As to your points about Iran and Cuba, the fact is that our Cuba policy has been an abject failure. Castro is still in power, the Cuban people are stilled repressed, and so it goes. As for Iran, we’ll see.

I don’t remember if I mentioned at all, let alone loudly enough that I don’t begrudge Tibet any of the attention they get. It’s not a zero-sum game at all. It’s about marketing, organizational skills, and luck.

In fact, I think it’s admirable for people to pick their causes and devote their energy to those. Trying to do everything is a quick path to achieving nothing. It’s just that the Free Tibet movement has a lot of hangers-on who, out of ignorance, become convinced that theirs is the most important cause there is. Tibet’s not my fight. But because it’s part of the package of safe liberal ideologies, I’m an asshole for placing my care elsewhere.

A strong Uighur movement would complement Tibetan demands for autonomy and might inspire other Chinese minorities. On the downside, Beijing would probably see the two as linked despite the obvious differences between the two peoples.

Even if it bothers you that the Tibetans receive a disproportionate amount of attention, you have to admit that they are the ideal candidate for such Western affection. Their pacifism, their exotic mysticism, and their home on the roof of the world are a publicity package that nobody else can compete with.

And what does everyone think about how the bumper stickers now say “Save Tibet” instead of “Free Tibet?” It strikes me as a depressing lowering of goals- now the Tibetans are a historical curiosity to be preserved in a museum case.

Of course, it could also be truth in advertising- do many of those Western sympathizers really want the Tibetans to be free to watch reality TV? Heck no.

I’m not particularly interested though. That doesn’t make me the bad person they accuse me of being. Honest, but not bad. I know that Turkestani rights issues are more important to me, and that I will make more of a difference focusing on those.

I’m in a bad place in the market. I don’t bemoan that no one cares or knows much about the Central Asian Turks, it is simply so.

So I understand the urge to scoff at the poseurs and hangers-on- I used to scoff at Green Day. But keep in mind that part of growing up is growing out of your own default cultural niche, and once the Tibet groupies do this, they may become the kind of internationalists that we need more of.

Perhaps those Free Tibet groupies will be early adopters of the Turkestani cause, what with a common oppressor and all. Even the bothersome self-righteousness could evolve into genuine concern and involvement in international causes, and Lord knows we need more of that.

I’m just glad that you’re out there spreading the news about your particular cause. The more such knowledge is out there, the fewer kids will have to rely on Chomsky and Rage Against the Machine for their global perspective.

The basic fallacy here is that there’s only so much human sympathy to go around and therefore every quantum given to Tibet is subtracted from the Uyghurs. But this is false. If the Free Tibet movement ran out of gas today, people wouldn’t somehow magically turn their faces towards Turkestan and start agitating about that. They’d just start embracing China even more fervently than most people do already. Conversely, if you managed to get a Free Turkestan movement off the ground, got movie stars interested, got the ear of influential members of Congress, would that mean people would forget about Tibet? It would not. The two have nothing to do with each other. It’s a matter of luck and organization who becomes popular and who languishes ignored.

And what were you thinking when I mentioned the idea of your getting a Free Turkestan movement off the ground? An appealing vision, wasn’t it? You’d like to have Bono mentioning the Uyghurs at the Grammys, wouldn’t you? Of course you would. But that means your disdain of the Free Tibet movement is a bit hypocritical. It’s not the means you object to, it’s the fact that they’re used for the too-popular Tibetans rather than your favorite wallflowers, the Uyghurs. If you were running a wildly successful Free Turkestan movement and Tibet were the wallflower, how would you react to a fan of Tibetans telling you that a lot of your followers didn’t know anything about the situation and were just writing checks because Bono told them to and all the cool kids were doing it? You’d say “Don’t be silly — any mass movement will have a lot of hangers-on, and the important thing is that the Uyghurs get helped. It’s not a zero-sum game; go out and stir up some support for the Tibetans!” And you’d be right.

Free Tibet-ers are involved because they get something from their involvement

And so do you from your involvement with the Uyghurs. We all “get something” from everything we do; it’s just that if it’s not money we’re expecting we can hide it from ourselves. There’s nothing wrong with self-interest, and I hope you don’t think I’m putting you or your commitment down with any of this. I happen to be concerned with the Uyghurs’ plight myself, and I have had my own moments of annoyance with the ignorance of the Tibet groupies. But I remind myself that that’s just human nature, that the more popular any cause becomes the more hangers-on it’s going to attract, and that all human-rights activity is good. I hope you’ll forgive the excessively long comment, but I wanted to give you something to think about that might help you not be so resentful of the other guys.