Our world is grey, many world affairs or national affairs are grey. There is no such simplistic view of we are all good and they are all bad in many matters. The latest situation in Tibet is one such matter. CCP has its own agenda, Dalai Lama has his own agenda, more government or NGOs have they own agenda. I think the worse thing that happened in this situation, other those the loss of life, the injured, the destruction of properties, is the tight control of access for fact findings. Reports are kept out, internet was blocked etc. I think it is not good to suppress the fact from coming out, regardless what would be leaked out are in favor of either side. Cos, only when unfiltered facts are coming out, objective analysis can then begin, so people can my judgment on what is right or wrong on both sides.
It is 2008, not 1989. Leadership has changed twice and the world is getting globalized. For an emerging power, it should have the gut to face the music, regardless whether it is music to the ear or not. Only then, it can develop into more matured and long-lasting power that can handle both internal and external challenges.
I’m a not a very strong believer in nation and borders. Rather, I would more concern on humanity issues, well-being of human being as a whole. Cos, nations, regime, government, political systems, and national borders have been changing through time as a result of war and peace. Whether an area is independent or not doesn’t interest me that much. I think it is more important is the answer whether the people who leave there feel that they are/will be better off now then before. As long as people are provided with a safe and good environment to live and grow, that’s what I think really matter. It applies to election, or revolution anywhere. I don’t care if it is Tibet, the ‘Green’ vs the ‘Blue’ in Taiwan election, Obama vs Hillary vs John, etc.
Certainly, there is a lot of arguments on what/when/where/why/how people are/will be better off now then before. Regardless, I don’t see why they can’t be discussed thoroughly, fact-finding can be done openly, and reaching agreements or getting problem resolved methodically.
It is 2008, not 1989. Leadership has changed twice and the world is getting globalized. For an emerging power, it should have the gut to face the music, regardless whether it is music to the ear or not. Only then, it can develop into more matured and long-lasting power that can handle both internal and external challenges.
I’m a not a very strong believer in nation and borders. Rather, I would more concern on humanity issues, well-being of human being as a whole. Cos, nations, regime, government, political systems, and national borders have been changing through time as a result of war and peace. Whether an area is independent or not doesn’t interest me that much. I think it is more important is the answer whether the people who leave there feel that they are/will be better off now then before. As long as people are provided with a safe and good environment to live and grow, that’s what I think really matter. It applies to election, or revolution anywhere. I don’t care if it is Tibet, the ‘Green’ vs the ‘Blue’ in Taiwan election, Obama vs Hillary vs John, etc.
Certainly, there is a lot of arguments on what/when/where/why/how people are/will be better off now then before. Regardless, I don’t see why they can’t be discussed thoroughly, fact-finding can be done openly, and reaching agreements or getting problem resolved methodically.
No comments:
Post a Comment