DanS: Hu is now the man

[DanS]

"Probably ousting him in some way, like the other Hu before him."

Could somebody describe what actions were taken to do this on Hu #1? Who was Hu #1 and what got him in trouble?

Educate DanS.

[ranskaldan]

Hu Yaobang?

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0824655.html

You know, of all the Maps I have looked at, I could never find many with an 'independent' Tibet... Too bad the Tibet issue is only fodder for a tiny group of people...

That could be because they aren't, in the first place.

Maps are supposed to reflect objective reality, after all, which means that Taiwan might be a different colour but Tibet isn't.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by mindseye

Quote:

I kinda wish I lived in China- all that potential for a nation must be exciting times for them.

It is truly thrillng to live here! It's hard to describe how exciting it is to see a new nation leaping into existance all around you. I was back in the US for ten days, when I returned I couldn't believe the changes in my neighborhood after such a short period!

I go back to Beijing every summer - and every summer so far has been new and surprising. But I hope they build up the Beijing downtown, it still looks too sparse...

And I just visited Shanghai this summer. Absolutely amazing!

[DanS]

Well, the Olympics should help Beijing as a city.

Overall, I'm optimistic about China's future, although I think it will be more tumultuous than hoped. The Party is planning on about 7.5% real growth per annum for the next 20 years (faster than the last 20 years, even though population growth is slowing drastically). I can't say it's unrealistic, but it's extremely tough to accomplish, and relies a good deal on luck.

For instance, about 1/10th of China's economy (currency basis) is tied to exports to the US. This should grow, but I don't think it will grow at 7.5% a year every year during this time.

[GePap]

Wouldn't the chinese want to accomplish those growth aims by increasing exports to other areas, like japan and the EU, plus a growth in their own internal markets and not just by increasing their trade with the US?

[Boris Godunov]

Who da man?
Hu da man!

[Winston]

I'm anxiously awaiting his next visit to a Western country and his subsequent arrest and trial - like the case was with Augusto Pinochet - for being directly responsible for sending 100,000 soldiers against Tibetan independence protesters in 1989, killing at least 40 innocent protesters.

Or maybe he'll do a Honecker on us... Afterall, the international PC comradery works in mysterious ways.

Meanwhile, the regular leftist loonies certainly seem to think that he's totally delightful and adorable. So what else is new.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by Winston
Maybe it's because their culture is downtrotten and they're in many cases denied rights of work, education, child birth, free practice of religion, and political rights.

Keep in mind that Tibetans are one of the few people in China who are allowed to have as many children as they want per family. Other ethnic minorities are limited to five, two, or (in the case of the Han majority) one.

However, I agree with you about the lack of religious rights and political rights. I would also like to point out that what you just said about Tibetans in those respects applies to everybody else as well.

I'm not sure if I just made a positive point, or an incredibly negative one. Either way, it was something extreme.

[Winston]

There are numerous reports of organized, forced sterilizations of women in Tibet.

Also the ongoing massive, centrally controlled, migration of ethnic Chinese into Tibet have been reported several times, along with some reports that these immigrants are not under any restrictions wrt. number of children.

Of course the same concerns apply to mistreated native populations elsewhere, but I'm talking about what China does to Tibet.

[Alinestra Covelia]

Originally posted by DanS
"Probably ousting him in some way, like the other Hu before him."

Could somebody describe what actions were taken to do this on Hu #1? Who was Hu #1 and what got him in trouble?

Educate DanS.

If I recall rightly (and I was only eight years old at the time, living in Beijing) the "first" Hu was a liberal who advocated democracy in Chinese politics. This split the Communist party leaders, with a hard core opposing but a largely younger generation trying to iron out how a system could work.

In the end, Deng Xiaoping dismissed the idea, and Hu's following diminished as political fallout took place, although he did remain within the CCP itself.

Fast forward to 1989, the year of Tiananmen. This is the same year that Hu died of liver failure (?) and university students express their sorrow with memorials, which the government discourages. The CCP believes the issue has been decided.

During Gorbachev's visit, the students demonstrate in Tiananmen and Li Peng opens talks with their spokespersons. Posthumously, Hu becomes something of a figurehead during Tiananmen.

After the violent crackdown, the hardliners took power. Deng, however, continued to institute economic changes while carefully avoiding any potential political destabilizers.

The result is that China is currently running a weird hybrid of Free Market *** Planned economics, while still remaining much of a Police State.

(This translates roughly to +2 Support +2 Econ +2 Growth +2 Industry -4 Efficiency -2 Police -2 Planet and an outlay of 195 energy credits over around four years or so.)

Note - the present Hu has no blood relation to the previous Hu. Nor is he related to my housemate Hu Man Bing, whom I fervently hope never gets admitted into any government anywhere.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by Winston
There are numerous reports of organized, forced sterilizations of women in Tibet.

There is, frankly, no official advocation for sterilizations of any kind. This is often done by local officials who are eager to up their records.

Also the ongoing massive, centrally controlled, migration of ethnic Chinese into Tibet have been reported several times, along with some reports that these immigrants are not under any restrictions wrt. number of children.

Migration, yes.
On the other hand, it is people of Chinese descent who are subject to the one-child policy, while minorities (i.e. Tibetans) are not.

Of course the same concerns apply to mistreated native populations elsewhere, but I'm talking about what China does to Tibet.

Tibetans, btw, are full Chinese citizens, with no "colonial" "sub-special" status. You might as well ask what China's leaders are doing to China.

[Winston]

The Tibetans didn't ask to become Chinese citizens they were forced to, which is kind of the whole point.

As for the child policy issue, I have infinitely more confidence in the reports of exiled Tibetans and human rights organizations, than in the official statements by the communist clerks in Beijing.

[ranskaldan]

The Chinese didn't exactly ask to become citizens of China either.

[Lord Merciless]

Just like the European immigrants once colonized the North American continent, Tibet will be colonized by the Chinese. The main difference here is that Chinese will not kill off any significant portion of the natives, unlike the Europeans.

If some Europeans can somehow think they can behave morally superior in these matters, they are wrong.

[Winston]

Except for the 400 years' difference in time and enlightenment.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Winston
The Tibetans didn't ask to become Chinese citizens they were forced to, which is kind of the whole point.

That's not necessarily true. The Tibetan people welcomed the Red Army in the 1950s. The Chinese liberated the Tibetan people from the feudal slave masters, aka the Dahli Lama and his religion. The main resistence to the Chinese occupation of Tibet came from former masters who wish to be masters once again and the CIA.

[Winston]

Oh yes, I forgot. The Tibetan people welcomed the Red Army.

I forgot to wash my brain properly before posting.

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Winston
Except for the 400 years' difference in time and enlightenment.

So, you are basically saying that you Europeans can get away with genocides after the passage of time.

Well, that shows what kind of person you really are and what you really think.

Tibet or else, they are just something you could use to make other countries look worse compared to yours and thus make yourself feel superior.

Still the same European obsession with cultural and moral superiority.

[chequita guevara]

No, you just forgot to use it.

[Boris Godunov]

Didn't the Red Army BOMB Tibet?

[chequita guevara]

Nope, they just moved in. Tibet didn't have much of an army, and the Dahli Lama saw that it was rather pointless to resist. After he fled, there was some resistence organized and trained by the CIA (they received their training in the Colorado Rockies, btw). It sort of petered out in the early 60s.

Despite the one famine (and it was a doozy) and the chaos of the Cultural Revolution, you really need to understand that life for the average person in China (including minorities) has been consistently getting better. That includes Tibet, where the people had previously had to support a God-King and all his priestly nobility on their backs.

[Winston]

No LM, what I'm saying is you can't compare genocides and other atrocities committed 400 years ago, when they were more or less the order of the day, with what is happening to oppressed ethnic minorities in this day and age - where the consensus is (or should be) that governments have to observe human rights as the first condition of administration.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm guessing you weren't a big fan of Kundun...

[Boris Godunov]

And yeah, 1.2 million dead is a real, um, "doozy"

[Lord Merciless]

Well, Tibet had suffered quite a bit from the late 50s until the mid 70s, with famine, cultural revolution, and all. But Tibet was hardly alone in this aspect, since the whole China was equally messed up during the same period. Mao's crazy social engineering experiment basically screwed over everyone.

[Winston]

che, I'm so glad you have no say over other people's matters and rights. Let's keep it that way shall we.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Winston
No LM, what I'm saying is you can't compare genocides and other atrocities committed 400 years ago, when they were more or less the order of the day, with what is happening to oppressed ethnic minorities in this day and age -

First off, European colonial powers were committing genocide right up until they got their collective asses kicked out of the 3rd World. Second, China isn't committing genocide in Tibet.

[Boris Godunov]

True, mass murder != genocide.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
And yeah, 1.2 million dead is a real, um, "doozy"

1.2 million? Try somewhere around 20 million, in the Great Leap Forward. That's the only famine that China's had since the revolution. Prior to the revolution, China experienced a famine, on average, every year and a half. So even the disaster of the Great Leap Forward is mitagated by the 35 other famines they didn't have.

[Winston]

che,

I was responding to a point by LM about the conduct of the original colonizers of North America.

And wrt. "China not commiting genocide in Tibet", well that's your heavily tainted interpretation. Tibetan exiles have a slightly different perception, I assure you.

But then, again they aren't fundamentalist in their outlook on the world like you, they're just desperately trying to report on the continuing atrocitites in their home country.