South Korea disease outbreak

I've not seen this reported in the English press at all. You have to go to Cattle News (!) to find out that there is a massive animal disease outbreak in South Korea, and they are only reporting it because of the impact it's having on US markets.

As things stand 16% of the entire pig and cow herds have been slaughtered (2.1 million animals). Obviously the markets think this is great because it has seen a jump in the future's markets. “The movement of animals is completely paralyzed,” said Dennis Smith, a senior account executive at Archer Financial Services Inc. in Chicago. “They basically are not producing any meat for their retail counters. They’re going to have to come to other people, primarily us.”

At the same time they are suffering a bird flu outbreak. Considering how much the press used to go wild over bird flu stories the fact this is passing them by seems perverse. The bird flu immediately prompted the authorities to cull half a million birds and we will have to see if this has contained the outbreak.

The Wall Street Journal blog reports that "people involved in the months-long containing operation are reported to be suffering from psychological damage. The National Emergency Management Agency said in a statement today it started a program to support approximately 6,500 people involved, including farmers, vaccinating and culling officials, with a psychological program."

In addition to this the outbreak may have spread to North Korea and they are currently suffering their coldest winter for some time. Not good news, but it is, I think, news which has been almost entirely ignored in the British press.

Announcement: A River of Light for Tiananmen this Thursday

Sadly I wont be able to attend this event as it's on election day in Cambridge but if you're around and have the time I'd like to encourage others to go along to support a worthy event.

A River of Light for Tiananmen

A Floating Lantern Ceremony on the River Cam at the 20th Anniversary of the June 4th Tiananmen Incident.

June 4th (Thu), 8pm
Gather by Fort St. George Pub, Midsummer Common

20 years ago, peaceful protests for freedom and democracy were brutally put down by tanks and machine guns.

20 years later, justice is still elusive. Mothers are forbidden to mourn their lost children. Exiles are refused the right to go home. Many still languish in jails. Discussion of "The Incident" is strictly censored.

The least we could do, is to remember. Both the death, and the living.

Let’s lit up River Cam in a call for justice and truth. Together we will show the world that yes, we care, and truth would not be buried forever.

The event itself is free, and help will be on hand to help you make your own lantern. We also provide an online ‘lantern adoption program’; even if you cannot join us on the day, you can adopt your own lantern beforehand and still show your support! All proceeds from the event will go towards the Tiananmen Mothers.

Co-organised by CU Amnesty International and Chinese Salon

The Sri Lankan crisis

Last night I went to an extraordinary and packed meeting at a Tamil Hindu Temple on the crisis in Sri Lanka. I hadn't intended to post on the situation because I know so little about it, but attending such a moving and informative meeting convinced me that I really should say a few words.


The latest episode in the Sri Lankan government's war against the Tamils is the one more brutal chapter in a history of ethnic cleansing and violent racism that the Tamils have faced. This time though there has been an incredible upsurge from the Tamil diaspora across the world. Thousands have been demonstrating in Britain outside Parliament and, when they decided to sit down and block the bridge the main strsam news even reported it.

Many are concerned that this offensive is the last installment of a genocidal war designed to finally break the resistance of the Tamil people. A speaker from the British Tamil Forum was particularly useful and considering it was such an emotive subject for him he was very measured and calm.

From civil rights to war

Over 61 years 125,000 Tamils have been killed, 900,000 internal refugees have been created and around 1.3 million Tamils have fled the country. However, what I didn't know was that for many years the Tamil movement was a dedicated non-violent civil rights movement, greatly influenced by Gandhian philosophy.

Organising marches, non-violent actions and electoral work the movement for Tamil civil rights tried to work within the system against the injustices that were being meted out against them. In 1977 82% of the popular Tamil vote went to this movement and the Sri Lankan government had finally had enough and launched another bloody offensive.

It brought to my mind the parallels with Ireland where the burgeoning civil rights movement was gunned off the streets by the British and PIRA became the natural response of those who wanted to fight back because there no longer seemed to be a space for non-violent means. Similarly with the Tigers, if the government will kill your Parliamentarians, journalists and activists eventually people will feel that using force in return is the only available response.

Without democracy, without equality, without respect there can't be any peace - and for the Tamil people that means self determination. When the Tigers (LTTE) were put on the international terror list in 1996 it became a massive barrier to peace, because the government could then turn round and say, we don't negotiate with terrorists. But for there to be a peace process there needs to be partners, and the LTTE legitimately represent a large proportion of the Tamil population, there could be no process even without the LTTE at the table.

The murders continue

The Sri Lankan government don't want peace and can use the war on terror as a cover for their murderous actions. As the papers have begun to report the civilian casualties of the conflict are mounting, with the Sri Lankan Army (SLA) seemingly uncaring about those they kill. Jean Lambert, who had been invited to speak at the meeting described how MEPs had organised a resolution calling for a permanent ceasefire and the need for access to the area - and that even this small gesture had meant they were denounced as "apologists for terrorism"

Aerial bombing and shelling including hospitals, schools, orphanages, the use of chemical weapons and other atrocities continue whilst no outside witnesses are allowed into the area. When the Sri Lankan government claim Tamils are doing this to themselves, or that these things are not happening they do so in the full knowledge that it is they who prevent journalists reporting from the area, or aid operations preventing a humanitarian crisis.

Fears of a new round of ethnic cleansing even after the shelling has ended seem well founded given the Sri Lankan government's history. Journalists, NGO workers, and parliamentarians have been killed, jailed and suppressed.

The meeting was clear on their demands;

• we have to stop arming the Sri Lankan Army.
• we have to stop financing the Sri Lankan government
• we need public statements condemning these actions (eg from Lewisham council (point e))
  
• we need to foster diplomacy by taking the LTTE off the terror list
  

And because of the historic racism that Tamils have faced the aid cannot be administered by the government but this must be done by independent NGOs unhindered by the Sri Lankan regime.

I don't want to go on too long but there was an interesting discussion about the role of the British Empire and partition which highlighted the difficulty of politicians from the UK where we have a historic obligation but can't still be a colonial hand and must seek out a wide range of those from elsewhere - which is how MEPs like Jean Lambert have been able to be a powerful advocate by drawing in others from across Europe who's voices are seen as less tainted by historic colonialism.

As the EU considers harsher measures, like ensuring the GSP Plus trade agreement doesn't go ahead Sri Lanka has started to look to other partners who aren't as concerned about human rights like China, Libya and Iran and it raised the difficulty of what the international community can do in the face of an intransigent criminal state. Sanctions? War? Harsh words?

More than anything what struck me was that the Tamils in this meeting wanted to know that people were listening. This was the first time I've been thanked by name for simply attending a meeting and it really brought home how much Tamils feel that no one has heard the plight they are in. I'm sure that this at least is something we can do, to show that we have heard what is happening to the Tamil people.

Congratulations to North Korea

Well done to North Korea for their lovely rocket launch. Nothing says world power like a sleek phallus swooping into space in order to transmit revolutionary songs to an applauding world.

Some South Koreans watch the inspiring launch and consider going over to
Communism by chucking away all their food and throwing themselves in prison.

So whilst North Korean ingenuity and scientific advances are now indisputable perhaps it might be possible to put some of that brain power and finance towards feeding the North Korean people.

Perhaps Gil Scott Heron could do a new version of Whitey on the Moon in honour of the occasion.

Pakistan in crisis: selected reading

The recent attacks on the Sri Lankan cricket team have highlighted to the world what people in Pakistan were only too well aware of - that Pakistan is in crisis and terrorism has become a daily occurrence.

In a country where democracy has been overturned more than once in the last few decades and political leaders, like Benazir Bhutto, are assassinated it is unsurprising that there is a well of inequality and injustice in the country that has no democratic outlet. The government often lacks the legitimacy to tackle those who will use force to push their political agenda. This unrest is deepened whilst they verge on a regional cold war with India and are tied to the US conflict formally known as the war on terror.

I've tried to assemble a mini-reading list here of blog reactions, analysis and news reporting. If you know any other links that would be useful for people please feel free to let me know.

Media;

• Imran Khan: this is the result of weak government and the war on terror.
• The Daily Times (Pakistan) says the attacks point to the regional threats.
• India draws fantasies from misery, The Daily Mail (Islamabad).
  
• Al Jazeera has a useful Pakistan timeline.
• Reuters India looks at the contours of the current crisis.
  
• The Washington Post draws in Afghanistan and the tasks facing Obama.
  
• Reactions to the attack. BBC.
• The New York Times has a round up of responses online.
• Tariq Ali in the Malaysian Insider.
• The Wall Street Journal on the daily threat of terrorism in Pakistan.
• Kashmir Observer on Muslims of India since partition and here on Pakistan should clamp down on its past friends..
  
• The Hindu says these attacks are a threat to the entire world.
  

The Left;

• Dissident Voice looks at how the US is still training Pakistan special forces.
  
• OpEdNews provides a glossary and analysis.
• International Viewpoint looks at the "anarchy".
  

Blogs;

• Dave Osler calls on the left to be far clearer in its opposition to the attacks.
• Neil Robertson, Liberal Conspiracy, thinks the attacks were wrong and stupid.
• Shariq on Pickled Politics argues that nothing is sacred in Pakistan anymore.
• William Dalrymple in CiF thinks the US needs a good dose of the blame.
• Liam asks whether Pakistan is going to hell in a handcart.
• Instablogs has a quotes round up.

Sports writers / stories;

• Mike Selvey, in the Guardian.
  
• Mike Atherton, in the Times.
• Kapil Komireddi, on CiF.
  

Poster ideas from Chuwit Kamolvisit

Elections in Bangkok look pretty exciting. Quite at random I came across an election poster for Chuwit Kamolvisit, who ran for Bangkok governor in October, and so I sought out some more (see more here).

Based on the posters alone I'd vote for him, I think we could do worse. Try and imagine your favourite politician in Chuwit's place, it might work.

Kamolvisit is pictured here out of his mind with worry.
It reads "When politicians lie, what should we do?"

Here Chuwit is in expansive mode.
The caption reads "I love you." Thanks dude, that means a lot.

Hold on though. Chuwit's pissed off now. The caption reads "6 billion spent on a fire truck we never use." You can see he's exasperated by his pose and that.

Woa! "You are a liar. You don’t have a standpoint. You disappoint society. You lie to the people. You make excuses to deceive the public."
It's not true Chuwit. I'm not, I do, I don't, I don't and I never would.

"Crush those who cheat, expose evil, do not fear the influential!"
If only he'd added "It's hammer time!"

Sadly, he didn't win - but he did get more than 300,000 votes which isn't bad for a city only slightly larger than London.

I demand to see a European election bill board with Jean Lambert, wielding a sledge hammer, denouncing evil, cheats and the influential! It's a vote winner I tell you, I'm certain of it.

Guest Post: The risks of modern living

Today's guest post is from Natalie Bennett who, were she to wear all of her hats at once would never fit through a doorway without knocking them off. Let's just say she's on the national executive of the Green Party, blogs at Philobiblon and is the chief architect behind the enormously successful Carnival of Feminists.

Last week I passed up an opportunity to listen to Arriana Huffington, of Huffington Post fame, on the future of the new media. Instead I was going to my regular book club, where we were discussing a 1970s account of the traditional life of Southeast Asian peasants, and their rebellious reactions to the attempts of colonialists to impose capitalism. It convinced some friends to whom I mentioned it that I'm definitely odd (well okay, maybe I am), but nevertheless by the end of the evening I felt that I possibly had – no offence to Arriana – a clearer glimpse of the future – or at least perhaps the future we need, than she could have offered.

The books was James C. Scott's The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia. It was, the economist who chose it assured us, regarded as a seminal work in the field, and it is not hard to see that when it was published in 1976 it was both radical and astonishing. For it starts from the actual lived peasant experience (explicitly influenced, the author says in the introduction, the Annales school of history), and it isn't in love with the traditional 20th-century Western view of progress – that everything that has happened in history is the great march towards a materialist utopia of great abundance and technology. Scott, it is clear, is highly sympathetic to the Vietnamese rebels of "La Terreur rouge" of 1930 and the Saya San rebellion of Lower Burma in the same year.

But there's nothing radical about that approach now – what is interesting, however, is his exploration of the thesis about the peasant's reactions, from the end of the 19th century onwards, to the colonial states' efforts to impose capitalism on what had been subsistence farming systems. This destroyed, he says, the fundamental basis of the organisation of these peasant societies in which harvests were often dreadfully uncertain: "It is quite rational for peasants...with very little margin for taking risks above their subsistence level to be content with a lower level of return for subsistence production than to choose the higher but riskier returns from cash production."

This set me musing on the point at which we are now in the 21st century – about, perhaps, to realise that the mad rush of material "progress" to which we have become addicted is not just not bringing us happiness, but pushing us perilously close to – maybe even already past – the point at which the entire human race, the entire Gaian ecosystem, is as perilously situated as any early 20th-century peasant watching his rice crop washed away by a flood, or parched by unseasonal heat.

Australia is the continent on which this is most evident – a story last week in the Sydney Morning Herald reports a desperate hunt by the national scientific organisation for an area of the vast continent in which agriculture and livestock rearing is likely to remain, or become, viable. I was reminded again of the prescience of Tim Flannery, Australia's foremost scientific intellectual, who told me about 20 years ago that the sustainable carrying capacity of the continent was perhaps 4 million. (The population is now 20 million.)

We are, it is clear, going to have to give up our addiction to material growth. But how can we make this great intellectual leap, give up something that has been the dominant paradigm, at least in some Western societies, for many centuries? How can those who are now living a lifestyle that could only be supported by three planets agree collectively to cut back to one, a tradeoff to prevent a new form of MAD (mutually assured destruction).

Well it seems to me Scott's peasants have one possible answer: large numbers of people, and complex cultures, can decide to choose basic material security over a gamble for the pleasures of materialist extreme.

Of course such stability has been the chief ambition for most of the human race for the great majority of history. Travelling amid the Roman ruins of Europe – particularly in southern France, where there are buildings that were in use right through medieval times and beyond – I often contemplate the basic fact that shaped the medieval mind – that their ancestors were stronger, grander, greater, than they were themselves. (It's something the classical Greeks –overshadowed by the giant structures of their Mycenean world -- also believed.)

The medieval example, and indeed the Southeast Asian one, are in appearance depressing. Do we really have to resort to a narrow-minded, insular peasant culture, one that is profoundly unattractive in its social hierarchies and repressions? Do we have to stop thinking, adopt some sort of intellectual deep-freeze for thought and independent action to return to the small-minded petty social control of the village? As one book club participant asked, a question I've scrawled on the title page in big letters: does this really on a small-scale society built on face-to-face personal relations? Do we have to in some important way "go backwards"?

Well perhaps the Greeks are an answer to that – there's was fundamentally an economically stable society, with few great technical innovation, that managed great innovations of the mind. And indeed when the book club discussed this issue another economist suggested that what we have to aim for is growth in complexity rather than growth in material – more and better blogs, not more pulp genre books to be remaindered, perhaps.

If we could direct human ingenuity, human spirit, human adventurism, to finding ecological stability while still pursuing great ambitions of intellect and sophistication of life; if we could take the good bits of the peasant lifestyle, the positive side of conservatism - conservation - and refused the strictures of convention, then we might be on the way to a liveable model for the 21st-century.

No, sorry Arriana, I've no regrets about my choice.

The Pride of Nations

We are all disgusted when a natural disaster of horrifying scale strikes a nation and the government does not seem to bend over backwards to help its citizens, possibly due to their ethnicity.

We're troubled when they allow political differences to bar entry to much needed humanitarian assistance, despite being unable to deal with the consequences of the disaster. When a government puts "face" above the good of its people it helps us to recognise a government without a moral centre. Especially when it's leaders are relaxing elsewhere.

Many of us are concerned when we realise that there appears to be no urgency to the idea of reconstruction and allowing the poorest to suffer in the most terrible of circumstances, and the ability of the press to report is restricted.

When a belligerent government, who is despised by many in the international community, is seen to care so little for its own people that it purports to protect many are caused not a little consternation. All because of ideology, all because of national isolationism, all because of idiocy and corruption, all because they see the people as an inconvenience and an unwanted expense.

But the lessons of Hurricane Katrina, that the government's interests are often opposed to the interests of the people, seem to be ones that require repeating over and again lest that very government starts posturing and making out they have the moral authority to lecture others on how they put their own political agenda above the good of the people.

Burma notes

I'm learning bits and bobs about Burma that don't seem to fit in with the official story in the press. I don't pretend any particular knowledge of the area but there are some salient facts which might be useful to draw upon when listening to the news.

1. Burma is part of George W Bush's axis of evil.
2. Which in the last years has meant that they are under threat of military intervention.
3. The US government regards them as an enemy power.
4. The US is sending military hardware to the region.
5. The Burmese authorities are reluctant to let the military of an enemy power trample around in their territory.

OK. I don't think there's a flaw to that logic which shows, perhaps, that the Burmese authorities are not being simply mindless bastards. Just to add weight to this point I'd like to point to the fact that India and China are shipping in aid, equipment and personnel right now with no problems - but then they haven't spent the last seven years arguing for regime change in Burma.

In this context the Liberal Democrat argument that we should airdrop aid into the south against the will of the Burmese authorities is both unrealistic, untried and completely insensitive to the political context where Western aid is suspect not aid in general. What about assisting the Chinese and Indians to give assistance and turning the military hardware around so the Burmese authorities don't feel under threat?

Next point.

1. The devastating impact of this natural disaster has been felt largely in the South.
2. Southern Burma is home to the longest running insurgency on the planet.
3. The Karen National Union and Karen National Liberation Army have been fighting the Burmese government since 1948, based largely in Kayin State.
4. The Karens, who have resisted ethnic cleansing and repression for decades, have been enormously successful in resisting the attempts by the Chinese armed Burmese military to literally wipe them out.
5. To the West of this rebellion in Mon there has been an equally long movement for Mon independence with a military wing in the shape of the Mon National Liberation Front.
6. Although this movement has been largely crushed or bought off this does not negate the fact that it has been a home for political dissent since the 40's.
7. Both Kayin and Mon are two of the areas hardest hit by this disaster.
8. Perhaps it is in someone's interests not to allow aid and rescue packages to get into these areas efficiently.
9. This may be one of the reasons that the Burmese authorities okayed Western aid packages but wanted to determine where this aid went themselves.

I mean it may just be me being cynical but surely the undoubtedly repressive government of Burma may weigh up in their calculations whether it is in fact useful to them to have the two centres of most long standing dissent absolutely obliterated.

No one has mentioned this factor on the news - am I missing something?

Tibet: mice against monsters

The riots in Tibet have received many column inches in the last few weeks, but much less coverage on the Green and left blog-o-sphere. Half the blogs that have posted on it have either descended into academic micro-arguments about the nature of Tibet in the 1950's (as if the protesters' demands include access to time machines) or simply rerun the lines of Western "pro-Tibet" governments vs pro-Chinese mouthpieces.

The riots began on March 10th (the 49th anniversary of the first independence uprising) when peaceful independence marches were smashed off the streets by the state. The protests escalated into violence and rippled out into other areas (including Beijing and neighbouring countries like Nepal). The protests became riots with wide spread looting, fighting with state forces and attacks on immigrant Hans.

There have been some hilarious contributions to the debate defending the actions of the Chinese authorities. One line is that Tibetans are better off living within the bounds of China's thriving economy than they were under feudal Tibet prior to the invasion. False choice, bad conclusion. The Tibetan economy is better than it was fifty years ago so the Chinese government has the right to kill and torture those who want to voice a legitimate political opinion? It's better in Wales now than it was fifty years ago, will any protest there be caricatured as wanting to reintroduce dripping sandwiches and pit accidents?

Another line is that to support the demands of the protesters is to support ethnic cleansing of the Hans. Well, firstly Hans became victims of attack after the repression began - in other words when the Chinese government cut off access to passive resistance those with nothing turned on the nearest identifiable targets weak enough to harm - those people that were associated with the occupation of Tibet in the minds of many native Tibetans due to long term demographic manipulation by the Chinese state. Now, these attacks are quite wrong, but they stem from a real grievance and we need to understand where any anti-Hans racism may come from.

Mark Steel was particularly good on this the other day when he lambasted the Morning Star for its attempts to blame outside agitators (in this case the Dalai Lama) "So Tibetans are defying a powerful army because they've been brainwashed by a 72-year-old with glasses who presumably chants his orders up a mountain, and as they echo round the valleys his followers stare into the distance and say robotically "Orders – from – master – must – get – crushed – by –tank."" As if anyone needs to be told to hate oppression. Frankly the claims that it was bjork who started it all off seem plausible in comparison.

Of course wealth, power and oppression has many critics, but it also has many admirers, and not just the more stale minded leftists. Like Yahoo and MSN for instance, who are helping the Chinese authorities root out the "most wanted" of those who oppose them, just as Google have been helping the CIA.

The simple truth is that if you're with those who roll their tanks over the heads of the poor then you've chosen the well trodden path of complicity with dictatorship. It's time to rethink.

Some warn of the "danger" of the young turning away from the holy messages of peace that the Dalai Lama advocates. Some shake their heads that the some Tibetans are turning towards violence. Let's be clear on this violence is the only answer. There are no other paths left open to those who want a more democratic society. The authorities have done everything they can to head off every avenue of peaceful resistance. They've succeeded, so it's the time for looting, stone throwing, bomb making, and baby eating until more peaceful options open themselves up again.

The Dalai Lama is a self aggrandised distraction in this entire process - the real people of Tibet are not the Dalai Lama and their concerns are not identical to his. Now obviously I've never had much time for spiritual leaders, but he is the self proclaimed leader of the government in exile elected in the... oh no.. hold on... enthroned as Tibet's absolute ruler in 1950 (age 15) although in fairness to him he now calls for a democratic system for Tibet, not a return to feudalism (despite what some on the left seem to think).

Some have criticised the way he has taken millions from the CIA when his interests and theirs coincided. It's something that's worth bearing in mind, but when there were those resisting in Afghanistan against the Russian occupation my support for that struggle was not contingent on them refusing aid from the CIA, nor was my support for Solidarity negated by the fact they were assisted by the West and the Catholic Church. People have a right to resist their repression no matter where that fits into global realpolitik, and I certainly don't give a shit about the Chinese system of government coming under threat.

Anyway, the Dalai Lama's views on Marxism, for instance, seem at odds with his CIA-loving image on the left. "Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes—that is the majority—as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair… The failure of the regime in the Soviet Union was, for me not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist."

I don't support him but let's not accept the fascist caricature that some seem keen to paint either. Then we have Mr Galloway who, in the Daily Record said “From the outset the American right and their pathetic echo chambers here have been determined to wreck China's Olympic Games, or at least to diminish them in the way the Moscow Olympics of 1980 were. Every button is pushed from China's supposed "occupation" of Tibet (in fact Tibet was always part of the Chinese motherland, and has been rescued from the mists of obscurantism under the demi-God Dalai Lama by the Chinese revolution) through its attitude to circus bears, the Falun Gong and its one-child policy.” Daily Record Feb. 18th (hat tip: yourfriendinthenorth). This makes me very sad. For someone who is so clear in his opposition to imperialism at home to be giving left cover to imperialism abroad flies in the face of any internationalism he may wish to claim for himself.

Any anti-imperialist posturing on the part of the UK, French or US governments is frankly bizarre, and people should be cautious of some of the Western organised Tibet solidarity movements - but consistent anti-imperialists should not allow the UK government's mouthings prevent them showing solidarity just as China's "opposition" to the Iraq invasion did not force the anti-war movement to hold fire... if that's the right phrase to use. Don't wave the CIA bogey man at me and think I'm not going to feel common cause with those who want to end dictatorship.

Some people seem so frightened of siding with the US that, even when they aren't they fear people might think they are, and start bending themselves into all sorts of odd shapes. Get over it, the US is the great Satan - but it doesn't make everyone else in the world little angels does it? There are a lot of fronts to fight on and the Tibet people are on one of them, don't let your opponents define your thought for you.

I don't care either way about the Olympics in China or Britain - these things are enormous, pompous wastes of resources designed to glorify nations I hate and promote a tedious athletic ideal I abhor. They bulldoze local communities in favour of their international prestige and then want to be thanked for doing so. They puff themselves up and feel so proud of their hegemonic monuments and grand spectacles of national unity. No, have the Olympics in the Faroe Islands with the only events the three legged race and international standard badger tossing, I don't care a bit for them.

You know I'm a great fan of dialogue - but to get to the table the Tibetan resistance will have to earn Chinese respect. Whilst China relies on Tibetan water they could try to cut off that supply, but whilst Tibet is peripheral to the Chinese economy all they will have to fight with is that very willingness to fight - and I find that willingness admirable to the highest order.

Unfortunately that violence will be messy, as every violent revolt has been throughout history. When Toussaint L'Ouverture, Spartacus or Ned Ludd took themselves into the fray it was not as left leaning liberals but as those fighting for their lives and liberty. There is only one set of people who can avoid further bloodshed, and that is the Chinese Government by taking the boot off the neck of those they oppress and letting them breath. If you support that boot don't cry fake tears when people get hurt.

An independent government, whether or not the Dalai Lama led it, would be moving forwards towards the modern world and greater democracy. A victory in Tibet could and should open up a space in the rest of China and give inspiration to others whether they be in Burma, Iraq, Nepal or Luton.

China is an imperialist state. It acts like imperialism, it walks like imperialism, it leaves dead bodies and helps itself to stolen territory just like imperialism. When people protest for the ability of the individual to live their own life, it is the very the definition of tyranny to send in a trigger happy occupying army to crush those desires.

One of the most amusing arguments I've seen during this debate is that because journalists can't get in and we don't have accurate information on the situation we don't know if the Chinese government is being nasty and whether the protesters are all that nice really - well perhaps the fact that we don't have any information because of the Chinese Government's efforts to suppress all media on the subject might just be a slight hint don't you think on what the situation might be... hmmm tricky.

This situation isn't simply about independence its about justifiable rage. There is an online petition you can sign to "end the violence" if you like - but if the repression doesn't end then I'm holding out for more.

This post is brought to you via suggest a topic for the Daily (Maybe), thanks to Weggis for the suggestion.