On Mar 14, 1:36 am, biofuelwatc...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Of course, Beijing would have to go along with first the referendum
> and plus accept its verdict for secession. Since Tibet was never
> allowed a referendum in the first place when China took over, no one
> really knows if Tibet should be free. Shouldn't the Tibetan people
> get the right to decide at some point in their history?
>
> Think of it this way, every state in the United States joined upon the
> conclusion of a referendum in the affirmative, except the original
> thirteen. OK, admittedly, Southern states tried to secede, but no
> referendums were held for secession. And the slave population would
> not have had the right to vote.
>
> Kosovo has its independence on the basis of the fact that the vast
> majority of its population wanted to secede from Serbia. Of course
> this flies in the face of centuries of precedent based on the norms of
> authoritarian regimes. But the people's will was taken into
> consideration in this case.
>
> The same should happen in Tibet. OK, agreed, Beijing, being a
> totalitarian regime, will never let such a thing happen. But the
> principle should be established throughout the world as the norm.
The problem with this is having it genuinely democratic and free...and
also the large amounts of ethnic Han settlers that have been brought
into Tibetan territory by the Chinese state. Oh by the way, nows the
time to start sabatarge of infrastructure - bridges, railways, yes
that one, etc etc etc.
|
