Comments for 30 Days At A Time http://3rdydays.wordpress.com Just another WordPress.com weblog Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:47:16 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Why Tibet Waits for Freedom by mjhasley http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/why-tibet-waits-for-freedom/#comment-70 mjhasley Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:47:16 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=85#comment-70 It just occurred to me. The state of Israel was a pretty useless piece of territory until the Jewish people moved in 1948. Now, it's a thriving nation. Why couldn't the Tibet's do the same? It just occurred to me. The state of Israel was a pretty useless piece of territory until the Jewish people moved in 1948. Now, it’s a thriving nation. Why couldn’t the Tibet’s do the same?

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by mjhasley http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-67 mjhasley Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:29:15 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-67 Churchill said it best, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. I don't buy the whole "single govenment rule" over the world. I don't see diversity and one super nation happening, that's counter intuitive. The EU may exist, but they also spend billions on translaters because they want their own national identies and languages. It's not going to meld into one supernation. Neither will the AU. In the last 40 years, the Puerto Ricans voted for statehood three times and it was rejected each time. When Germany was reunited, the West Germans didn't want it and they still struggle. China needed HOng Kong more than Hong Kong needed China. Strong nations don't want to merge, super nations will never happen. I do think the world wants democracy, that's why the last 25 years have seen a huge growth in democratic nations over communist and other forms of government. And though some might not see it, establishing democracy in Iraq, will lead to more democracy in other regions as Lebanon has witnessed. Lebanon doesn't want to merge into some mega Arab state. Iran and Iraq wouldn't never have merged. I'm not sure where you're going with this other than saying that Tibet would be better off with China. But that's just thinking economically and I don't think that's all they want. Churchill said it best, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others. I don’t buy the whole “single govenment rule” over the world. I don’t see diversity and one super nation happening, that’s counter intuitive. The EU may exist, but they also spend billions on translaters because they want their own national identies and languages. It’s not going to meld into one supernation. Neither will the AU. In the last 40 years, the Puerto Ricans voted for statehood three times and it was rejected each time. When Germany was reunited, the West Germans didn’t want it and they still struggle. China needed HOng Kong more than Hong Kong needed China. Strong nations don’t want to merge, super nations will never happen. I do think the world wants democracy, that’s why the last 25 years have seen a huge growth in democratic nations over communist and other forms of government. And though some might not see it, establishing democracy in Iraq, will lead to more democracy in other regions as Lebanon has witnessed. Lebanon doesn’t want to merge into some mega Arab state. Iran and Iraq wouldn’t never have merged.

I’m not sure where you’re going with this other than saying that Tibet would be better off with China. But that’s just thinking economically and I don’t think that’s all they want.

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by apolucosis http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-66 apolucosis Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:27:16 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-66 I think I should clarify my point one step further. I am using the shift in Hong Kongers' attitude toward China to make the point that we're living in a world that favors nation (or supernation) of great scale, diversity, unity and stability. This is not a trend, it's a rule. Thus people adapt, consciously or unconsciously. This is why China climbs up the ladder so quickly. This is what Europe has done with EU. This is what African countries have done with AU. And this is what South America countries are doing now. This is why Puerto Rico want statehood of U.S.A., not independence. Think about it. Do you think every state can lead a better life as independent sovereignty if U.S.A. dissolves? This is not about China and the rest of the world. It's about Darwinism. Hong Kongers' mentality is just a good example of that. After all, the world at large is not as obsessed with democracy as U.S. is. Understandably, that little war in Iraq greatly helped to drop a lot of people's faith in American-style democracy to an all time low. Seriously, how can you expect other nations to adapt democracy when even the U.S. cannot solve myriad issues associated with it? I think I should clarify my point one step further. I am using the shift in Hong Kongers’ attitude toward China to make the point that we’re living in a world that favors nation (or supernation) of great scale, diversity, unity and stability. This is not a trend, it’s a rule. Thus people adapt, consciously or unconsciously. This is why China climbs up the ladder so quickly. This is what Europe has done with EU. This is what African countries have done with AU. And this is what South America countries are doing now. This is why Puerto Rico want statehood of U.S.A., not independence. Think about it. Do you think every state can lead a better life as independent sovereignty if U.S.A. dissolves? This is not about China and the rest of the world. It’s about Darwinism. Hong Kongers’ mentality is just a good example of that. After all, the world at large is not as obsessed with democracy as U.S. is. Understandably, that little war in Iraq greatly helped to drop a lot of people’s faith in American-style democracy to an all time low. Seriously, how can you expect other nations to adapt democracy when even the U.S. cannot solve myriad issues associated with it?

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by mjhasley http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-65 mjhasley Thu, 17 Jul 2008 01:02:39 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-65 In most societies, wealth has a tendency to take your eyes off of things like freedom and liberties like a free press. Once there's an economic downturn however, anger rises against the very group that was ignored during the good times. In most societies, wealth has a tendency to take your eyes off of things like freedom and liberties like a free press. Once there’s an economic downturn however, anger rises against the very group that was ignored during the good times.

]]> Comment on Why Tibet Waits for Freedom by mjhasley http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/why-tibet-waits-for-freedom/#comment-64 mjhasley Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:59:42 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=85#comment-64 You raise good points. But, in the end, it should be Tibet's decision. I'm sure western aid will flow in, maybe even business. Who knows, Wal-Mart could help. You raise good points. But, in the end, it should be Tibet’s decision. I’m sure western aid will flow in, maybe even business. Who knows, Wal-Mart could help.

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History by apolucosis http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/china-tibet-history/#comment-63 apolucosis Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:30:15 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=82#comment-63 Sign. Someone really miss the cold war I think.... Sign. Someone really miss the cold war I think….

]]> Comment on Why Tibet Waits for Freedom by apolucosis http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/why-tibet-waits-for-freedom/#comment-62 apolucosis Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:26:55 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=85#comment-62 Sign. For everyone that agrees Tibet should be independent, then the more prudent question is not "how", but "what Tibet will become". Because, if being an independent state is a worse situation than being a part of China, then there's no point going for independence, right? Hypothetically, what do you expect if Tibet does gain independence? It will become a theocracy state, Tibetan Buddhism being its state religion. Tourism will become the single most significant resource of income as Tibet lost hundreds of millions of dollars China invested in each year. Without sufficient agriculture and industry Tibet will most likely becomes poorer and poorer until it becomes a Tibet-themed Disneyland. Does independence worth all these? Feel free to share innovative ideas about how Tibet will run itself as a nation. And they better be good : ) Sign.

For everyone that agrees Tibet should be independent, then the more prudent question is not “how”, but “what Tibet will become”. Because, if being an independent state is a worse situation than being a part of China, then there’s no point going for independence, right?

Hypothetically, what do you expect if Tibet does gain independence? It will become a theocracy state, Tibetan Buddhism being its state religion. Tourism will become the single most significant resource of income as Tibet lost hundreds of millions of dollars China invested in each year. Without sufficient agriculture and industry Tibet will most likely becomes poorer and poorer until it becomes a Tibet-themed Disneyland. Does independence worth all these?

Feel free to share innovative ideas about how Tibet will run itself as a nation. And they better be good : )

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by apolucosis http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-61 apolucosis Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:00:45 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-61 The reality in Hong Kong is that people think much less about this sort of politics anymore. A decade after the reunion, Hong Kongers' mentality has shifted from how different they are from mainlanders, both politically and culturally, to how much they actually have in common. I'd say the government wants more control in Hong Kong than they deserve, and it knows that. Broadly speaking, the perspective of an ever better economy overrules worries about freedom and censorship in Hong Kong, for now. The reality in Hong Kong is that people think much less about this sort of politics anymore. A decade after the reunion, Hong Kongers’ mentality has shifted from how different they are from mainlanders, both politically and culturally, to how much they actually have in common. I’d say the government wants more control in Hong Kong than they deserve, and it knows that. Broadly speaking, the perspective of an ever better economy overrules worries about freedom and censorship in Hong Kong, for now.

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by apolucosis http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-60 apolucosis Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:46:20 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-60 Many western media are disappointed that an open market doesn't lead to more aggressive social or political changes in China. What they failed to acknowledge is that with an economy as open and accessible as China's has become, there's only so much the government can do to restrain public opinions now. Remember 30 years ago China is as isolated as North Korea (still) is today. Although some of the most popular media in China are state-run, people now have full access to almost all western media outlets online (NYT, time, Washington Post, BBC, etc.), including content that's considered anti-China. Wikipedia has been available for some time now, although certain references are still blocked. I'd say that the communist government is very sensitive to public's exposure to its critics. In the meanwhile the progress China has made should not be ignored. Many western media are disappointed that an open market doesn’t lead to more aggressive social or political changes in China. What they failed to acknowledge is that with an economy as open and accessible as China’s has become, there’s only so much the government can do to restrain public opinions now. Remember 30 years ago China is as isolated as North Korea (still) is today. Although some of the most popular media in China are state-run, people now have full access to almost all western media outlets online (NYT, time, Washington Post, BBC, etc.), including content that’s considered anti-China. Wikipedia has been available for some time now, although certain references are still blocked.

I’d say that the communist government is very sensitive to public’s exposure to its critics. In the meanwhile the progress China has made should not be ignored.

]]> Comment on China-Tibet History, II by mjhasley http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/china-tibet-history-ii/#comment-59 mjhasley Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:50:09 +0000 http://3rdydays.wordpress.com/?p=83#comment-59 Hi Leo, Thanks for writing. To be honest, I picked Macau and Sichuan because they are one of the few Chinese provinces I knew of off the top of my head. I really meant of of the other provinces. I'm sure Hong Kongers do feel like genuine citizens under the current situation. However, if my hypothetical played out, I wonder if they still would? I don't know, just curious. And, my home state did separate itself once in its history, and it wasn't pretty. I'd like to know if people's opinion in Hong Kong are honest opinions, or if the communist government of PRC influences public opinion? Hi Leo,
Thanks for writing. To be honest, I picked Macau and Sichuan because they are one of the few Chinese provinces I knew of off the top of my head. I really meant of of the other provinces.

I’m sure Hong Kongers do feel like genuine citizens under the current situation. However, if my hypothetical played out, I wonder if they still would? I don’t know, just curious.

And, my home state did separate itself once in its history, and it wasn’t pretty.

I’d like to know if people’s opinion in Hong Kong are honest opinions, or if the communist government of PRC influences public opinion?

]]>