When China holds the 2008 Olympic Game and said “one world, one dream,” what do we expect for this dream?
Schumann explained the origin of the Olympic torch:
古代希臘人在奧運舉辦前,會按宗教儀式,在奧林匹亞宙斯神廟前的祭壇上點燃火種， […]火炬手高舉火炬,一邊奔跑,一邊呼喊：停止一切戰爭,參加運動會。
火炬傳到哪，哪的戰火就熄滅了。[…]人們忘記了仇恨,忘記了戰爭,都奔向奧林匹亞參加奧林匹克運動會。
久而久之，火炬這個本來用來傳遞信號的工具，便成了和平、光明與友誼的象征。
However, Schumann said,
原本具有神聖意義的奧運聖火,卻被中國搞得像過街老鼠,
中國, 污辱了聖火。
Many Taiwanese discuss if we should boycott the Olympic torch due to China government's records of repressing human right. AW talked what is the goal for China government to hold the Olympic Game：
舉辦奧運變成了中共向全世界展示其「合法性」[…]當奧運場上人們盡情歡呼的時候，在中共黑暗的監獄裡，可能良心犯們正在被折磨得痛苦的呻吟；當西方政要在開幕式上給予中共足夠面子用來貼金的時候，中共正下定決心一定要把共產黨獨裁專制永遠延續下去。
Door and window discussed who should take the responsibility for letting the Olympic torch be tarnished?
世界各國的領袖…..才是讓聖火蒙塵的主因…..
平日以民主自傲的國家那去了???
以自由為榮的國家哪去了???
自稱世界警察的傢伙呢….是癱瘓了嗎???
也好….讓全世界看清楚….
道德的糖衣….在強權面前….全都瓦解殆盡….
Where are the countries proud to be democratic?
Where are the countries proud to be free?
Where are the countries called as world police? Are they paralyzed?
That's fine. We can see how their sweet cover of morality diminishes before powerful autocracy.
doctor61 is surprised by how this Olympic torch is being relayed:
一個國家辦奧運，搞到要動員海外學生華人保護聖火，甚至由中國主動派安全人員出國保護，實在也是創舉了。
On the other hand, many people are surprised by how people supporting Tibet can evoke the boycott of the Olympic torch. forumvisitor commented,
圖博人在海外的人數應該沒台灣人數多，可是他們能爭取到的國際友人的聲援能量, 我自己覺得真的很驚人。我覺得我們要好好學習, 至少要盡量幫忙保護這個可能的盟友。
Door and window supported the boycott:
奧運聖火的繞境…幾天看下來…
真的有不少感慨…..
中國鎮壓西藏的當時….抵制聖火的言論根本聽不到…..
新加坡甚至….變相支持…挖勒…
但….幸好正義沒有完全消失….
支持人權的民眾站出來之後….
各國也紛紛表態不參加開幕式…..
唉…..人民若不以行動發聲…..就真的沒聲音了……
When China government was repressing Tibet, we did not hear a thing about boycotting the Olympic torch.
Singapore was even supporting China government's action. Sigh.
However, justice does not disappear.
After people supporting human right come forward, many leaders said they will not go to the Olympic opening ceremony.
Sigh. If we do not voice through our action, there is no voice.
mobobeijing2008 thought Taiwan should join the boycott:
台灣長期遭受中國武力的威嚇[…]在2008北京奧運舉辦之前，大家應掌握這個關鍵時刻，共同參與跨國界的抵制行動[…]呼籲中國，不應「右手舉聖火、左手抓飛彈」[…]而應該公開承諾，放棄以武力解 決台灣問題。
When the boycott becomes a serious matter to China, China government asks people not to mix politics and athletics. However, this request does not sell.
johnnio said,
中國過去有幾年都因為政治問題不參加奧運，現在反而喊很大聲，要政治歸政治，體育歸體育。中國人的雙重標準果然博大精深 。
no justice argued,
政治歸政治？ 那台灣要加入世界衛生組織, 非政治機構, 他們在哭夭什麼？
Boycott of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Game is not only a political issue. It is about what dream people all over the world want to share with each other.
“The Communist Party of China plans to exhibit its legitimacy (to be in power) by holding the Olympic Game.[…] When people cheer in the athletic field, the human right activists are probably suffering in the prisons. When the western political leaders show their respect for China government in the opening ceremony, the Communist Party of China is determined to rule China forever.”———————————————————太可笑了！我们自己生活在中国大陆的人都没有感觉到自己的人权受到什么限制，你们整天瞎什么心啊？过好自己的日子吧，别整天眼睛盯着别人的“苦难”，装作一副“救世主”的样子！
允许分裂一个国家就表明有人权？ 那法国为何不允许科西嘉岛独立？加拿大为何不让魁北克省独立？英国为何不让北爱尔兰独立？ 如果夏威夷要独立出美国，你们认为美国政府会让他们夏威夷来个全民公决决定吗？
你们了解西藏的历史吗？它什么时候可曾是一个独立的国家过？3.14事件那些闹独立的如果不烧杀抢平民，军队会镇压么？ 这叫国家利益至上！懂吗？ 美国可以攻打伊拉克、狂袭利比亚、轰炸南联盟、进军海地、进军巴拿马、入侵阿富汗，已经打遍五大洲了，中国对西藏还仅仅是平息分裂分子，为什么就不能呢？
台湾自古就是中国的领土，台湾是毛泽东和蒋介石解放战争内战的后遗症，想独立成为一个国家，那可是13亿人民不可能答应的事情！ 因为台湾属于中国，最符合中国的国家利益！就这么简单。
我想问，台湾假设真的独立对自己的好处究竟在哪里？ 不要鼠目寸光，中国的强大只是迟早的问题，30年左右的时间，中国的整体经济实力将完全和美国一样，不管你们想不想看到，它将都成为事实。到时候，一个小小的台湾，别说大陆对你动武，就是仅凭经济封锁，就可以让你死的很难看！一个包括台湾在内的强大的大中国对你们台湾百姓有什么不好？ 一个弹丸之地，即使成为一个国家也只能永远做大国的低三下四的附庸而已，那样的国家有自尊吗？你以为美国永远有和中国抗衡的实力来袒护你？当美国发现和中国为台湾斗争损失很大，不符合自己的国家利益时，它会主动放弃台湾这颗棋子的。明白吗？
不要标榜你们的什么“自由选举权”了，首先，世界上不是任何人都和你一样只热衷于政治。比如许多女性，就只喜欢看电视剧，属于两耳不闻窗外事类型的，只要物质生活富裕，拥有爱情，根本不管谁在统治这个国家；其次，就是在公民投票决定国家领导人的民主国家，上台者的得票率一般也仅为50-60%而已，这还不意味着这个国家另有一半人对当前的政府不满吗？最新的民意调查布什的满意度仅为32%，也就是说目前有68%的百姓都对他不满，这不比中国的共产党的满意度高吧？
That’s some serious whinging… Keep it coming you guys:)
You probably didn’t bother to work out that the Chinese government did NOT “mobilise” the Chinese students overseas. You only say so because it fits your stereotype and reckon that it serves your course of some smearing…
I’ve never seen a more pathetic bunch, seriously.
I think Taiwan should stop whining about China. I wish Taiwan stops trying to be a cute poodle of the U.S. If you can not appreciate the olympics, stay home and behind your closed curtains!
I just wonder why are you misunderstanding China?!
>>
It is the first time that the country that holds an Olympic Game needs to mobilize oversea Chinese and their “safe guards” to “protect” the Olympic torch.
———–
How ridiculous!
may be some of you couldn’t imagine the chinese love their motherland so much!
but, it is the truth!
And China is NOT the first host nation to send security personnels to protect the torch, we are only doing so to keep with practices of past Olympic games.
Really, being ignorant is not your fault, but it’s your fault to show off your ignorance everywhere.
Why the same group keep plaguing the torch relay?
Why the same group keep insulting the Chinese people?
Why the same group keep focusing the issues in China?
Why the same group do not go to IRAQ to ask for the profits for the people there!
Why the same group keep confusing people by lying!
Do you really think,using your own mind,How the hell is going on!
My dear Chinese friends,
First, if you agree that “oversea Chinese” should take the responsibility of the attack of peaceful Japanese protesters in Malaysia and the attack of Wang Qianyuan who studies in Duke University, I agree that the Communist Party of China did not “mobilize” Chinese to do these attacks–I am flexible about who should take the responsibility.
Second, if China is not the first country sending its “safe guards” to protect the Olympic torch, these “security personnels” should be the first ones to be rejected by so many countries, and they are definitely the first ones to be called as thugs (in UK) due to their behaviors.
Third, if you simplified all the protesters as “anti-Chinese” or “ZB,” these protesters did come from the same group. However, they are from different groups: Free Tibet campaign, Stop Genocide in Durfur, Taiwan, Free Burma, Reporters sans frontières, Human Right groups, and so on. These people are not anti-Chinese, and they hope that this Olympic Game can keep Olympic spirits–all human beings should have their freedom and live without fear.
Last but not least, before you leave your message here, please think about what is the dream you want to share with others in this Olympic Game.
I disagree the boycott the Olympic Game in china. The game belongs to the people in the world. As one member in this global family, china has the right to host the game.
However, i disagree CPC is using hosting a game as an evidence to boast its accomplishment. Chinese people does not deserve to be fooled by CPC.
recently, oversea chinese is motivated to support the torch relay. however, such goodwill is manipulated by the CPC as a tool to bargain with wesern country. The reason We support the torch realy is because we love china.
It is doubeless that Taiwan will unite with mainland china. New taiwan leader will be a catalyst to accelearate the process, which was paused in last eight years. The unite will help Mainland china become a democratic country. As a trade off,CPC will accpet Guo ming party as an equal party in the central government.
“I agree that the Communist Party of China did not “mobilize” Chinese to do these attacks–I am flexible about who should take the responsibility”
Oh?! It was the Chinese consulate in LA that brought Chinese immigrants by bus from LA to SF to “support” the Terror Torch on its Parade of Suffering.
Taiwan should not allow the torch because if it accepts a torch run, it would acknowledge Beijing’s claims to that independent nation.
nanheyangrouchuan:
First of all, Chinese consolate is in SF, not in LA.
Secondly, I was there for the torch run. I live in Silicon Valley, and I saw a ton of people going there without any urging; and we far outnumbered the protesters. There were people there from the east coast who timed their vacation just try to cheer the torch on. I doubt the Tibetans were going to be able to do anything if the torch were to proceed according to the original plan.
As for Taiwan’s position, Taiwan is already irrevelant in terms of a political/military entity. It will be irrelevant economically if it seeks to distance itself from China. The failed policies of Chen forshadow this.
“Matt Y”, I have told by a friend that several of their Chinese students were called away, by the local embassy, to “protect the flame”, thus quoting:
“because they were summoned to join other Chinese residents here to “help guide” (read: protect) the torch on Sunday… It’s not a voluntary thing for them.”
U know what , TAIWAN should not be so sensitive to the torch relay, because it does not mean anything.
Taiwan is on the trail of being integrated by china. Do not say NO. GUO MING PARTY, the current ruling party , does not have pure heritage in TAIWAN island. it was originated from CHINA MAINLAND. In its core, returning china is its dream.
oops my mistake
There is a consolate in LA…so much for my knowledge of where I can go to get a visa :P
Steven Chang made some points that others may find interesting, so I thought I’d share them in English:
“Too laughable! We living here on the Mainland never feel as if our human rights have been limited, what are you going on about all day, huh? Mind your own business and don’t gawk at other people’s “hardships”, and act like you’re “world saviors”!
Approving of splitting up a nation, would that show that we have human rights? And France, why don’t they approve of Corsican independence? Why doesn’t Canada allow Quebecois independence? Why doesn’t England approve of Northern Ireland’s independence? If Hawaii declared independence from the US, do you think the US government would hold a referendum to decide?
Do you understand Tibetan history? When was it an independent nation? In the 3/14 incident, those making noise about independence, if they didn’t burn to death or shoot average people, would the army put them down? This is called national security! Get it? The US can attack Iraq, arrogantly attack Libya, bomb Yugoslavia, go into Haiti, go into Panama, invade Afghanistan, they’ve already attacked all five continents– China and Tibet is only putting down separatists, why can’t we do that?
Taiwan has itself always maintained that it is a part of China, Taiwan is a symptom of the civil war between Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek; if you’re thinking about becoming and independent nation, well, that’s something 1.3 billion people won’t allow! Because Taiwan belongs to China, it’s a matter of China’s national interest. It’s just that simple.
I would like to ask, if Taiwan really were independent, where would your benefit ultimately lie? Well, it’s right under your nose- China’s greatness is only a matter of time- in about 30 years’ time, China’s overall economic strength will be the same as the US’ and it doesn’t matter whether you like it or not, it’s just going to be a matter of fact. Until then, tiny little Taiwan, don’t talk about the Mainland using force when even an economic blockade would make you die an ugly death! How would a strong China with Taiwan as a part of it be bad for your people? A bullet’s worth of land, if you were to become a nation, you would only always be a third or fourth-rate dependency and that’s it- does that kind of country have any self respect? Will you always have the strength to contend with US and Chinese power to shield yourselves? When the US discovers how big its losses would be in a China-Taiwan battle, don’t tally with its own national interests, it will give up this pawn. Got it?
Don’t advertise your so-called “free elections”; first, in the whole world there’s nobody that mourns the government more than you. For example, many women, only like to watch TV series, the shitty types who don’t know anything about the world outside, only want a material existence and wealth, only have love, basically don’t care who’s in control of the country; and second, only a country that decides its leaders by popular vote with a participation rate of only 50-60%, doesn’t this mean that only half of the people were unhappy with the country’s previous government? In the latest poll, Bush’s popularity rating was only 32%, also at present 68% are dissatisfied with him– this isn’t as high as the Chinese Communist Party’s approval rating?”
In response to Stephen Chang`s points (btw, who`s Stephen Chang?):
I`m afraid that we live in a globalized society. You and like-minded people are going to have to learn to deal with the criticism any super power has to endure. And the overly simplistic, `Mind your own business` retort is more than just a little bit old by now, isn`t it? Can we really just mind our own business when we see what`s happening in places like Darfur, Palestine, Burma and beyond?
I know little about separatist sentiments in France or Ireland, but as a Canadian I might remind you all that the Quebecois separatists have been granted two opportunities to hold referendums on their sovereignty, both of which they lost. Furthermore, their linguistic and cultural rights are held above those of the majority, Anglophones, (speaking in terms of the country as a whole) in Quebec. Furthermore, Quebec was seeded to the British when the French were defeated in the 1800s. They were granted the right to a referendum after not signing out latest constitution, as is legal under our constitution. Where does such a similar agreement exist between the PRC and the government of Tibet?
If the debate surrounding Taiwan and Tibet was `just that simple` as was written in Chang`s response, would there be any reason for debate in the first place? If Taiwan is so culturally and economically insignificant, let the people put it to a referendum as to whether they wish to rejoin the PRC or continue on their way as an independent nation.
What SOME Chinese fail to understand is that while perhaps Taiwan, Tibet and other break-away states would fair far worse economically were they to be independent nations, why shouldn`t they be given the right to choose themselves? Democratically? Sure, there`s apathy in democratic countries. But people are given the freedom to choose a party, or the freedom to not vote at all. They have the freedom to watch politics, or to sit at home and watch soap operas. Who are we to tell individuals how to run their lives?
What always puzzle me is that foreigners, and chineses in Taiwan all seem to want to save Chinese people in mainland from a totalitarian country, and they want to be the savior like the heros in American films. In fact, if you don’t cry Down XXX in Tian’an Men square, you won’t be put into prison. And why would we do it if we are generally satisfying with it although there are many problems with it?
@Kneecap
hm, what about what’s happening in Iraq? Why don’t you take into your argument? Clearly you support the Americans!
Why is it that the discussion about China on Global Voices has switched almost completely to this? I’m assuming it is just a reflection of current netizen sentiments, but it bothers me to see that constructive discussion and contemplation has been cast to the wayside in favor of blind, frothing nationalism.
Kneecap
As you said “Who are we to tell individuals how to run their lives?”
Good point! Did you notice that majority of Chinese netizans are supporting the one China which includes Tibet and Taiwan.
There is a fundamental cultural difference between western and Chinese. China is a country with thousands years of history of unification. It was big and small and big and small….in the history. In the end, it did not break like Europe or India. There is a strong dignified value and belief in Chinese culture.
Are you telling them to change their belief and culture just as YOURS? Otherwise, it needs to be punished and condemned?
For the same logic, you might accuse China of changing the culture of Tibet.
Sorry, Sir, I really could not see the consistent logic in your mentality.
Can you check your logic again?
Talking about africa and middle east, I thought they are heavily engaged by western forces for years (about a hundred years?), have they ever gotten rich and stopped killing?
@Joe Flynn
I would much rather talk about things such as consumer prices in China, the nonpolitical aspects of Olympics in China, the collapse of the Chinese stock market recently, etc. but it seems United States Media at least are focused on Tibet and such.
If we discover rest of the world is focused on trying to get Hawaii independant, how would we react?
I’d like to point out that last year when Denver hosted the 2007 Junior Olympics, nobody linked it to politics like Iraq occupation, Guantanamo Bay, CIA tortur/extrordinary rendition, occupation of Native American land, etc.
Where was y’all’s boiling blood then? What happened to Free Native America? What happened to our own transgressions?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080425/ap_on_re_us/police_shooting
American police alloed to shoot African Americans and let go!
I have a question that perhaps someone here can answer for me? If so, I would be grateful.
From my understanding of Chinese history, I know that Tibet has been a part of China from *at least* the Qing beginning in 1644. I also know that the Great Qing Empire was the largest dynasty in Chinese history, and extended to Mongolia and past the Amur River to the seas of Japan and Okhotsk (commonly referred to as “Manchuria”). Mongolia as part of China dates to *at least* the Yuan dynasty (1271).
How is it that the Mongolia got it’s independence in 1911? And why let the Russians get Manchuria after the Japanese puppet state Manchukuo fell at the end of WWII?
I know Outer Manchuria was ceded to the Russians by the Aigun Treaty (瑷珲条约) but isn’t that one of the Unequal Treaties (such as gave HK to the British) that the PRC opposes so strongly? Why not fight this one, too?
The Guomindang in Taiwan still claims these territories, if I’m not mistaken, so the logic there is consistent. Why then does the PRC not insist that Manchuria and Mongolia are still a part of China? I’ve always been curious about this, so any information you can share would be very welcome.
Thanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China-Mongolia_relations
Qrs, please check the wikipedia for the questions about Mongolia.
In short, it was recognized by Republic of China in 1946 but withdrawn after retreating to Taiwan.
I assume you know PRC took over in 1949.
@QRS:
My limited read of history suggests:
Outer Mongolia was able to formerly declare independance and the soviets were able to formally take outer manchuria because the Russian army was poised to back up those claims. Outer Mongolia was also recongized formerly I believe in the world body of that time. No one is going to back up Tibetan’s claim of independence with an army, then or now.
That is just cold reality, no matter what side you are on.
Also a couple of corrections: HK was leased out for 99 years. There was no if or buts on whether UK is going to give HK back or not. Also, greater part what was then Manchuria is still in China’s hands.
I do welcome others who will have better insights to add or correct what I stated above.
R. Elgin:
“Matt Y”, I have told by a friend that several of their Chinese students were called away, by the local embassy, to “protect the flame”, thus quoting:
“because they were summoned to join other Chinese residents here to “help guide” (read: protect) the torch on Sunday… It’s not a voluntary thing for them.”
===========================
Well, I’d like to make 3 points here…
Firstly, I guess you meant to say “I was told by…” instead of “I have told by…”. It, nevertheless, puzzled me a bit. I thought I was going to communicate with some educated people here… NO?
Secondly, who’s that friend? What does s/he do? What gives him/her the previlige to get access to such info? How can s/he be trusted as a credible source of info?
Thirdly, I’d like to make a concession about the point above - even if what your friend said was totally true - how representative is that amongst the vast majority of the Chinese students who partook the pro-China demonstration?
OK, time for a bit enlightment, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen~
In Chinese, the word “republic” is “共和国(gong he guo)”, which can be literally translated into English as “a COUNTRY where people (of different origins, social classes, etc) PEACEFULLY stay TOGETHER. While “res publica” in Latin may have contributed to the western version of its idea, the Chinese culture takes the word as a concept that emphasises the elaborate balance of rights, powers and obligations in a country of different groups, which can be classified by ethnic, economical, social, occupational criterions and so on.
Sun Yat-sen, the founding father of the Chinese KMT(Nationalist Party), originally sought to drive the Manchus out of “China” with his revolutionary campaigns because the last dynasty, Qing, was a Manchu regime. He, nevertheless, later came to terms with the fact that it was the history that had made the “China” we know of today a place where “Hans, Manchus, Mongols, Muslims, and Tibetans” shared her glorious cultural reserves and forged brotherly bonds.
Not without slight dissent, he accepted the “five-colour flag” as the national flag of the Republic of China after 1911, with each colour on the flag representing an ethnic group. It is, however, noticeable that Dr. Sun preferred the “flag of the white sun in the blue sky” because it is the symbol of the Chinese KMT.
This idea or concept of “the republic of the 5 ethnic groups” actually originated before Sun Yat-sen’s revolution back in the Qing era. It became more known and accepted by the general public after the democratic revolution led by Dr. Sun.
Tibetan and Mongolian rulers did not dissent from this idea as they needed financial aids from the government of the Republic of China even after the revolution that saw the end of the Qing Dynasty.
Later, the CPC found the PRC. Back then they thought the support from the U.S.S.R. was necessary so of course the unequal treaties were not mentioned any more. Usually communists back then were supposed to be internationalists, rather than nationalists, which didn’t help the cause, of course, to claim the already lost territories.
The CPC also got the work of “ethnic group identification” under way after the PRC was founded. I personally wouldn’t think it’s a very wise move but it did happen, and as a result 56 ethnic groups were identified.
But now that all these groups have been together in the same boundary for so long, most people from all groups have come to terms with the fact that WE ARE ALL CHINESE. I personally have 75% Han ancestry and 25% Turkic ancestry - sometimes outsiders think I don’t look Chinese enough to them but that’s only because their concept of the word “Chinese” is wrong. And I always tell them, half jokingly and half seriously, that I’m “made in China”. The Chinese, I guess especially the ones originally from the western provinces like me, are not racists and have always understood the meaning of “multiculturalism”, so to speak.
Finally, it’s also worth mentioning that the KMT founded by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, was just elected into power in Taiwan, with Dr. Ma Ying-jeou as the president elect.
“Matt Y”, sorry about my typos! My friend is a university professor, with years of experience, otherwise, I would not consider his comment worth mentioning. The man knows of this since these people were his students. I also know the man has no political agenda other than enjoying hiking. I keep his name out of this blog out of respect for his position and the concern for harassment that is possible.
Review the current articles in the NY Times about what happened in Seoul and also http://www.rjkoehler.com for threads on it. This was a politically orchestrated event. There are links to photos therein as well.
谈判的天平正往Chinese GOV方面倾斜,
海外华人越愤怒,dalai的筹码越少
[...] GVO I-Fan 的文章〈What Is The Dream We Have In The Olympic Game?〉引起的回應裡，一位中國朋友 Steven Chang 甚至說： [...]
“R. Elgin”, OK, let’s leave the credibility issue of your professor friend as it is.
As to the S. Korean media, I don’t think they are in a good position to pick on the so-called Chinese nationalism.
I simply don’t believe that as a nation who shamelessly and unscrupulously claim many Chinese historical heritages as their own, AND teach their kids distorted history about the territories of their ancient empires, the S. Koreans stand in a justifiable position to comment on the “Chinese nationalism”.
If you bother to check the Chinese blogosphere, you will find that nowadays amongst our neighbours Japan is becoming more and more welcomed as a country. They do still have a few cheeseheads running around inciting hatred but the general public there are getting much more reasonable. Whereas the Koreans are just never taken seriously as to what they say/do. They are just a joke, most of the time.
I’m now in Shanghai. We have lots of S. Korean students here in my uni, which is nationally prestiged. They are always the noisiest, the most unscrupulous and the most unpopular ones here.
If somebody, during the demonstration in Seoul, broke the law of S. Korea, they should be subjected to the local court of justice. The so-called riot started all because some people from either the pro-Tibet group or the pro-N.Korea Runaway group started the flame and physically challenged some Chinese students.
Speculations here don’t help, not at all.
>HK was leased out for 99 years.
Nope, the New Territories were leased out for 99 years. Hong Kong Island was ceded “in perpetuity”.
plus4chan is a pretender to be Chinese, he’s not! He’s one of Bush and Pelosi’s puppets!
and knights,ur chinese freind and wei are puppets of the CPP
if knights is allowed to say plus4chan is a “pretender” , than it works both ways. i see three people on this site who are always saying the same old tired argument about how the world is picking on china. they are knights, wei and ur chinese freind. why do they keep coming back to make sure they have the last word? i think they are speaking for the CPP. it is so obvious!
LOL Eugene…It’s no fun if you have to make a second post explaining yourself :)
It is interesting I made the list ;) The people who debate with me on Chinese sites are going to have a great laugh about your post as I am just about as CCP hostile as one can get.
This is the point that you guys missed completely…In this Olympic/Tibet issue, a majority of ordinary Chinese are well represented, wether they like CCP or not. The typical “we are not anti government but not anti Chinese people” argument is a failed tag line. A majority of Chinese do not want a quarter of their territory be carved out and lost because a deposed “living god” decides to play western politics.
To all the dear Chinese friends,
It’s our great honor to have you join this interesting discussion. It would be even greater if you can provide evidence when you make a claim about “the majority of Chinese.” Thanks.
By the way, since we discuss anonymously here, it would be funny to say someone is a “pretender” based only on imagination.
Ifan…
What I wrote in reply to your similar post on other thread:
As far as going against the majority of the Chinese people, this is a feeling, the same as you don’t need the polls to tell you that Bush is unpopular in US. You or the well meaning people may choose to not believe this and still believe these protests are levied only against the CCP and not against the people of China; that is your choice; but ignoring that does no good for whatever goals you might want to reach. All my friends who were protesting against the Chinese government in 1989 are entirely on the side of promoting Olympics this time; some of them I know who have terrible things done to them by the CCP in the past. That says a lot.
Thanks for the info, Wei.
I did not question a specific point, but for our general discussion. If anyone wants to say something, he or she speaks for him/her-self, but if someone wants to say “the majority,” it’s better to provide proof for other people to think about the situation.
If you want to discuss a specific case like the protests in several countries, I agree there were many Chinese supporting these activities due to patriotism, and this is why I wrote another report about some Chinese reflecting the patriotism we saw in these activities.
I like the title of this Blog ” what is the dream we have in the Olympic games ?” by I-fan rather “China: Curse of the Olympic mascots? ” by JK, which is meaningless to me.
May all the positive and good dreams come True, keep up with good dreams !!!!
One good dream - one free world?
Any good dream will do, freedom & human right :-)
“One good dream - one free world?”
Yes, one free world from Iraq war, one free world from master-slave serfdom system (let me clarify it’s the old tibet system just in case you are ignorant), one free world from CNN media distortion, one free world from western oppression. . . one free olympic from sabatage . . . . one free society/world from prejudice against handicap people (hint: paris incident)
shall I go on?
knights,
I really like your idea, …:-) :-)especially the idea of using “prawn”, it suit my taste ..ha ha
Olympic flame
The Olympic flame is “The light of knowledge, life and spirit and symbolises the handing down from generation to generation”. The Olympic flame, which symbolises the endeavor to perfection and struggle for victory, was first introduced to the Olympic Games in Amsterdam in 1928. The first Olympic Torch Relay was organised and run in Berlin in 1936.
Originally the suggestion of the Germans, Theodore Lewald, a torch is lit at Olympia in Greece, the home of the Ancient Olympics, and then carried by relay to the host city. The last runner, carrying the torch, runs into the main stadium at the time of the Opening Ceremony. The Olympic flame is then lit and allowed to burn throughout the Games until it is extinguished during the Closing Ceremony.
Olympic Motto
The Olympic motto Citius, Altius, Fortius, expresses the message which the IOC addresses to all who belong to the Olympic Movement, inviting them to excel in accordance with the Olympic spirit.
Citius, Altius, Fortius, which is Latin for faster, higher, stronger, was devised by a teacher friend of de Coubertin, a Dominican monk, Father Henri Didon.
The aims of the Olympic Movement area:
To promote the development of those physical and moral qualities which are the basis of sport
To educate young people through sport in a spirit of better understanding between each other, and of friendship, thereby helping to build a better and more peaceful world
To spread the Olympic principles throughout the world, thereby creating international goodwill
To bring together athletes of the world in the great four-yearly sports festival, the Olympic Games.
One of the major aims of the Olympism is “to improve the human race, not only physically, but to give it a greater nobility of spirit, and to strengthen understanding and friendship amongst peoples.”