chechnya alone does have a legitimate cause to demand independence, Russia just cannot afford to show signs of 'giving up' at this time.

Once things have settled down, they may give it another chance.

3. Improved human rights treatment can be achieved without having to make a democratic nation. People usually confuse democracy automatically resulting to better humans rights and civic power. It's actually the opposite. More civic power means more demands for civilian rights, and civilian rights leads to democracy.

Human rights violations result from power struggles (government instability) and lack of civil power. Once government stabilizes and economy goes up, these things will take care of themselves.

It's because

1. Russia actually DO want Putin to stay in power. Despite what Kasparov says there, the general Russian public does have a strong support for Putin. Especially young Russians support Putin with much optimism and vigor.

2. If released Chechnya, other states with private militaries would start demanding the same thing. Many of them being remnants of instability since the collapse of USSR. So even though Chechnya alone does have a legitimate cause to demand independence, Russia just cannot afford to show signs of 'giving up' at this time.

Once things have settled down, they may give it another chance.

3. Improved human rights treatment can be achieved without having to make a democratic nation. People usually confuse democracy automatically resulting to better humans rights and civic power. It's actually the opposite. More civic power means more demands for civilian rights, and civilian rights leads to democracy.

Human rights violations result from power struggles (government instability) and lack of civil power. Once government stabilizes and economy goes up, these things will take care of themselves.

In reply to this comment by messenger:
@legacy:

You have said several times that you democracy can't be forced on a people who aren't ready for it. I fully agree with the principle and your examples. But I don't see how that sentiment applies here. What country is being considered for "forceful" democratization? Nobody's talking about going to war to make China and Russia democratic. We're talking about nations that are clamoring for freedom and being militarily repressed. As I said above, if Russia and China stopped their human rights violations, Tibet, Taiwan, Burma and Chechnya would be free, and soon democratic. Heck, Taiwan already is democratic, but not freely so. China and Russia would be imperceptibly smaller, and free to continue on as the dictatorships they are now, without having any democracy "forced" on them.

@legacy:

You have said several times that you democracy can't be forced on a people who aren't ready for it. I fully agree with the principle and your examples. But I don't see how that sentiment applies here. What country is being considered for "forceful" democratization? Nobody's talking about going to war to make China and Russia democratic. We're talking about nations that are clamoring for freedom and being militarily repressed. As I said above, if Russia and China stopped their human rights violations, Tibet, Taiwan, Burma and Chechnya would be free, and soon democratic. Heck, Taiwan already is democratic, but not freely so. China and Russia would be imperceptibly smaller, and free to continue on as the dictatorships they are now, without having any democracy "forced" on them.