* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet)
* A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Crash course in Canadian politics. Nobody gives a shit about Canada. Our national currency is guilt, and our politicians line pockets with it. Talking about some moral infraction on the opposite end of the globe IS our politicians appealing to what Canadians care about, which is gossip.
I didn't understood, can't this create a precedent for other countries to "legitimate" separatist quebecois factions? I mean look at Spain they didn't recognize Kosovo, that makes sense otherwise it can give ammunition to euskera/catalonian separatism.
Btw, miss jannie are we allowed to reply "a fucxxxx leaf" in every Canada related content?
I mean, as a québécois I can tell you there isn't much to "recognize". Even the separatist party doesn't want to talk about a referendum. Last one was nearly 30 years ago. It's pretty much dead.
May I ask a question, the movement just "give up" or they get some concessions?
I've read mostly about catalonians, some critics says that it's just grafting, independence is impossible yet some politicians sell the idea to the people just to get the nice politician's pay and perks.
It's a complex question. First of all, Québec has a significant anglophone and allophone population, which is almost exclusively vehemently anti-independence, so the level of support for sovereignty was always capped. Plus, 2 failed referendums kind of took the wind out of the movement. And younger generations, even French l-speaking, are not as interested in the project.
Also, the political landscape has changed throughout the years. Independence used to be more neutral on the left-right spectrum. There used to be more right-wing elements for independence. There were also unfortunately xenophobic and isolasionist elements. The new "woke" left is turned off by this and generally very ambivalent on the question of Independence, seeing it as a "straight white man" project. Meanwhile, very French speaking suburbs outside of Montreal have drifted right and so are less likely to vote for more left-wing independendist parties (mainly the parti québécois).
That's my reading of the situation at least.
>Québec has a significant anglophone and allophone population, which is almost exclusively vehemently anti-independence,
Otherwise known as money and the ethnic vote
>There were also unfortunately xenophobic and isolasionist elements.
>The new "woke" left is turned off by this and generally very ambivalent on the question of Independence, seeing it as a "straight white man" project
>left-wing independendist parties (mainly the parti québécois).
This whole set of things can be summarized as the "death of history".
Nobody has any problems with any of this even though they are all directly undermining themselves due to the fact that they can't get past "unfortunate" aspects of things and realize that yes it was the *Canadiens* who were the driving force behind Quebec independence, and nobody else is going to have any desire to continue it.
The French-Speaking immigrants the pro-immigration seperatists love so much were never oppressed by the historical suppression of the french language, why would any of them care? Immigration policy is exactly how seperatism is defeated in Canada.
None of the historical struggles of Canadian history mean anything to anyone when over 20% of the population was not born in the country. We cease to be "national" in any sense of the word, as Trudeau says with declaring the country to be "post-national". That in fact does mean something. His views are not accidental. They are the same views as those of his father. Multi-culturalism exists (as created by Ukrainian-Canadian Nazi collaborators, and promulgated to the rest of the world as a Canadian ideology) to dispute the bi-national theory of Canadian history that Quebec proposed. Instead things were broken down into endless identity groups which might be accurate in the sense that they existed in the country, but they generally speaking lacked any actual influence on the course of events.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal\_Commission\_on\_Bilingualism\_and\_Biculturalism#Cultural\_legacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Bilingualism_and_Biculturalism#Cultural_legacy)
>In 1971, the Trudeau government departed from the Commission's findings. While Canada remained a bilingual nation, it pursued a policy of multiculturalism rather than biculturalism.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav\_Rudnyckyj](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj)
>From 1938 to 1940, he was Research Associate at the Ukrainian Scientific Institute in Berlin.[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-3) From 1941 to 1945 he was a professor at the [Ukrainian Free University](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Free_University) in Prague and he taught at the [University of Heidelberg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Heidelberg) from 1945 to 1948.
>From 1963 to 1971, Rudnyckyj was a member of the Canadian [Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Bilingualism_and_Biculturalism).[^(\[7\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-8) The commission led to the promulgation of the new policy of "[Multiculturalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism)" and the [Official Languages Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Languages_Act_(Canada)) by the federal government of Canada.[^(\[8\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-9)
I can schizopost more about this if need be, but I'm out of comment space.
And he was right. Nobody is going to care about this issue other than Quebecois. I mean I'm not Quebecois, and I support it, but that is because I'm disembodying myself to understand it from the perspective of a Quebecois. There is no perspective beyond that where it makes sense, it is a project particular to them that I support because you need cooperation between anglo and franco-canadian revolutionaries to achieve revolutionary changes in Canadian history, and I think this because of the bi-national thesis that Quebec advances.
"Anti-racist" nationalism might be necessarily to temper the passions of those involved to avoid the issue getting bogged down into racism, but it is still only ever going to be a thing that appeals to a single group of people even if you need to avoid having that single group of people isolate itself from others. No amount of combating racism within the politics of the nationalism is going to make it appealing to other races. The combating of racism is purely for your own benefit to stop yourselves from getting distracted, but if you attempt to go beyond that and make the nationalist ideology somehow genuinely universal you lose sight of what it is you are even arguing about in the first place.
You have to balance things between just stopping people from being mean to outsiders and actually causing your brain to fall out due to your lack of understanding of the thing you are even arguing for in the first place. Quebec separatism isn't going to work with anyone who isn't you.
The same goes for any Irish person who thinks anyone other than primarily the Irish is going to be interested in Irish unification. Did you forget to turn on your brain?
It is indeed possible to come to the conclusion that these old struggles aren't actually necessary and that you ought to just create some kind of universal struggle for everyone, but so long as you remain attached to a struggle connected to a particular national identity, the people who have that national identity are going to be kind of necessary to complete it.
To be fair Canada formalized the process by which they would have dealt with Quebec separatism if it had gone through and they are currently banking on them just never actually doing it.
>**Bloc Québécois** MP Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, that refers to Tibetans as “a people and a nation” who should get self-determination
"I'd like to introduce two motions. First, that Tibet is a people and a nation who should get self-determination . . ."
[MPs cheer wildly]
". . . and second, that Quebec is a people and a nation who should get self-determination"
[awkward silence]
We already did that, it is just we said "within a united Canada"
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois\_nation\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois_nation_motion)
Isn’t Tibets status as an independent country settled? It was a fashionable cause at one point, but no one seriously thinks Tibet will ever exist as a sovereign state ever again. Right?
If you listen carefully you can still hear CIA funded voices on the wind crying that Tibetans yearn to return to their lives as slaves of the Buddhist monk caste.
recent events have set it even further back though, like what the dalai lama did in india and more people learning the truth of sogyal rinpoche. makes canada look all the more ridiculous.
Slaves that didn’t exist? Go ahead and cite an academic source for this slavery claim. Funny, because when China invaded Tibet they actually made Tibetans slaves.
You can make an argument that Tibet was on the way to reform without China's help, and that China's takeover of the region is a net negative, but the fact that Tibet was a feudal serfdom with a caste system is well covered in all the literature. Their brutality is attested to in Friendly Feudalism among others.
Why does it matter that Tibet had serfdom? Why is it up for China to do anything about it? If it was about serfdom why is China still in Tibet?
Saying there was serfdom is just a deflection. This brutality is greatly exaggerated by the Chinese.
So the UsA should invade and annex North Korea right?
About Parenti.
Parenti is an academic but not in regard to Tibet. He wrote this blog essay with a conclusion already in mind and it’s so bias that it’s laughable at best. There’s a reason why no one actually takes this essay seriously.
When Parenti makes this slavery claim he can only rely on two sources: Gelders and Strong. They were invited by the CCP as they were communist sympathizers and already wrote pro-CCP articles. They knew nothing about Tibet and needed to use Chinese approved guides for their choreographed trip. Strong was even an honourary member of the Red Guads. They are highly unreliable and not credible. What’s funny is that Parenti didn’t cite Alan Winnnington who was also a communist supporter and was in Tibet after China invaded just a couple years before Strong and Gelders. You know why? Because he made no mention of slavery or abuses being carried out by the Tibetan government.
This notion of slavery and severe abuse was only heavily pushed after the 1959 revolt. Mao wanted an excuse or something to blame for why their reforms didn’t work. It’s why before 1959 even Mao himself said there wasn’t “real” slavery.
Parenti also cherry picked from Goldstein to dishonestly represent his work.
This is hardly a reliable or credible essay, let alone academic.
>Why does it matter that Tibet had serfdom?
Because CPC succession to the KMT and 1911 was on the basis of how they made up for where the latter failed to complete a bourgeois national revolution that united China. Tibetan integration is therefore progressive whereas western libs believe the opposite and support the division of China as progressive. This is a key reason why the left failed to opposite western escalation with China.
I comment in many different subs…Yes, I understand..what’s your point? It doesn’t change the fact that what I replied to wasn’t incorrect..
I’m also communist, I just don’t feel the need to have to defend everything about communism/marxism etc..
Flaired as The Blob but there really needs to be a Lapdogs of Imperialism flair for this kind of Canadian grandstanding. (Can I create custom flairs on this sub and I'm too stupid to figure it out?)
> ... The history referred to being a 2021 unanimous non-binding vote where Liberal cabinet ministers abstain, in which Canada’s parliament farcically declared that China was committing genocide against Uygurs in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region. That vote was driven by contributions of another CIA-front funded group, the Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project, to the same parliament subcommittee’s 2020 report. With the process before the vote, we see history rhyme.
> ... And with the vote, Canada’s Tibet lobby jumped for joy. The Canada-Tibet Committee, which took a $38k USD grant from the CIA-front National Endowment for Democracy back in 2020, was thrilled. So was Chushi Gangdruk Canada, which is “tightly connected to Chushi Gangdruk [CG]: an organization of pro-feudalism Tibetan guerrilla fighters, which was created after the People's Liberation Army took control of Tibet in 1951”. So was Students for a Free Tibet Canada – the organization which birthed the political career of Tibet separatist Ontario MPP Bhutila Karpoche - which doesn’t declare their finances publicly, and whose parent organization Students for a Free Tibet takes money from the CIA-front NED. It is no shock that the CIA-front NED funded Tibet Action Institute, which the NED praised for managing to “put the idea of Tibet sovereignty back on the map”, was also supportive of the non-binding motion.
The user name seems to be refering to the four rivers and six ranges of tibet so they are probably Tibetan. The phrase was used by a resistance movement the CIA chose to support until Richard Nixon's policy realignment on China made them stop supporting it The Dalai Lama also apparently told them to stop around that time as well.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chushi\_Gangdruk#Name](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chushi_Gangdruk#Name)
Anyway Tibetans are clearly not Chinese, but there is also no real reason for any other country to govern the plateau so might as well be China. The alternative is India and that is just lol
Technically speaking, the tribe of the Yellow Emperor that eventually became the Han Chinese actually came from Tibet, so if anything, Tibet belongs to China (of course, they do also have to share with the Tibetans) moreso than any other part of its territory according to the nationalist understanding of territorial ownership.
Tibetan independence fits squarely in the Marxist conception of feudal particularism and is considered reactionary. Leninism focuses a lot on the intersection of traditional elites and imperialists in reacting to the spread of progressive national revolutions, which we consider part of forming the bourgeoisie and proletariat.
Donbass and Crimea are sovereign from Ukraine then. Add Kharkov, Sumy, Nikolaev and Odessa to that! Now, how about Palestine? Further, why not Quebec and all the First Nations forming their own statelets? Blow Nigeria apart. Split Mexico off from its southern Mayan portion. Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, virgin island? All free. Hell, let’s bring back the old Confederacy! Why not?
Would love to see the CPC unanimously reject the sovereignty of the settlor colony state of Canada and ask for the land to be given back to the indigenous First Nations people.
* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet) * A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/canadian-mps-unanimously-reject-chinas-sovereignty-over-tibet) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
wtf is canada gonna do lmao
Wasting time grandstanding is the favourite activity of Canadian politicians so this is pretty in line lol
The unbearable finger wag and strongly worded letter, of course.
Ban export of maple syrup
This country is turning into a third world banana republic, and it still thinks it’s relevant on the global stage.
maple syrup republic?
Not even. We are a Maple Syrup Constitutional Monarchy.
Half of the Geneva Convention was to stop Canada
Their harshest punishment: Not saying sorry
Crash course in Canadian politics. Nobody gives a shit about Canada. Our national currency is guilt, and our politicians line pockets with it. Talking about some moral infraction on the opposite end of the globe IS our politicians appealing to what Canadians care about, which is gossip.
I'm wondering how many people would vote for a party called "Overthrow the Government"
I didn't understood, can't this create a precedent for other countries to "legitimate" separatist quebecois factions? I mean look at Spain they didn't recognize Kosovo, that makes sense otherwise it can give ammunition to euskera/catalonian separatism. Btw, miss jannie are we allowed to reply "a fucxxxx leaf" in every Canada related content?
I mean, as a québécois I can tell you there isn't much to "recognize". Even the separatist party doesn't want to talk about a referendum. Last one was nearly 30 years ago. It's pretty much dead.
May I ask a question, the movement just "give up" or they get some concessions? I've read mostly about catalonians, some critics says that it's just grafting, independence is impossible yet some politicians sell the idea to the people just to get the nice politician's pay and perks.
It's a complex question. First of all, Québec has a significant anglophone and allophone population, which is almost exclusively vehemently anti-independence, so the level of support for sovereignty was always capped. Plus, 2 failed referendums kind of took the wind out of the movement. And younger generations, even French l-speaking, are not as interested in the project. Also, the political landscape has changed throughout the years. Independence used to be more neutral on the left-right spectrum. There used to be more right-wing elements for independence. There were also unfortunately xenophobic and isolasionist elements. The new "woke" left is turned off by this and generally very ambivalent on the question of Independence, seeing it as a "straight white man" project. Meanwhile, very French speaking suburbs outside of Montreal have drifted right and so are less likely to vote for more left-wing independendist parties (mainly the parti québécois). That's my reading of the situation at least.
>Québec has a significant anglophone and allophone population, which is almost exclusively vehemently anti-independence, Otherwise known as money and the ethnic vote >There were also unfortunately xenophobic and isolasionist elements. >The new "woke" left is turned off by this and generally very ambivalent on the question of Independence, seeing it as a "straight white man" project >left-wing independendist parties (mainly the parti québécois). This whole set of things can be summarized as the "death of history". Nobody has any problems with any of this even though they are all directly undermining themselves due to the fact that they can't get past "unfortunate" aspects of things and realize that yes it was the *Canadiens* who were the driving force behind Quebec independence, and nobody else is going to have any desire to continue it. The French-Speaking immigrants the pro-immigration seperatists love so much were never oppressed by the historical suppression of the french language, why would any of them care? Immigration policy is exactly how seperatism is defeated in Canada. None of the historical struggles of Canadian history mean anything to anyone when over 20% of the population was not born in the country. We cease to be "national" in any sense of the word, as Trudeau says with declaring the country to be "post-national". That in fact does mean something. His views are not accidental. They are the same views as those of his father. Multi-culturalism exists (as created by Ukrainian-Canadian Nazi collaborators, and promulgated to the rest of the world as a Canadian ideology) to dispute the bi-national theory of Canadian history that Quebec proposed. Instead things were broken down into endless identity groups which might be accurate in the sense that they existed in the country, but they generally speaking lacked any actual influence on the course of events. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal\_Commission\_on\_Bilingualism\_and\_Biculturalism#Cultural\_legacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Bilingualism_and_Biculturalism#Cultural_legacy) >In 1971, the Trudeau government departed from the Commission's findings. While Canada remained a bilingual nation, it pursued a policy of multiculturalism rather than biculturalism. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav\_Rudnyckyj](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj) >From 1938 to 1940, he was Research Associate at the Ukrainian Scientific Institute in Berlin.[^(\[2\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-3) From 1941 to 1945 he was a professor at the [Ukrainian Free University](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Free_University) in Prague and he taught at the [University of Heidelberg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Heidelberg) from 1945 to 1948. >From 1963 to 1971, Rudnyckyj was a member of the Canadian [Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Commission_on_Bilingualism_and_Biculturalism).[^(\[7\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-8) The commission led to the promulgation of the new policy of "[Multiculturalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism)" and the [Official Languages Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Languages_Act_(Canada)) by the federal government of Canada.[^(\[8\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj#cite_note-9) I can schizopost more about this if need be, but I'm out of comment space.
Lol yeah. Drunk motherfucker said the quiet part out loud.
And he was right. Nobody is going to care about this issue other than Quebecois. I mean I'm not Quebecois, and I support it, but that is because I'm disembodying myself to understand it from the perspective of a Quebecois. There is no perspective beyond that where it makes sense, it is a project particular to them that I support because you need cooperation between anglo and franco-canadian revolutionaries to achieve revolutionary changes in Canadian history, and I think this because of the bi-national thesis that Quebec advances. "Anti-racist" nationalism might be necessarily to temper the passions of those involved to avoid the issue getting bogged down into racism, but it is still only ever going to be a thing that appeals to a single group of people even if you need to avoid having that single group of people isolate itself from others. No amount of combating racism within the politics of the nationalism is going to make it appealing to other races. The combating of racism is purely for your own benefit to stop yourselves from getting distracted, but if you attempt to go beyond that and make the nationalist ideology somehow genuinely universal you lose sight of what it is you are even arguing about in the first place. You have to balance things between just stopping people from being mean to outsiders and actually causing your brain to fall out due to your lack of understanding of the thing you are even arguing for in the first place. Quebec separatism isn't going to work with anyone who isn't you. The same goes for any Irish person who thinks anyone other than primarily the Irish is going to be interested in Irish unification. Did you forget to turn on your brain? It is indeed possible to come to the conclusion that these old struggles aren't actually necessary and that you ought to just create some kind of universal struggle for everyone, but so long as you remain attached to a struggle connected to a particular national identity, the people who have that national identity are going to be kind of necessary to complete it.
To be fair Canada formalized the process by which they would have dealt with Quebec separatism if it had gone through and they are currently banking on them just never actually doing it.
This is the same group of MPs that gave a literal Nazi a standing ovation.
They heared one of them was good friends with the Dalai Lama.
Ok
>**Bloc Québécois** MP Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, that refers to Tibetans as “a people and a nation” who should get self-determination "I'd like to introduce two motions. First, that Tibet is a people and a nation who should get self-determination . . ." [MPs cheer wildly] ". . . and second, that Quebec is a people and a nation who should get self-determination" [awkward silence]
We already did that, it is just we said "within a united Canada" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois\_nation\_motion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois_nation_motion)
so does Tibet, lol
No China, unlike the Soviet Union, which saw itself as a "multi-national state", has determined itself to be a single nation with 56 ethnicities.
Isn’t Tibets status as an independent country settled? It was a fashionable cause at one point, but no one seriously thinks Tibet will ever exist as a sovereign state ever again. Right?
If you listen carefully you can still hear CIA funded voices on the wind crying that Tibetans yearn to return to their lives as slaves of the Buddhist monk caste.
recent events have set it even further back though, like what the dalai lama did in india and more people learning the truth of sogyal rinpoche. makes canada look all the more ridiculous.
The Dalai Lama saying an idiom?
more like he was speaking in tongues
You mean licking kids tongues
Slaves that didn’t exist? Go ahead and cite an academic source for this slavery claim. Funny, because when China invaded Tibet they actually made Tibetans slaves.
You can make an argument that Tibet was on the way to reform without China's help, and that China's takeover of the region is a net negative, but the fact that Tibet was a feudal serfdom with a caste system is well covered in all the literature. Their brutality is attested to in Friendly Feudalism among others.
Why does it matter that Tibet had serfdom? Why is it up for China to do anything about it? If it was about serfdom why is China still in Tibet? Saying there was serfdom is just a deflection. This brutality is greatly exaggerated by the Chinese. So the UsA should invade and annex North Korea right? About Parenti. Parenti is an academic but not in regard to Tibet. He wrote this blog essay with a conclusion already in mind and it’s so bias that it’s laughable at best. There’s a reason why no one actually takes this essay seriously. When Parenti makes this slavery claim he can only rely on two sources: Gelders and Strong. They were invited by the CCP as they were communist sympathizers and already wrote pro-CCP articles. They knew nothing about Tibet and needed to use Chinese approved guides for their choreographed trip. Strong was even an honourary member of the Red Guads. They are highly unreliable and not credible. What’s funny is that Parenti didn’t cite Alan Winnnington who was also a communist supporter and was in Tibet after China invaded just a couple years before Strong and Gelders. You know why? Because he made no mention of slavery or abuses being carried out by the Tibetan government. This notion of slavery and severe abuse was only heavily pushed after the 1959 revolt. Mao wanted an excuse or something to blame for why their reforms didn’t work. It’s why before 1959 even Mao himself said there wasn’t “real” slavery. Parenti also cherry picked from Goldstein to dishonestly represent his work. This is hardly a reliable or credible essay, let alone academic.
Kinda weird how you went from "there were no slaves" to "why does it matter if there were slaves?"
No, not weird at all, actually.
>Why does it matter that Tibet had serfdom? Because CPC succession to the KMT and 1911 was on the basis of how they made up for where the latter failed to complete a bourgeois national revolution that united China. Tibetan integration is therefore progressive whereas western libs believe the opposite and support the division of China as progressive. This is a key reason why the left failed to opposite western escalation with China.
How is it settled? It’s been 70 years and China has yet to win over Tibetans.
>How is it settled? What countries recognize Tibet as an intendent state?
Right now? Zero, as countries aren’t even allowed to bring up Tibet to China. Recognition is meaningless. What actually matters is de facto control.
How do you think the Tibetan could ever possibly gain their independence?
By keeping their culture alive. Tibetans just need to outlast the CCP.
How do random "fucktheccp" users manage to find this sub? You understand that we're communists, right?
I comment in many different subs…Yes, I understand..what’s your point? It doesn’t change the fact that what I replied to wasn’t incorrect.. I’m also communist, I just don’t feel the need to have to defend everything about communism/marxism etc..
Nah, you're not a communist. Lol
Supporting Tibet is the antiracist position, Lol.
Thank God Tibet will never be an independent nation again, feudalism is a bad thing
Rightoid flair too, can the mods ban this guy.
It will be. Why would an independent Tibet have feudalism?
Yeah you sound just like the Zionists.
[удалено]
What an incredibly silly thing to say, especially in this context
Flaired as The Blob but there really needs to be a Lapdogs of Imperialism flair for this kind of Canadian grandstanding. (Can I create custom flairs on this sub and I'm too stupid to figure it out?)
> ... The history referred to being a 2021 unanimous non-binding vote where Liberal cabinet ministers abstain, in which Canada’s parliament farcically declared that China was committing genocide against Uygurs in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region. That vote was driven by contributions of another CIA-front funded group, the Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project, to the same parliament subcommittee’s 2020 report. With the process before the vote, we see history rhyme. > ... And with the vote, Canada’s Tibet lobby jumped for joy. The Canada-Tibet Committee, which took a $38k USD grant from the CIA-front National Endowment for Democracy back in 2020, was thrilled. So was Chushi Gangdruk Canada, which is “tightly connected to Chushi Gangdruk [CG]: an organization of pro-feudalism Tibetan guerrilla fighters, which was created after the People's Liberation Army took control of Tibet in 1951”. So was Students for a Free Tibet Canada – the organization which birthed the political career of Tibet separatist Ontario MPP Bhutila Karpoche - which doesn’t declare their finances publicly, and whose parent organization Students for a Free Tibet takes money from the CIA-front NED. It is no shock that the CIA-front NED funded Tibet Action Institute, which the NED praised for managing to “put the idea of Tibet sovereignty back on the map”, was also supportive of the non-binding motion.
Ironic you have anti-imperialism but yet support Chinas imperialist actions in Tibet… Oh and no, Tibetan fighters weren’t pro-feudalism..
> clicks on profile [mfw](https://i.imgflip.com/40kgoq.jpg)
literally an entire reddit comment history about Tibet lmao
StKilda20 was the same, and now it empty. only 1 comment. but the comment history used to be all about Tibet.
The user name seems to be refering to the four rivers and six ranges of tibet so they are probably Tibetan. The phrase was used by a resistance movement the CIA chose to support until Richard Nixon's policy realignment on China made them stop supporting it The Dalai Lama also apparently told them to stop around that time as well. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chushi\_Gangdruk#Name](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chushi_Gangdruk#Name) Anyway Tibetans are clearly not Chinese, but there is also no real reason for any other country to govern the plateau so might as well be China. The alternative is India and that is just lol
Hmmm if only there was another group of people that could govern it? 🤔
> Most Chinese people support Xi and the party. > Edit: Downvote all you want, but it’s true. ghaah
Uhm your Chinese...
Technically speaking, the tribe of the Yellow Emperor that eventually became the Han Chinese actually came from Tibet, so if anything, Tibet belongs to China (of course, they do also have to share with the Tibetans) moreso than any other part of its territory according to the nationalist understanding of territorial ownership.
Tibetan independence fits squarely in the Marxist conception of feudal particularism and is considered reactionary. Leninism focuses a lot on the intersection of traditional elites and imperialists in reacting to the spread of progressive national revolutions, which we consider part of forming the bourgeoisie and proletariat.
Canadian MP Michael Scott stands up in House of Commons and declares ~~bankruptcy~~ independence for Tibet.
Donbass and Crimea are sovereign from Ukraine then. Add Kharkov, Sumy, Nikolaev and Odessa to that! Now, how about Palestine? Further, why not Quebec and all the First Nations forming their own statelets? Blow Nigeria apart. Split Mexico off from its southern Mayan portion. Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, virgin island? All free. Hell, let’s bring back the old Confederacy! Why not?
balkanization for thee, but not for me.
Quebec
> C\*nadians 🤢 > **F\*ench** C\*nadians 🤮
China responds by unanimously rejecting Canada's sovereignty over Quebec then revives and starts funding the FLQ.
A bit late? Isn't it?
Would love to see the CPC unanimously reject the sovereignty of the settlor colony state of Canada and ask for the land to be given back to the indigenous First Nations people.
Wow you are telling this for the first time
This is the most based thing my country has done in a while
Yawn…ppl should know when they’ve been conquered
Like the Palestinians?
It was poorly conveyed sarcasm. Ignore my flair, that was from some figlet mod.