Xizang is closer to the Tibetan word Ü-Tsang for the region, so I’m confused why this is even a story.
Tibet isnt widely known as that name in English speaking areas. This seems designed to avoid people in the west making the connection between the two names rather than using a name “more in line” with the Tibetan word for the region.
Who the fuck cares what English speakers use? It’s like maintaining colonial names in the US and Canada because “we don’t want to hurt the feeling of the colonizers!”
Apparently China does, with their policy of trying to strong-arm the rest of the world into calling Taiwan a part of China
China doesn’t change the name of Taiwan. Even on Chinese maps, it’s Taiwan Province.
This isn’t even close to comparable.
The point is they very much care about the perception of the rest of the world. Your idea of what is comparable there is a little too literal
A name is a name. The Chinese name for America is 美国 (meiguo, “beautiful nation”). The English name for 中国 is China. A name makes no indication of ownership, unless you’re suggesting the British still hold power over India?
Except for China being the colonizer now.
I mean, Canadian colonizers today use the (romanized) First Nations names of Squamish, Tsawwassen, and Chilliwack.
Moving names closer to their origins is a good thing.
But thats something the country should decide – and not something the next colonizer decides.
Two questions:
-
How do you define colonialism?
-
Do you understand how the CPC functions as a government? How responsibilities are delegated from national to provincial and regional governments? How those governments are elected?
-