Please confirm your Email address
Welcome!
- Real deals from your departure city
- Verified by our Dealhounds
Popular Destinations
- Cheap flights to Albuquerque
- Cheap flights to Austin
- Cheap flights to Bangkok
- Cheap flights to Cancun
- Cheap flights to Chicago
- Cheap flights to Cozumel
- Cheap flights to Denver
- Cheap flights to Du Bois
- Cheap flights to Flagstaff
- Cheap flights to Franklin
- Cheap flights to George Town
- Cheap flights to Honolulu
- Cheap flights to Houston
- Cheap flights to Kalispell
- Cheap flights to Las Vegas
- Cheap flights to London
- Cheap flights to Los Angeles
- Cheap flights to Los Cabos
- Cheap flights to Miami
- Cheap flights to Munich
- Cheap flights to Ontario
- Cheap flights to Philadelphia
- Cheap flights to Rome
- Cheap flights to Sacramento
- Cheap flights to San Francisco
- Cheap flights to San Juan
- Cheap flights to Sarasota
- Cheap flights to Seattle
- Cheap flights to Tampa
- Cheap flights to Washington, D.C.
Travel to China morally wrong?
Airfarewatchblog
Travel to China morally wrong?
Posted by George Hobica on Sunday, March 30, 2008
Q: I noticed that you answered a question about finding low airfares to the Beijing Olympics this summer, which brings up a question: don't you think it's morally wrong to encourage travel to China, what with the genocide in Darfur, which is largely made possible by China's support (oil money for weapons, support for the Sudanese government, etc). Not to mention Tibet. Not to mention that the Chinese government looks the other way as their factories send us tainted products, everything from Heparin to dog food? Oh, and how about the way they censor internet access. I'm not saying you're as bad as Yahoo, which handed over a Chinese dissident to authorities not so long ago. But I would ask that you show some social responsibility.
A: This is a tough one. We certainly share your concerns about China, no doubt. But are we a political organization or an airfare listing service? Does travel to China by North Americans encourage understanding, and help bring down barriers between peoples?
Many people outside the US take issue with our involvement in Iraq. So what if they boycott travel to the US? Is this what we really want?
I'd be interested to see what others think about this issue so perhaps we'll set up a reader survey and feel free to leave comments below.
Post a Comment
Advertisement
© 1998-2010 Smarter Travel Media LLC. All Rights Reserved Privacy Statement | Terms of Use
In reference to your comment about Made in China vs Made in USA labels: Made in the US does not necessarily mean made with fair wages in the continental US. There are plenty of US territories (ex: American Samoa) with very **VERY** cheap labor that produce a lot of our US "made" products because of their lax laws and poor standards. And it is perfectly legal to use the MADE IN THE USA label. Also, contrary to what you may believe, sweat shops do exist in the good 'ol USA. Don't be deceived.
Could it be, Katie-Kate, that I'm just 'plain right'? Haha, lay off the moonshine...
HAHAHA!!! Sorry, I can't seem to stop laughing...guess it must be my "anger"...lol! You should put down your e-mail address, Katherine, and I'll make sure to send you a postcard (sans the "poison").
Hahaha...
In any case, here's the deal - the recent riots in the Tibet province are entirely instigated by the Tibetan dissidents, many of whom I'm not sure are acting entirely on their own (some organization, possibly externally involved). Western nations feeding the fire will not ease any tension already felt by the Chinese government. In fact, the best way to save Tibetan lives at this point would be NOT to pressure or criticize (or boycott) China. China doesn't really respond well to negative criticism. Let's see, the last example I can give you is the Tienanmen incident (not a 'massacre', but let's stay on topic) in 1989, and hopefully that doesn't happen in Lhasa.
China did in fact receive the Olympic bid under the current conditions that are in place, yet with an absolve to improve the 'human rights' factor as the time line draws closer. So far, China has been partially successful in meeting that resolution, although recent punctuated incidents of Falun Gong (let's not even go into that; I don't think that it's appropriate for China, you probably do, and so on and so forth) have cast a rather negative cloud over the nations progress. But I assure you, my friends and families all concur that life in China is hardly 'miserable'. In fact, many of the populous honestly like the current administration (OK, they may not have seen the proverbial 'greener grass', but every nation has its ups and downs - including the current U.S. economy).
Let's not forget now that China does not recognize human rights as a natural law, and that there are few provisions set in the government's constitution for these cases. I often get asked how I can like China and the U.S. at the same time, especially when "China violates human rights". My response is simple: "Humans don't have rights in China." Human rights are viewed as something other than that which is simply thought up by humans, even if a majority of people believe in basic human treatment (since majorities don't really work in a Communist system). It would be like me criticizing someone for not taking their shoes off when entering THEIR house, yet that person's culture might find it perfectly acceptable for them. So the whole frame of comparing China to the rest of the world is innately faulty due to the fact that China doesn't abide by any other nation's system, especially not that of the U.S.
Besides the fact that boycotting the Olympics would be useless (and detrimental) to international and trade relations, it seems to me that we are all more worried about China's power in the world. Perhaps the notion of a polarized world divided by 2 superpowers scares you? Fear not - some of the greatest technological, militaristic, and economic progress occurred during the U.S.-Soviet standoff. Of course, I'm not suggesting that America's current relationship with China turns sour...
In any case, what won't happen is that China changes her mind from a bunch of young adults protesting in front of her embassies and consulates worldwide - sorry, but protesters remind China of slogan and poster-carrying hipsters without real jobs. Doing so might just result in a few arrests and confiscated property, even in the "U.S. & A." (Borat). Of course, that's just my opinion - I tend to visit a country with an optimistic lens to find out for myself what's happening locally (trust me, Cuba is not as bad as the media portrays - sippin' mojito's and smokin' fat Chohiba's discussing 'Che' is the way to go).
This is what's going to happen in the next few months: China maintains her internal security by arresting all provoking rioters in the Tibetan province, restores order, cleans up Beijing some more, welcomes all the happy international guests / athletes / delegations, everyone has a good time, better networking relationships developed with international companies, all smiles on the return flights. Actually, some lame reporter will probably try to do something stupid, as well a religious group ignorant enough to bring in bibles or a hippie international organization (i.e. Amnesty International) and China's 'Zero Tolerance Policy" (don't you like how it sounds?) will have to come into play. We'll see. If I'm wrong, I'll owe you an apology. Remind me after the Olympics.
The truth of the matter is that Tibet (not an independent country, first off) was part of China before the United States was ever created. Besides the large historical aspect to the 'ownership' of Tibet by China, though, Tibet has provided China with a sufficient 'buffer' area against rather radical Islamic populations to the West. There is hardly a practical reason for China to govern the region - it is arid, barren, and otherwise useless in terms of economic commodities (although having 1/2 of Mt. Everest isn't a bad 'superlative').
People also forget that life during the Dalai Lamas' reign (I think the current one is the 13th Dalai Lama) was a poverty-stricken, feudal system at best. Do some research if you can, but life expectancy, healthy births, and GNP in the Tibet region have ALL RISEN since modern Chinese governance. Then again, the Dalai Lama at one point had correspondence with Hitler when his exploration teams reached Tibet, but that's way besides the point.
Actually, the greatest damage done to the Tibetan independence movement was caused by Tibetans themselves, by the ironic violence that these 'non-violent' Buddhist-loving populous have conducted over the past few weeks. Many of the news agencies are viewing the matter with a pervasive bias, and few photos actually depict Chinese soldiers conducting 'offensive' assaults rather than simply 'defensive' riot maneuvers to protect themselves and regulate peace. Most of the photos you have been seeing online and in the news detail Nepalese (blue camo uniforms) and Indian police forces, and Chinese medical crews, many of whom wear military uniforms, have been misleadingly shown as well.
I'm not arguing for any sort of military action against Tibet. All I'm saying is that there are definitely 2 sides to the story here, and I hate to be the one that has to balance it in favor of China's government. Anyways, the boycotting the Olympics would be highly impractical. What would happen? China doesn't suffer from an athletic boycott, but gets pissed as a result at those countries and then shuts off economic trade with them economically (yes, the Chinese government has that ability). It would be most likely a lose-lose situation for all countries involved, and trade with China is at an all time high. Let's be PRACTICAL here, and not simply dream in ideological PRINCIPLE.
By the way, I'm going to the Olympics in August, and I expect it to be an extremely fun international endeavor - the quintessential ATHLETIC (and not political) event in this year. I will try to visit Tibet as well, if the rioting is down (notice the replacement of the implicative word 'violence' or 'suppression'), as I'd like to form my own opinions about the situation through my own perspective without external interpretation.
KATIE
Nothing in my post said that Tibetans should be resorting to violent protests.
Their frustration and anger is justified, but it would be best if they could use civil disobedience. Unfortunately, unlike the woman's rights, civil rights or anti-war movements in the US, the Chinese simply line up and shoot them or take them away to labor camps for the rest of their lives.
A very difficult situation, but non-violence in this case, especially now, would be horribly difficult, but still the best thing to do (in my personal opinion).
And as for the Chinese that are imported to the Tibetan areas...that is simply the Chinese government's way of overrunning a region and eradicating the indigenous culture to insert it's own. Same thing "we" did to the Native Americans with the Westward expansion - giving away land and resources to "our people" as we stole it with violence and broken deals. Sure...we brought roads and industry and we can see how much it "helped" the native Americans. Boy, they got a great deal. I wonder why they were so 'ungrateful'?
But in short - My comments were more about the state of mind of people that don't really seem to care what goes on because it's "over there" or "not my problem". That point of view is a dead end, and typically compounded by believing that watching the evening news is being "informed".
These things are like a cancer, and just as foolish to ignore as it is to ignore the cancer in your stomach because the brain is OK. It will spread and grow and eventually it will impact you and those close to you.
Not to be over dramatic, but when I see certain comments, it really highlights the state of mind that allowed the Nazis to do their "work" while people turned a blind eye. The US included, although we don't like to admit it when telling that story.
I'll get off the soap box now, and my comments are aimed at me as much as anyone else, because I haven't done nearly enough either.
As for AFWD - I didn't fault them in any way. In fact, I said people should go to China and if they really travel the region as an informed consumer, all the better. You, and others, wanted to know about the Olympics and travel...completely fair question and completely correct for AFWD to answer it.
What's not correct is defending China's (or the US or North Korea or some parts of Africa, etc.) human rights offenses and saying it's OK for people to suffer abuses that you would not want your loved ones to suffer. Or that we're not perfect so who are we to judge? Wagging a judging finger is not a good place to be and there's far too much of it growing in the US, but yelling at the thug beating up the old woman for her purse is completely appropriate and required.
1. I've personally talked to Tibetans as well, and many of them disagree vehemently with the violent riots of their peers in China, Nepal, and India. Their increasing perchance for violence only self-degrades their respectability and respect around the world (especially since the Dalai Lama's 'middle ground' rests upon a platform of non-violent, Ghandi-copying movement).
More importantly, though, I've spoken with MANY native Han Chinese who were discriminated or shunned by Tibetans, especially with population relocations in the last few decades. The addition of Chinese government supported infrastructure has been immeasurable; compare this with the feudal system (at best) before the Dalai Lama fled in the middle of the last century.
2. In recent years, there has been an increased trend to expand travel outside of the 'tourist zone'; most travel agencies providing Olympic Games services even recommend leaving Beijing to see the 'real' China (whatever that means in a couple of days / weeks). We can never depend on our limited perceptions and isotopic experiences to permeate our beliefs about what is 'true' or 'false', but our senses are the best tools that we have. So, a week spent in China is one more week of experience to gauge China more accurately than those who lack all travel experiences.
3. Yes, we can mire in self-hypocrisy in realizing our limitations judging others. The USA is not perfect, but perfection remains in the means more than in the ends.
Here's the kicker: China does not include human rights in its constitution / CCP charter - thus, there are NO human rights violations in China because China does not have 'human rights' (sorry, no "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"). The only human rights violations China suffers are the ones outside nations / organizations decide to apply; those laws / policies are artificial at best and arbitrary at worst - depending on the current zeitgeist. It would be the equivalent of applying Chinese laws to the U.S. - we would be major violators of many 'laws', eh? Of course, let's not get into a petty debate about whose laws / policies are 'right' or 'wrong'. Granted, there are 'basic' human rights that all nations should provide for its citizens, but China meets those extremely basic requirements.
Logical posters should not intrude AFWD with politically-charged assumptions that have little or no merit on their own (purposeful poisoning of US food? Ignorant Americans searching for luxury over immersing experiences?). Remember, fallibility is still expected within debates and topics of controversy.
Whether or not we bicker and toil in online blogs and forums - the Olympics WILL be happening in China this summer. There WILL NOT be an international boycott of the games (opening ceremonies...eh). There MIGHT BE possible incidents regarding overzealous reporters or religious groups, but national security and an overwhelming sense of nationalism (felt overseas as well) will quickly suppress all fears / dangers / annoyances.