Yes. They are entitled to their self-determination.
Results 1 to 20 of 137
Free Tibet
Should Tibet Be Free From Chinese Rule?
Yes. They are entitled to their self-determination.
Coalition of Resistance - Fight Back Against the Cuts!
"As for the lad "Sam_b", I've been reading this forum for a while and I don't think I've ever seen him contribute anything of any value. Most of the chap's posts seem to be confrontational and snarky digs at other posters. Thankfully, most other contributors do not seem to behave in this manner." - Some Guy
Since, according to their fantasy, the relationships of men, all their doings, their chains and their limitations are products of their consciousness, the Young Hegelians logically put to men the moral postulate of exchanging their present consciousness for human, critical or egoistic consciousness, and thus of removing their limitations. This demand to change consciousness amounts to a demand to interpret reality in another way, i.e. to recognise it by means of another interpretation. The Young-Hegelian ideologists, in spite of their allegedly "world-shattering" statements, are the staunchest conservatives.
Karl Marx
No. This choice cannot be made in a vaccume. If Tibet was "free" there would be the reintroduction of a racial caste and a feudal theocracy. Which is worse than the current set up.
"How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and Bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kids gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I've plunged them in the filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you'll govern innocently?"-Jean-Paul Sartre
When did Tibet actually ever have sovereignty? Independence from Chinese rule = a U.S. colony/CIA base of operations.
3A CCCP!
Mikhail
Exactly 3A CCCP. As I understand it Tibet has been a vassal state of sort to either Mongolia or China for most of its existence.
I do not wish fro a "free tibet" for it is a flanking tactic and a demand resounded by capitalistic imperialists only to suit their purposes.
There would have to be elections so that Tibetans can decide who governs Tibet, and how, for themselves. There's no prospect of the outcone you fear.
Since, according to their fantasy, the relationships of men, all their doings, their chains and their limitations are products of their consciousness, the Young Hegelians logically put to men the moral postulate of exchanging their present consciousness for human, critical or egoistic consciousness, and thus of removing their limitations. This demand to change consciousness amounts to a demand to interpret reality in another way, i.e. to recognise it by means of another interpretation. The Young-Hegelian ideologists, in spite of their allegedly "world-shattering" statements, are the staunchest conservatives.
Karl Marx
How are Tibetans any more "not free" then they rest of China's ethnicities?
Should all of China be balkanised into ethnic-nationalist states? I can't see how any real socialist could take on U$A strategy as their own.
The spiritual atom bomb which the revolutionary people possess is a far more powerful and useful weapon than the physical atom bomb. - Lin Biao
Our code of morals is our revolution. What saves our revolution, what helps our revolution, what protects our revolution is right, is very right and very honourable and very noble and very beautiful, because our revolution means justice
- Dr. George Habash, founder of the PFLP.
The whole Tibet fetishism thing comes from the fact that western, mainly British, imperialism/colonialism in the early 20th century wanted Tibet to be independant so they could expand their influence east of India.
As far as I know the main people pushing for Tibetan independance are wankers like the Dalai Llama and the other exiled slave owners, and the CIA. I'm not convinced many Tibetans at all want independance.
Chinese rule in Tibet (and much of what is China) is colonailism. However when I say that Tibet should be free I mean that it should be a secular, socialist region that has autonomy for the working class aswell as the region itself. So ofcourse Tibet should be free, everywhere should be free and all borders and states should be destroyed.
Tibet is historically a part of China going back to the Yuan Dynasty.
It should also be remembered, that the Chinese Revolution brought immense gains to the toilers of Tibet. Prior to that Tibet was a theocratic hell. The U.S. imperialists and their CIA have been pushing for "independence" (read: the creation of an imperialist neocolony in Tibet). Originally, it was a part of a push for counterrevolution in China. Now, it's to damage what they see as a growing competitor.
Imperialist-backed "independence" is no kind of gain for workers. Struggles for "national liberation" that don't go on to forge a proletarian state don't either. This is the reality of today (the assertions of State Department socialists that back all sorts of reactionaries in the name of defending "the right of self-determination" and "global class war" Marcyites who see any force that comes into conflict with U.S. imperialism as progressive, now withstanding).
"Each time a country is freed, we say, it is a defeat for the world imperialist system, but we must agree that real liberation or breaking away from the imperialist system is not achieved by the mere act of proclaiming independence or winning an armed victory in a revolution. Freedom is achieved when imperialist economic domination over a people is brought to an end [i.e. through socialist revolution]." - Ernesto "Che" Guevara
"Getting a job, finding a mate, having a place to live, finding a creative outlet. Life is a war of attrition. You have to stay active on all fronts. It's one thing after another. I've tried to control a chaotic universe. And it's a losing battle. But I can't let go. I've tried, but I can't." - Harvey Pekar
The only way that Tibet can be freed is through proletarian revolution.
Self determination is another word for the imperialist tactic "divide and conquer."
The Tibetan theocracy is merely symbolic, like the royalty of England. I say Tibet deserves independance, but the United States has no place to demand this due to their own imperialistic policies.
no for all of the reasons mentioned, by people who said no,
human rights need improved in all China and Tibet should be allowed it's own culture to flourish but as a province of china
Edit, ooo a tie in votes now
If only I read all of this before I voted yes...
I don't see how people can not support sedition from an oppressive regime. So what if Tibet was fucked before? We should continue to punish them with the imposition of a violent, imperialist state? WTF?
Seriously, just because right-wingers like to hold Tibet up as a cause doesn't mean we should mirror them on the opposite side. That is extremely reactionary.
Yes. A lot of this anti-Tibet thought seems to stem from some "enemy of my enemy is my friend" posturing.
This clears a lot of things for me because I'm always skeptical about all this fucking liberals pushing for Tibet to be free.. Free to do what? or what?
we need more revolutions and less "isms"
So you support the strengthening of US imperialism? The force that is out to destroy any type of revolution on the globe. If this whole "free tibet" movement isn't so tied into US imperialism, I would support it.
