Would you say the same about the south, if after the civil war, 40 acres and a mule happened and the former slave owners proceeded to flee to a hostile country and cry about the plight of their people?
I don’t know how to tell you this so I’ll just rip the bandaid off: the same amendment that outlawed slavery in the US opened up a pathway for legal slavery if the enslaved person was convicted of a crime. This led to uneven enforcement of the laws targeting black people to fill the prisons with cheap labor. Additional laws were passed denying those convicted of felonies that right to vote which helped keep black people from alleviating their bondage at the ballot box. And that’s all setting aside that most newly freed people spent generations living in absolute poverty as sharecroppers and any black communities that actually managed to do well for themselves were targeted by whites like in the Tulsa race massacre or simply had their communities bulldozed during the construction of the interstates in the 50s and 60s. Did black people trade one master for another? The Black Panthers might agree.
Back to the analogy, both former slaves and former slave owners from Tibet cry about their plight but the plight former slaves cry about is the conquest and domination of their country by China and the use of the education system and large scale settlement of Han Chinese to destroy Tibetan language and culture while making them second class citizens in the land of their ancestors. I’ll oppose that like I oppose all Imperialism.
Regarding the south post-reconstruction, there’s a reason I specified 40 acres and a mule, if the land and political representation had been handed to the former slaves instead of what actually happened.
destroy Tibetan language
Schools literally teach in the Tibetan language.
second class citizens
How? What rights do Tibetens lack?
plight former slaves cry about
A Tibeten talking to the west over their plight is no different than a Palestinian talking to Israelis about the plight of LBGT+ in Palestine or a cuban gusano talking to America about the horrors of free healthcare; literally the only use is to justify hostile action that harms the people they pretend to support.
No, OP is probably referring to the invasion as a whole, as well as the genocide and cultural/social repression carried out by the Chinese government on Tibet during its ongoing occupation of the country.
You can free slaves without needing to annex the region. Claiming an independent country for your own government to control permanently (regardless of supposed initial intent) is called imperialism.
The kidnapping of a child for the purposes of destroying/controlling the religion of a culture you conquered definitely is imperialism.
As is the shelling of civilian populations to quell protests, shelling major sacred monasteries / cultural heritage sites, imprisonment and torture of women during women’s uprising, installing your own government controlled head of a religion because the original one said bad things against your imperialist government etc.
Those are probably what OP is referring to when they mean the PRC acted imperialist when it used ”military interventions, and cultural influence to maintain their dominance over other nations” like Tibet.
^ that quoted section is from the ProleWiki page for Imperialism btw, so even by the communist/socialist definition of imperialism, the occupation of Tibet by the PRC was/is imperialist
You can free slaves without needing to annex the region. Claiming an independent country for your own government to control permanently (regardless of supposed initial intent) is called imperialism.
Tibet wasn’t an “independent country,” it was one of countless warlord states that emerged following the fall of the Qing. Both the CCP and the KMT recognized the need to pacify these states and reunify the country, so much so that they were both willing to put aside ideological differences and form a temporary alliance in order to do it. Tibet was always part of China, is still claimed by Taiwan, and never received international recognition as an independent country, just from like, Mongolia and one or two other countries.
If you want to treat Tibet as an independent country, then should we also treat all the other warlord states that were put down by the united front the same way? Should we just say that whoever has de facto control of a region is the rightful owner of it - even if it’s a theocracy with a brutal system of serfdom?
the original one said bad things against your imperialist government
The original one was a slave owner wtf
I don’t have a very strong opinion on Tibet as I haven’t been there and investigated, but anyone defending the Lamas China drove out knows even less and is just trying to twist anything at all into hostile evidence.
The Dalai Lama currently in exile assumed his political power at age 15 AFTER the PRC invaded. So unless the PRC didn’t end feudalism in 1950 like they say they did (and also assuming the slavery actually happened the way the PRC said it did despite others claiming it is mostly just PRC propaganda used to try and legitimize their invasion) I don’t think you can really call him a slave owner.
Regardless, the only one trying to twist things seems to be you because once again, you are trying to draw attention away from the main argument which is that the PRCs actions were imperialist.
Even if the slave owner claim was correct, that wouldn’t negate the other events and imperialist actions I listed. However, because you can’t refute those claims you instead chose to default to ad hominem, trying to attack me or my reliability rather than the evidence I listed.
Sure, that only strengthens the argument that the US should have been even more “authoritarian”; prosecuted more slavers for their crimes against humanity, pay out reparations, control the narrative about the civil war (or rather, don’t allow southern states to teach it with the lies by omission).
It’s not obvious that all the smoke is for China. We get so much American politics on Lemmy that everyone else is sick of it and sets up filters. This meme in particular is about China.
No. I think if it wasn’t imperialist, the USA would’ve done a better job at Reconstruction. In case you need an obligatory condemnation, the USA has the world’s largest prison population and still practices slavery.
There are other countries that are neither imperialist nor slavers.
Tibet is free, they have representation and everything.
I do not defend genocide because there is no genocide happening right here in Xinjiang, you just refuse to believe you’ve been lied to. No investigation, no right to speak.
Seeing a KFC that serves coffee and no biscuits, and ordering what I thought was orange juice, but turned out to be piping hot orange soda made me want to leave this country.
You know I haven’t personally seen ICE in my city; I guess that means there is no genocide or imperialism happening here either. Guess America isn’t imperialist after all lol
Thanks to your comment I just realized tankies are basically MAGA overseas. Both share love of dictatorships and are ultranationalists who fall heavy into the cult of personality, and also drink the koolaid just as hard as MAGA do about what the dear leader and party tells them to believe.
must suck to be a chinese shill…
hey, how do you feel about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre?
was china just keeping everyone happy by crushing their heads with tanks?
Are you suggesting the Tibeten people weren’t liberated from the slave-owning class? That Mao should have just let the Lamas practice slavery forever?
We’re suggesting they traded one master for another.
Would you say the same about the south, if after the civil war, 40 acres and a mule happened and the former slave owners proceeded to flee to a hostile country and cry about the plight of their people?
I don’t know how to tell you this so I’ll just rip the bandaid off: the same amendment that outlawed slavery in the US opened up a pathway for legal slavery if the enslaved person was convicted of a crime. This led to uneven enforcement of the laws targeting black people to fill the prisons with cheap labor. Additional laws were passed denying those convicted of felonies that right to vote which helped keep black people from alleviating their bondage at the ballot box. And that’s all setting aside that most newly freed people spent generations living in absolute poverty as sharecroppers and any black communities that actually managed to do well for themselves were targeted by whites like in the Tulsa race massacre or simply had their communities bulldozed during the construction of the interstates in the 50s and 60s. Did black people trade one master for another? The Black Panthers might agree.
Back to the analogy, both former slaves and former slave owners from Tibet cry about their plight but the plight former slaves cry about is the conquest and domination of their country by China and the use of the education system and large scale settlement of Han Chinese to destroy Tibetan language and culture while making them second class citizens in the land of their ancestors. I’ll oppose that like I oppose all Imperialism.
Regarding the south post-reconstruction, there’s a reason I specified 40 acres and a mule, if the land and political representation had been handed to the former slaves instead of what actually happened.
Schools literally teach in the Tibetan language.
How? What rights do Tibetens lack?
A Tibeten talking to the west over their plight is no different than a Palestinian talking to Israelis about the plight of LBGT+ in Palestine or a cuban gusano talking to America about the horrors of free healthcare; literally the only use is to justify hostile action that harms the people they pretend to support.
No, OP is probably referring to the invasion as a whole, as well as the genocide and cultural/social repression carried out by the Chinese government on Tibet during its ongoing occupation of the country.
You can free slaves without needing to annex the region. Claiming an independent country for your own government to control permanently (regardless of supposed initial intent) is called imperialism.
The kidnapping of a child for the purposes of destroying/controlling the religion of a culture you conquered definitely is imperialism.
As is the shelling of civilian populations to quell protests, shelling major sacred monasteries / cultural heritage sites, imprisonment and torture of women during women’s uprising, installing your own government controlled head of a religion because the original one said bad things against your imperialist government etc.
Those are probably what OP is referring to when they mean the PRC acted imperialist when it used ”military interventions, and cultural influence to maintain their dominance over other nations” like Tibet.
^ that quoted section is from the ProleWiki page for Imperialism btw, so even by the communist/socialist definition of imperialism, the occupation of Tibet by the PRC was/is imperialist
Tibet wasn’t an “independent country,” it was one of countless warlord states that emerged following the fall of the Qing. Both the CCP and the KMT recognized the need to pacify these states and reunify the country, so much so that they were both willing to put aside ideological differences and form a temporary alliance in order to do it. Tibet was always part of China, is still claimed by Taiwan, and never received international recognition as an independent country, just from like, Mongolia and one or two other countries.
If you want to treat Tibet as an independent country, then should we also treat all the other warlord states that were put down by the united front the same way? Should we just say that whoever has de facto control of a region is the rightful owner of it - even if it’s a theocracy with a brutal system of serfdom?
The original one was a slave owner wtf
I don’t have a very strong opinion on Tibet as I haven’t been there and investigated, but anyone defending the Lamas China drove out knows even less and is just trying to twist anything at all into hostile evidence.
The Dalai Lama currently in exile assumed his political power at age 15 AFTER the PRC invaded. So unless the PRC didn’t end feudalism in 1950 like they say they did (and also assuming the slavery actually happened the way the PRC said it did despite others claiming it is mostly just PRC propaganda used to try and legitimize their invasion) I don’t think you can really call him a slave owner.
Regardless, the only one trying to twist things seems to be you because once again, you are trying to draw attention away from the main argument which is that the PRCs actions were imperialist.
Even if the slave owner claim was correct, that wouldn’t negate the other events and imperialist actions I listed. However, because you can’t refute those claims you instead chose to default to ad hominem, trying to attack me or my reliability rather than the evidence I listed.
When you find yourself defending literal slave owners maybe take a step back and reevaluate how you got here.
I don’t defend slave owners, but you do defend genocide. I’ll pass on taking any life from advice from someone like that.
How about China free the liberated Tibet? Oh, what’s that it was really about territorial acquisition?
I know I’m late to the party but you’re arguing with a known tankie. I would suggest block and move on. No need to read pure propaganda and lies.
By that logic, why hasn’t the US freed the confederacy?
The confederacy has essentially seized power in the US.
Sure, that only strengthens the argument that the US should have been even more “authoritarian”; prosecuted more slavers for their crimes against humanity, pay out reparations, control the narrative about the civil war (or rather, don’t allow southern states to teach it with the lies by omission).
Nobody is arguing that the USA isn’t imperialist.
Right, which begs two questions…
Why all the smoke for China when it’s obvious the US is much more so?
Do you think it would be better if we allowed the confederacy to exist? You deflected to “both sides”. What do you believe here?
Some of us have heaps of criticism for both
lol what? You were the one who initiated the whataboutism here.
I think they’re both in the right. I want to know if you think the confederacy should exist. Please elaborate
I think you mean “raises the question”.
It’s not obvious that all the smoke is for China. We get so much American politics on Lemmy that everyone else is sick of it and sets up filters. This meme in particular is about China.
No. I think if it wasn’t imperialist, the USA would’ve done a better job at Reconstruction. In case you need an obligatory condemnation, the USA has the world’s largest prison population and still practices slavery.
There are other countries that are neither imperialist nor slavers.
Tibet is free, they have representation and everything.
I do not defend genocide because there is no genocide happening right here in Xinjiang, you just refuse to believe you’ve been lied to. No investigation, no right to speak.
Tibet is not an independent country.
Neither is Ohio, what’s your point?
The blow-up cartoon figure on the right appears to be doing a shove it up your ass gesture? Lol
Seeing a KFC that serves coffee and no biscuits, and ordering what I thought was orange juice, but turned out to be piping hot orange soda made me want to leave this country.
Also durian pizza.
Chinese consoomers so progressive!
You know I haven’t personally seen ICE in my city; I guess that means there is no genocide or imperialism happening here either. Guess America isn’t imperialist after all lol
Thanks to your comment I just realized tankies are basically MAGA overseas. Both share love of dictatorships and are ultranationalists who fall heavy into the cult of personality, and also drink the koolaid just as hard as MAGA do about what the dear leader and party tells them to believe.
are you suggesting that if you do something nice for someone once, you own them forever?
I am saying you are mischaracterizing the relationship; Tibet is a part of China and her people are democratically represented as such.
must suck to be a chinese shill…
hey, how do you feel about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre?
was china just keeping everyone happy by crushing their heads with tanks?