Tibetan monasteries 'surrounded by soldiers'

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Why bring poor Lonestar into this?

Ooh! That's right! It's not Lonestar who got upset, it was Slowwwwhand. (Like the URL thingy I'm not sure how many Ws are supposed to be in there so I threw in a few extra to make sure I was covered.)

I've gone back and edited it now. My poor, poor arse

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Barnabas
chinese textbooks calling G Khan a Chinese Conqueror.

Like teh Greeks and Alexander>

[DaShi]

I like the Japanese claiming G Khan. Not sure the rationale for it, but it seems pretty out there.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by LordShiva


Like teh Greeks and Alexander>

Strictly speaking, Kublai Khan conquered China, not Genghis. He just went a bit of the way in then decided it wasn't worth it to cut through all the red tape ...

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by DaShi
I like the Japanese claiming G Khan. Not sure the rationale for it, but it seems pretty out there.

Fun fact: The Mongolians and the Koreans appear to be fairly close, ethnically. Both of them have a little genetic quirk where the babies often are born with a blue or green spot on the skin near the bottom or lower back. Most Han Chinese babies do not display this, but the few that do are known as having "Mongol spots".

My housemate HMB is Chinese but was born with a Mongol spot. Most of the time they fade when the child is about three or four, but HMB's ass is still blue, 27 years later ^_^

[Dinner]

BTW up to the very late 40's both the KMT and the CCP claimed Mongolia as part of China. Both wanted to claim Mongol history as Chinese history which was very odd given that the Great Wall was built to keep out the foreign Mongol hordes.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Oh noes! Teh former feudal oppressors of Tibet are being oppressed!

Monks spend most of their time meditating, Chetitz. I'm sure that more than 99% of the monks who are being starved today had nothing whatsoever to do with whatever oppression you're talking about. Most simply spend time meditating and working. Even if, for your sake, I assume that half had, at some point, done something oppressive, do you think that that justifies starving the other half to death? Don't forget that most came there because of some inner longing for a higher life.

And do you really think that two wrongs make a right?

[BeBMan]

In orthodox communism the religious layer in a society is all oppressors or at least helpers of the ruling class of oppressors

[Winston]

We also have to remember that commies have the inalienable right to oppress, according to other commies.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I support self-determination for Tibet. I also, however, think there is a qualitative difference between the former ruling class agitating for independence and the masses of the population agitating for independence. Monks and priests are a parasitic class. They produce nothing for society and only take.

Isn't that rather a large blanket statement? By that yardstick, theoretical scientists (and all other academics, actually) who are state-subsidised (as they were in the Communist countries, and still are in many otherwise free-market ones) are useless and parasitic.

Do you think that cultural contributions - ideas - are worthless? That the provision of a civilisational narrative, of having something - anything - to look up to is worthless? And that if I, as a private and free man, am willing to support some institution whose sole job is to produce new ideas and train some people to act in accordance with them, then I am being preyed upon, that I am supporting a parasite? Even when I choose to do so on my own?

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by BeBro
In orthodox communism the religious layer in a society is all oppressors or at least helpers of the ruling class of oppressors

Very true.

Even though I am no fan of Christianity and its behaviour throughout history, I can still give credit where it is due. IIRC, it was the Benedictine monks who were responsible for many advancements in agriculture during the Middle Ages, and they also, cloistered away in their little monasteries, preserved the bulk of the original Greek and Roman corpus of knowledge which would form the kernel of the Renaissance and deliver Europe from the Dark Ages.

Were they parasites? During the Dark Ages, many could have accused them of being such. Maybe many were. But in the final analysis, did they and their order contribute more than they took? I doubt anyone would reply with anything but a resounding affirmative.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia


Fun fact: The Mongolians and the Koreans appear to be fairly close, ethnically. Both of them have a little genetic quirk where the babies often are born with a blue or green spot on the skin near the bottom or lower back. Most Han Chinese babies do not display this, but the few that do are known as having "Mongol spots".

My housemate HMB is Chinese but was born with a Mongol spot. Most of the time they fade when the child is about three or four, but HMB's ass is still blue, 27 years later ^_^

What I happen to find far more fascinating than the fun fact in question is that you happen to know so much about your housemate's anatomy.

[aneeshm]

Oh, and lest I be left out of the more intellectual discussion I find raging around me:


**** the Chinese state!


There. That felt better.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Oh, and lest I be left out of the more intellectual discussion I find raging around me:


**** the Chinese state!


There. That felt better.

It almost appeared that you had an unbiased opinion there for a moment.

[Winston]

I agree with aneeshm.

We ought to boycott something of high importance to them. If only our elected decision makers actually had some balls.