Why do Chinese Shills always claim that Tibet Belongs to China because of the fact that they were a part of the Qing Dynasty yet at the same time denouce the Qing Dynasty and Blame the Manchu for literally everything?
Because nationalism is not conducive to a sober analysis of events.
Also, Asians aren't people and they don't feel feelings the way humans do.
It's more of an insectoid hive impulse.
>>956150
hypocricsy
>>956150
Manchu here, we didn't do nothing.
>>956150
Because clay is good.
>>956156
This. Western virtue is about personal excellence, Eastern virtue is about social harmony.
>>956150
What are you gonna do? Take it from them?
Last Qing emperor's announcement of abdication
https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E6%B8%85%E5%AE%A4%E9%80%80%E4%BD%8D%E8%A9%94%E6%9B%B8
>仍合滿漢蒙回藏五族完全領土為一大中華民國
>"still combine all territories of the Manchu, Han, Mongolian, Hui(muslim in general) and Tibetan people as a greater Republic of China"
/thread
>>956327
/thread
>>956327
留髮不留頭,留頭不留髮
The three massacres at Jiading District are some of the most infamous, with estimated death tolls in the tens or even hundreds of thousands.[21] Jiangyin also held out against about 10,000 Qing troops for 83 days. When the city wall was finally breached on October 9, 1645, the Qing army, led by the Han Chinese Ming defector Liu Liangzuo (劉良佐), who had been ordered to "fill the city with corpses before you sheathe your swords," massacred the entire population, killing between 74,000 and 100,000 people.[22]
Hurr durr the Manchus are our friends.
>>956150
"but we developed Tibet! without us, they'd be a repressed fascist theocracy!" - every Chink shill ever
>>957100
i dunno about fascist but it would definitely be a landlocked theocracy
>>956688
Implying Han didn't massacre each other on a regular basis.
They're not going to let go of Tibet because it gives Asia it's main source of water. This feeds more than 80% of Asia. Then there's the huge mineral resource extraction centers and the natural border against the west.
>>956150
>>956156
>ITT: I do not know how mandate of heaven works.
>I also do not know that past the 1600's, the Manchus pretty much saw themselves as Chink.
They blamed the dynasty, not the Ethnic group. The Manchus weren't like the Mongols who didn't want to integrate themselves to Chinese civilization. Had a Han emperor been making those same mistakes in the 19th Century cunts wouldve hated his guts as well.
In fact the only people pulling the race card on the Qing was Sun Yat-Sen's nationalists. Everyone else hates the fact that the Qing emperor just plain sucked at handling the Crises of 1800's thereby necessitating his removal.
>>956150
Because politics needs bullshit ancient flags stuck in other peoples land to claim it. Look at the crap traditional sovereignty arguments all over the South China Sea.
This is what happens when you have a bunch of monarchs and autocracies playing at diplomacy.
>>958521
Nah, the SCS is pretty much "All sides, just making shit up."
No dynasty ever gave a shit about Islands past Hainan.
>>956303
This is the shallowest take on history though. Like Buddhism whatever but all kinds of traditions will lend from one or the other in different quantities. China right now happens to be and oligarchic autocracy, you can't expect every person to actually believe whatever the government spews out. And if they do, look no further than your own country for people easily manipulated by propaganda. People are inherently prone to hive-mindery
>>957243
Did you just say Tibet would be landlocked. Do you mean this figuratively?
It's not even a matter of who owns what, Tibetans are slave drivers - and predictably the "abolitionists", "freedom loving" Americans bent over backwards in order to justify the Tibetans' slavery, showing whose side they really are on:
>They weren’t really slaves, because their legal status wasn’t exactly the same as black slaves in America; most of them had some rights!
>If they didn’t like being slaves, they surely could have just run away, so either they weren’t really slaves, or else they liked it, so it was OK!
>It wouldn’t have been in the slave owners’ economic interest to mistreat their slaves, therefore they didn’t, so slavery was OK!
>Some Tibetan slaves were much better off than others, almost as rich as free people, which proves it wasn’t slavery!
>Slavery in other countries was worse, so Buddhism is a highly ethical religion!
>They were all happy and singing as they worked the fields because they had Buddhism!
>>957100
Pic related is what you stand for.
>>958562
>because the monks were slavemasters everyone in Tibet must forever be a slave to China
Thanks for your logic
>>958562
So China intends to free Tibet when the slave masters are put to trial?
>Tibet
>Not a theocratic dictatorship
The PRC is just better than the Dali Lama, at least the PRC doesn't believe that some random kid is reincarnated and he is their spiritual leader and dictator.
>>958534
But I'm literally comparing Confucian virtues with Aristotelian virtues. Buddhism has nothing to do with this. Hiveminds have nothing to do with this.
>>958562
Googled tibetan serf and got this. Pretty sickening
>>958562
Googled tibetan serf and got this. Pretty sickening
>>958845
http://md.chineseembassy.org/eng/zt/zgxz/t554379.htm
Not sure I trust the source.
>>958562
"hurr durr let's colonise Tibet and settle the place then fuck the Tibetan slave drivers lmao"
