Sunday, March 16, 2008

5,500-year-old human sacrifice evidence unearthed in Sudan

This was a headline occurring at the same time that Tibetans are being burned to death in Lhasa, the capitol city of Tibet. Our policy toward China makes no sense to me: of course, International relations is not my field. I have read that morality has no place in international relations: that we have no "friends" only interests. My understanding is that morality plays no part in international relations. Only interests. Condoleezza Rice comes from a christian background and i suspect she knows the bible better than me, however, her approach to IR is definitely the Henry Kissinger approach (did you know he researches the international laws of countries he visits because he has been indicted for war crimes by some countries?) China is of course an important part of our economy - what would WalMart be without china? How could they deliver those low prices? Hillary clinton served on WalMarts board (thats part of her 35 yrs of experience). So china is part of our economy, and we cant screw with china. Their human rights violations are clearly at a level with Iran: so why dont we have sanctions against china? Because china is in our "interest" and Iran is not. If Bush is really for freedom he would change our china policy. But he isnt: every time he brings morality into IR, I cringe. He is either a pathological liar or he is just stupid. I think we should research the "human sacrifice" that is happening in Tibet, we should bring sanctions against China, we should cancel our involvement in the Olympics, and that Bush should make a press conference about human rights violations in china.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You should probably note that the people who were actually being burnt to death in Lhasa were of Han Chinese ethnicity and they were being burnt to death by the Tibetan rioters, not the Chinese authorities. The riots, which targeted Han Chinese people and property in a similar way to how the Krystalnacht violence targeted Jews, were in fact stopped by the Chinese police. I see little problem with this. For example, if black people were being killed based on their race in London or New York, it would seem outrageous if the police did nothing. Many pro-Tibet protesters seem to be dangerously misinformed and not only oppose the Chinese intervention (bad enough) but actively accuse the Chinese government of causing the deaths. You should know that I am NOT pro-China, rather I am pro-understanding. People support the Free Tibet campaign, which is fundamentally flawed, based on fallacious information provided by certain media agencies, like CNN or the BBC. I suggest that you truly research the facts rather than jumping on the Free Tibet bandwagon. Also, the rest of what you propose is outrageous- Bush's snubbing China would be a terrible idea and would benefit no-one.

Dude said...

Krystalnacht is the wrong comparison, I would say the Tibetans rioting is more like thye jewish uprising in Warsaw. Also you analogy of black people being killed because of their race is wrong: black people in US rioted in the '60's and burned stores of white people who ran stores in the black neighborhood and charged higher prices and took their profits out of the neighborhood. Should the police protect white owned stores in the black chicago ghetto during the '67 riots? Yeah, I guess so, but black people certainly had reasons for hating the white store owners. I support understanding too, and the cause of the problem in Tibet is the lack of political power Tibetans have over themselves and their country/region. I have searched the web and nowhere have I read that Tibetans are burning or killing chinese. The deaths seem a result of police action against rioters.