Brought to you by the 5 eyes propaganda machine: Bullshit Broadcasting Corporation
Reminder that the CCP is a communist dictatorship.
How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
71–80 of 159 posts
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy. There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great libe…
> There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great liberator - only because of superior military power. Is it just me or the sentence also makes perfect sense if Tibet is replaced by Iraq/Afghan…
It makes perfect sense if op want a Balkanized Tibet
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy. There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great libe…
This is the general tone that Lamas justifies the Buddhism invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, Lamas liberated them, now everybody is happy. One particular Lama even assassinated Langdarma, the last King of Tibet. In fact as of today the 14th DL actively suppress native Tibetan religions like Dorje Shugden. If you think Lamas were peaceful monks, check out how many "independent states" they have invaded i…
I don't think that any lama claims what you say. The assassination if Langdarma took place 1200 years ago.
But all this is not the point - it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion. The Chinese never address things like "you invaded a country, you were killing people, putting them in prison, starving to death". Instead, they turn to arguments like: "But lamas were very bad, they were abusing ordinary people".
Of course the past system was bad and abusive. The problem is, the current system is so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it.
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
no one assumed that? The point is everyone can say whatever that person wants, including ANY journalists. Being afraid of some "government policy" is a paranoia coming from countries where the first point does not apply, projecting their own fears to others
>The point is everyone can say whatever that person wants This works fine if everybody's voice has equal weights but some have louder megaphones than others. Their voices matter disproportionately more.
Has there ever been a place or time when this wasn't true?
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> DL was a monster, killer, some demonic being aiming at the destruction of China Or he is a democratically elected peaceful spiritual leader (like a reincarnated pope) from an independent theocratic serfdom kingdom?
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy. There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great libe…
I think China would argue that it wasn't really an invasion, because Tibet had for a couple of hundred years kowtowed to the emperor, and was therefore really part of the empire.
Note that if you read the testimonies of those who escaped to India, it's hardly surprising that they are uniformly critical of the occupation. A more balanced history shows that prior to the occupation, peasants were generally the property of the landowner; a peasant needed the permission of his "owner" to get married, and that would not be granted if the intended was from another estate; and that many lives were objectively improved by the occupation.
I'm by no means a supporter of the occupation/invasion; it's been racist and kleptocratic since the beginning. But let's be clear: pre-occupation Tibet was no Shangri-La.
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#76This is coming from BBC that uses differential click-bait headlines in different countries for the same article.
The state of you, BBC. It's like as if they hired Buzzfeed journalists and started running it to the ground with clickbait garbage and tons of nonsense all from third-party sources from random social media accounts.
It should be rebranded to BuzzFeeds British Circus.
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy. There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great libe…
> There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great liberator - only because of superior military power. Is it just me or the sentence also makes perfect sense if Tibet is replaced by Iraq/Afghan…
I agree, there is very little difference between these. The invasion on Afghanistan was one of the most senseless, impulsive actions on the part of the USA: Bush desperately wanted tho show a strong reaction to 9/11 but was too stupid to do something that would have some actual positive impact and in the end made the situation worse. Also, he hasn't managed to kill Bin Laden, Obama did.
Iraq seems even worse. They admitted they invaded it on false grounds and the supposed WMDs haven't been found to this day. And it was just the beginning, because the invasion created an even greater evil, ISIS.
As for Libya, it's true that many people hated Kadafi and he was a cruel man (just like Hussein, Bin Laden and the rest of the crew), but the final result for ordinary people was a disaster. So whenever someone proposes "let's kill a dictator and al problems will disappear" for me such a person is a lunatic.
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#78Steve Bannon etc as victims of fake news??????
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy. There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great libe…
I think China would argue that it wasn't really an invasion, because Tibet had for a couple of hundred years kowtowed to the emperor, and was therefore really part of the empire. Note that if you read the testimonies of those who escaped to India, it's hardly surprising that they are uniformly critical of the occupation. A more balanced history shows that prior to the occupation, peasants were generally the property…
I cannot disagree. It was similar in Central Europe, for example in the Kingdom of Hungary the feudal system ended in 1931, some hundreds years later than in France.
On the other hand, I know several people whose lives are made worse by the occupation. There was a period of some limited freedom a few decades ago, now it seems worse. As a Westerner you can't just visit Tibet and go where you want. And when you go there, you can notice that apart from official and public situations, Tibetans will avoid any contact with you. Many of them are simply afraid of accusations of spying or collaborating with the enemy etc. They try to keep a low profile and be obedient to stay away from prison. They cannot possess objects like a picture of the DL and so on. So even though from a material point of view their lives might look better, when you talk to them, there is no happiness inside.
Re: How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the general tone that Lamas justifies the Buddhism invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, Lamas liberated them, now everybody is happy. One particular Lama even assassinated Langdarma, the last King of Tibet. In fact as of today the 14th DL actively suppress native Tibetan religions like Dorje Shugden. If you think Lamas were peaceful monks, check out how many "independent states" they have invaded i…
I don't think that any lama claims what you say. The assassination if Langdarma took place 1200 years ago. But all this is not the point - it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion. The Chinese never address things like "you invaded a country, you were killing people, putting them in prison, starving to death". Instead, they turn to arguments like: "But lamas were very bad, the…
> But all this is not the point
Why? I thought you were arguing with your colleague whether DL is good or bad?
> it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion
So yeah, Tibet was in bad shape when DL reigned. That's the whole point.
> so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it
If you look up news closely, you'd see that only privileged Lamas self-immolate.