h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

We are free to go to church and have complete religious freedom. We are able to run our churches in the way we would like and it isnt government controlled. We not at risk of teaching something in church which could result in us ending up in prison. Also if you do break the law here you arent likely to be beaten in prison.

Can you say the same thing for China?

>>However, dare you say you have absolute freedom in your country? You can do anything you want without any constraints?<<

Yeah, so long as it's legal. And the usual definition of legal is something which doesn't harm others.

Your censorship doesn't only apply to what is legal - it applies to what the CCP dislikes. That's an important distinction.

"We are free to talk anything we like,from politics to economics, but subjected to a so called "censorship" system"

What do you mean "so called"? If there are things you are prevented from reading or discussing then that is censorship. If these are related to politics then that is political censorship.

<>

Is that an excuse for China to invade and absorb Tibet as part of itself?

If they felt compelled to interfere with another country's internal affairs, could they not have done so to effect regime change without violating Tibet's sovereignty?

>>If Tibetans were so unhappy with the rule of the lamas, why were parts of Kham and Amdo in open rebellion until the early 1960s? Why are there continued calls for autonomy and the return of the Dalai Lama from various parts of Tibet?<<

Only because, these slaves masters and aristocrates whan to chase their lost power of ruling and dream of their lost heavens.

A continued calls for autonomy is just one kind of hypocrisy , you may not know before 1980s, they appealed only for independency of Tibet. The slogan was changed to this so called autonomy because not many countries could support them. Even now, the objective of such autonomy is in fact tring to separate Han Chinese and Tibetan, which is ignoring the human rights who live in Tibet. ///////

>>If they felt compelled to interfere with another country's internal affairs<<

Tibet was not, and is not an independent country, it is only an autonomy povince of China..

It was part of China before 1949? Really?

Forgive me, but I was certain Tibet was an independent country before the Chinese entered in 1950 or thereabouts. Is that not what your history books say?

You're now telling me that Tibet has never been separate from China. Is this the truth?

If Tibet was always part of China, never separate, then the blame for this:

<>

...would be down to the Chinese.

>>Yeah, so long as it's legal. And the usual definition of legal is something which doesn't harm others.

Your censorship doesn't only apply to what is legal - it applies to what the CCP dislikes. That's an important distinction.<<


Yes, so long as it is legal..I can second with you of such legal definition. But it is an ideal, in real life, the laws (no matter in UK or in CHina) sometimes are a lttle complicated to follow.

I don't even like such censorship system, theoretically it ensures people in China to be legal, but practically it blocks some opponencys. It is abused. Thats should be accused of and need to improved, in the mechanism.

I'm just a bit staggered by this re-writing of history.
So according to you Tibet was ALWAYS PART OF TIBET!?

You see, if in 1949 Tibet was a separate independent country, which I understand was the case, then at that time China did feel compelled to interfere with another country's internal affairs

And, assuming Tibet was until 1949/50 separate from China, they did violate Tibet's sovereignty in 1950 by invading Tibet.

>>forgive me, but I was certain Tibet was an independent country before the Chinese entered in 1950 or thereabouts. Is that not what your history books say?<<
It doesn't a matter you don't know the history of Tibet. Tibet is part of CHina back to Yuan Dynasty. In history, all Dalais were named and accredited by central government of China of the time....you can refer to relevant books not merely from UK guys, who dreamt to seek of colony in far east.

>>I'm just a bit staggered by this re-writing of history.>>

No necessary in deed.

purpleDavidL:

Has Tibet never in all its history ever been independent of China?

>>Has Tibet never in all its history ever been independent of China?<<
WG, you are smart, but it was not dependent around 1949s...

Ha ha, thanks. I have my moments sometimes.

<< it was not dependent around 1949s...>>
So in other words it was independent.


Do you know for how long had it been independant?

Hehe, WG, we all know Tibet annnounced independent around 1911. But please note this has never been acknowledged by any central government of China.
Another fact is this independence was in fact supported by UK who invaded Tibet around 1903...Hope you would not deny this invasion, all we have no bisis to debate on this topic..We need to check all history books again and then back for talking...

I'm not in a position to deny anything.
I can only ask you questions, I'm afraid.

So Britain invaded in 1903.
Tibet was part of China then, was it?
If so, that means Britain invaded China (or a part of it) in 1903.

>>If so, that means Britain invaded China (or a part of it) in 1903.<<
Yes, Qing Dynasity in fact was of recreance and just demured for this invasion.

I get the impression that the political status of Tibet at that time must have been rather vague.

What is undeniable is that, whatever the political status then or now, there is a distinctive culture in Tibet, their own language and writing system, and many Tibetans are trying their best to demonstrate for independence in various ways.

The Dalai Lama himself apparently doensn't call for independence but greater autonomy.

....The Dalai Lama himself apparently doensn't call for independence but greater autonomy.>>

You can check with his annual report before 1987