11 Mar 08
Originally posted by uzlessWould you be talking about the parade on an internet chess site with a global community (raising awareness of the situation in Tibet), if the parade hadn't taken place?
It's a question of what good does it do. If it doesn't do any good, then why do it?
Mutual venting of emotion at best. I guess they are just making themselves feel better by thinking they are doing something...when in reality they are just holding up signs and going for a walk.
Often protests are aimed at making the public aware that there is a problem. The parade isn't aimed at the Chinese government in the immediate term, but with more of the public aware of the situation, then public opinion (and behaviour) may sway the Chinese governments actions in the future.
D
11 Mar 08
Originally posted by SeitseI've had that experience in different states. I can only imagine what it's like in different countries.
Leaving one's nest enlightens, and a lot.
And I'm not speaking about tourist stuff, but really abandoning your birth place (where you are safe and know the unwritten social rules), and facing a complete new environment where everything is alien.
It opens the skull, as old people say.
11 Mar 08
Originally posted by uzlessI think you're wrong here. The average Joe on the street would know very little about the ongoing situation in Tibet.
I've already addressed the raising awareness answer but i'll state it again.
To raise awareness is the best answer i think, but even that is suspect because unless you live under a rock, or are 8 years old, or are such an idiot that even if you finally heard about the china/tibet issue through this protest its highly unlikely you'll ever do anything ab ...[text shortened]... way, you must have heard about this issue already.
So raising awareness is a weak answer.
Also, there are different levels of awareness. Some people might know nothing whatsoever about Tibet until they saw the parade. Others might be individually feeling aggrieved about the situation in Tibet, but not know there were others like them.
You assume that the only thing that the protestors do is that solitary march. Again, I think you're wrong. Charity organisations need people to donate their time. Protests and the exchange of information may inspire others to do just that.
D
11 Mar 08
2 edits
Originally posted by RagnorakYou are using the classic argument that for issue X, there are alot of people who don't know about issue X so they need to be informed.
I think you're wrong here. The average Joe on the street would know very little about the ongoing situation in Tibet.
Also, there are different levels of awareness. Some people might know nothing whatsoever about Tibet until they saw the parade. Others might be individually feeling aggrieved about the situation in Tibet, but not know there were others their time. Protests and the exchange of information may inspire others to do just that.
D
I wish I could find the study online but researchers basically exposed this argument as flawed when they asked Christians why they believed in god. Over 70% said it was because they felt a strong personal connection to god or that god had made real difference in their lives.
However, when asked why they thought OTHER people believed in god, over 70% said because most people use religion as a crutch in order to give meaning to their lives.
Now, these 2 stats cannot be true at the same time. The study showed that people make poor assumtions about the beliefs/motivations of other people. They just assume there are a whole bunch of idiots out there who are too stupid to do things for the right reasons.
The same, I think, is true in this issue. "Raising awareness" assumes that there are a bunch of people who aren't already "aware". Where is the evidence of this? People just assume it, without proof. As I said before, in Canada you have to either be very young, or have been living under a rock to not know about the China/Tibet issue. Newspaper, TV, print magazines, radio for years and years have talked about it. No one can be that dumb, and if they are, a parade will not spur them to action.
BTW, I didn't assume that parading was the only thing they did. I was asking what the point of parading is. I'm sure they do other more constructive things. You do raise an interesting point though. Perhaps the parade is a way to draw in people. It's like a recruiting tool! Hmm, that is interesting.
So, the parade is to get more "membership" if you will. Self serving indeed!
11 Mar 08
Originally posted by uzlessA parade doesn't just draw new people in, it also reinforces solidarity between those already committed to a cause.
BTW, I didn't assume that parading was the only thing they did. I was asking what the point of parading is. I'm sure they do other more constructive things. You do raise an interesting point though. Perhaps the parade is a way to draw in people. It's like a recruiting tool! Hmm, that is interesting.
So, the parade is to get more "membership" if you will. Self serving indeed!
It may not (or in some cases may) be an intentional effect, but a mass public demonstration inculcates a sense of belonging and purpose in the participants. An external display of solidarity has subjective effects for the demonstrators: for a while, they are among ostensibly like-minded individuals in pursuit of a common goal. In this sense, participating in a demonstration differs largely in terms of stated purpose to attending a sports fixture. If you've ever taken part in a demonstration, you'll know just the sort of camaraderie I'm talking about.
Taking what was said above in to account, it's actually more like attending a sports fixture as a fan of one of the teams (rather than simply to enjoy the game for its own sake). Insofar as the demonstration is about raising consciousness, it also reminds the demonstrators of their shared virtue, thus (again) reinforcing communality between the participants.
Of course, this might encourage participants to carry on the struggle - but don't overlook the *intrinsic* value of the above.
It's not the entire answer by any means - but I would suggest that, compared to the enormous variability of chances of 'success' for any number of public demonstrations - it remains fairly constant whatever the subject of the demonstration.
13 Mar 08
Originally posted by uzlessOf course a parade is to draw more support. I'm not sure what your clouded cynical mind finds so interesting in that. What exactly is self serving about spreading awareness of a problem and receiving support in your actions?
Perhaps the parade is a way to draw in people. It's like a recruiting tool! Hmm, that is interesting.
So, the parade is to get more "membership" if you will. Self serving indeed!
" Campaigners based outside China say protesters in Lhasa are being spurred on by rallies in other Chinese provinces and in India.
"Tibetans inside Tibet are aware that Tibetans in India are marching towards the Tibet border," said Matt Whitticase from the UK-based Free Tibet Campaign.
He said protesters in Lhasa had been "emboldened" by the support they were receiving from across the world. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7294014.stm
5 people can't take on something as powerful as the Chinese government. However, if those 5 manage to "recruit" 5 million, then the Chinese will have to start paying attention, especially if the protesters engage in other forms of protest apart from marching.
D