.jpg)
Bravely carrying on, despite Richard Gere's best efforts
For those not in the know, today marks the 50th anniversary of a famous uprising in Tibet against the occupation of the People's Republic of China, which led shortly thereafter to the Dalai Lama's exile, which has been recorded, mythologized and celebrated by numerous vapid Hollywood celebrities.
Roughly ten years before that, the PRC, which is to say the People's Republic of China, had begun it's occupation of Tibet, the exact nature of which is still up for historic (and historiographical) dispute. The CPC, which is to say the Communist Part of China, has two arguments on it's side which are undoubtedly true, namely;
- That they were met with scant resistance,
- That as the successor state to the Qing Dynasty, they were merely renewing the relationship that had existed within Zhong Guo prior to 1904, when British troops invaded Lhasa and occupied Tibet, demanding, amongst other things, that the Qing Dynasty pay the expenses of their invasion (a small taste, just in case you were wondering where anti-Western Chinese Nationalist sentiment came from)
The latter is a point of some importance; Tibet and China had varied from a hostile to a symbiotic relationship by the last few centuries, with the central Qing government administrating the region, and the Dalai Lama acting as spiritual advisors to the court.
The CPC makes other claims that are completely unverifiable, but which probably have some basis in truth; certain other scholars have agreed with most of these claims, while many others take a wide gradient of stances.
Penn and Teller, eminent stage magicians, libertarians, and Run-DMC hanger-ons, detailed some of these complaints on their show, (profanity-filled) clip to be seen here.
Featured in the clip is Michael Parenti, a scholar who writes his own description of the sort of feudal, slavery- and sefdom-filled, poverty-ridden and backwards, oppressive place Tibet was under the relatively brief rule by Lama caste, from 1912-1949, in his essay, Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth. Complete with sources.
Surprisingly, I also found an actual comprehensive answer on Yahoo Answers, too.
Most supporters of the Free Tibet cause, of course, are idealogues, hippies, and Hollywood celebrities who, having thoroughly rejected their own European culture, are just looking for something to believe in. The peculiarities of Western self-hate being what they are, most activists never get as far as to question whether or not Tibet was actually ever a Shangri La before it was arbitrarily and brutally attacked by China some fifty years ago. Heck, as a dare, go search for news stories from the usual gullible suspects in the media about Tibet; see how many feature pictures of either the Dalai Lama himself, or other monks (even in their heyday, a small percentage of the population), and see how many actually feature pictures or even references to the lives of average Tibetans. I know I'm shocked whenever I see the latter. To left-leaning activists, the Free Tibet movement is an indulgence and ongoing fantasy, the common socialist fantasy of a numerous, simple, happily ignorant peasant class toiling under the gentle, nurturing care of a spiritually and mentally enlightened elite, who gladly lift the burden of free will from the former and take it for themselves. Meanwhile, to many warhawks, any excuse to complain about China is a good one.
Thus, most people never actually get so far as to question what Tibet looked like as an independent nation, and what it would look like again as the same. But several counter points might occur to those that come this far and are still skeptical. I shall try to address these.
Q: But aren't the portrayals of 1912-1949 Tibet the biased propaganda of the CPC, attempting to justify their invasion?
A: Of course. Only a fool would take information coming out of an authoritarian state like China without a hefty dose of salt. However, parsing information reveals a number of things. Even the most pro-Dalai Lama sources have to concede a number of facts about Tibet prior to the Chinese invasion; 1) It was one of the poorest and most illiterate nations on Earth. There was not enough food, girls were not educated at all, boys were lucky to learn how to read. 2) Tibetan society was essentially caste-based, with a secular aristocracy, a theocratic monkhood, and numerous peasant serfs who were under the thrall and contract of the former, working land not theirs to support these castes. No serious scholar contends these two points. The counterarguments rely largely on supposing that Tibetans are a people naturally inclined to enjoy a simple of life of ignorant serfdom and high mortality, which is a fundamentally racist supposition.
Q: But wasn't the PRC rule just as bad, if not worse?
A: Probably. Tibet has been part of China, and China's government under Mao was pretty terrible and incompetent. Tibet, however, was actually relatively sheltered from some of the worst fallouts of the Great Leap Forward, given how far to the west it was- the PRC is, after all, about the same size as the United States or Europe, andLhasa is no closer to Beijing than Madrid is to Minsk, or D.C. is to Denver. It would also be a mistake to ignore that nationalist rhetoric coming from China on the subject; they do not view Tibet as a foreign region being occupied, but as a part of Zhong Guo, the traditional region of influence of the Chinese empire, which is, after all, a multi-ethnic one to start with. There have been extensive efforts from the CPC to win Tibetan hearts and minds, and to raise the living standards and economy of a region that remains China's poorest. It's a lukewarm victory to say that Tibet has about a 50% literacy rate, but it's certainly a vast improvement over where the nation was under the Lama caste.
Q: But don't the Tibetan people have the right to be Free? (or any variant of a "Free Tibet" slogan)
A: No. Not specifically. Exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis. More on this later.
This one bears getting into, because it's a common misunderstanding, and a continuation of a common misunderstanding that caused a lot of common grief and suffering throughout the 20th century.
First of all, it is not at all clear here what is to be meant by "The Tibetan People". It's all well to talk of an abstract concept of Tibet, as a cultural concept, but as a nation or people? To go right to the most severe form of this fallacy, this distinction is no easier to enforce in any way than that between the concept of an Aryan race and the realization of an Aryan nation. The most extreme calls from the Tibetan Government-in-Exile have included demands for whole swaths of Western China that feature prominent Tibetan communities; but advocates here fail to realize that these regionsare no more homogenuous than 1930's Germany. Large populations of Han, Hui, Salar, Monpa, Lhoba, Mongol, Qiang, Dongxiang, Pumi, Lisu, and some several dozen other peoples live in this region. The common phrase, "One People, One Nation", associated with the Free Tibet movement, is not only a lie but a chillingly racist and fundamentally fascist one. We could go to Israel and Palestine, or India and Pakistan, to see how well partitions along cultural, religious and racial lines work out, or explore the many-fractured maze of failed states and tribal emnity raging through sub-Saharan Africa, but it shouldn't take much convincing to persuade a reasonable person that multi-ethnic nations are stronger and more secure than those who strive for anything else. Even the Han majority in China are deeply fractured amongst many cultural-linguistic groups. If one were to dump a hundred buckets of paint onto a marble floor and be commanded to get each color back into it's respective bucket, pure and whole, one would still have an easier task than that of sepearting the tens of thousands of inter-mingling and criss-crossing ethnic groups that cover the globe.
Not that ethnicity alone could guide politics even then- then we'd have to come to mention the Tibetan Atheists, Muslims, and members of several large sects of Buddhism that do not place particular reverence on the Dalai Lama, and thus would not want a return to his rule, an unspoken and implicit assumption of the Free Tibet movement, based on the smiling mugs of His Holiness used in about every vapid National Geographic, Rolling Stone and even (I'm so disappointed in you) Economist articles on the subject.
Which brings us to the next point;
Q: But doesn't the Dalai Lama want to institute democratic reforms in Tibet, making it a free, liberal democracy?
A: Maybe, but I wouldn't bet my life savings on it. First of all, the Dalai Lama sings whatever tune's going to please the audience; when appealing to more Leftist groups, he's described himself with the Progressivegasmic phrase, "Half-Marxist, Half-Buddhist". He's basically hinted that if he were to try and lead Communist reforms, he would make them work, dammit. On the other hand, more recently he's put forward a proposed constitution. It guarantees religious freedom and freedom of speech, but then, so does the PRC. Moreover, it looks a lot like a Western democracy, except for the references to Tibetan Buddhism, making the Dalai Lama President for Life, and giving him exclusive power to hire and fire elected officials at will, as well as generally pause the democratic reforms he talks about at his own discretion.
I'm not saying that the Dalai Lama's plan is to use gullible Western support to secure a huge nation at the axis of Asia, announce democratic reforms, and then put them on indefinite hold while he establishes himself (again) as theocratic dictator for life with absolute power over the law and no accountability, I'm just saying that that's exactly what his proposed constitution allows him to do.
Q: But don't the Tibetan people want the Dalai Lama back in power?
A: Well, some certainly do. Most of them have a funny way of showing it. Just for clarity's sake, the Tibetan landscape makes Afghanistan look like gentle rolling hills; if there were substantial local opposition to PRC rule, you'd assume they could make life a bit more difficult than it is. Buddhists, despite what white college students might tell you, are exactly as capable of political violence as other religions, as anyone in Sri Lanka or Japan could explain. The Dalai Lama, in concert with the CIA, in fact sponsored train guerillas in Tibet during the 60's, but they didn't seem to garner a lot of popular support.
Certainly some want the Dalai Lama back, and express this by trapping Han and Muslim businessmen and their families inside of shops and burning them down (yeah, I know this was missed by the media, but those crackdowns last year? Weren't initiated by monks peacefully humming and clinking thumb-cymbals together), but it's hard to gauge where there's any real support anywhere other than exiled monks/aristocracy, Hollywood, and amongst privileged white college students.
Q: But the PRC government is repressive, exploitive, violent and abusive. How can you support that?
A: I don't. I just don't think this is a Tibet-specific issue. Hence why I said Tibetans weren't specifically entitled to freedom before.
Everyone is entitled to freedom. As it so happens, there's roughly 1.3 billion people that are having their religious freedom, their freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, right to trial, etc., abused by the government of the PRC. There's also another eighty million or so suffering far worse fates in Burma and North Korea, broken military regimes supported by the CPC. The repressions of free speech, free practice of religion, the opaquness of government and corrupiton of justice suffered by Tibetans are not more or less wrong than those suffered by Uyghars, Mongols, Koreans, Yi, Hui, or Buyei, or Han.
I'm simply being realistic. For all the freedoms it doesn't allow, the PRC does allow it's people the freedom to eat, to read, to an education, to an opportunity at economic success. The freedom to vote or write an article means nothing when your family is starving, you can't read, and you can't walk down the street without being shot by roving thugs in jeeps. The PRC is better than the alternative the Dalai Lama is offering; if it were a choice between Taiwan remaining independent or being absorbed by the PRC, my stance would be very different, since Taiwan is an actual liberal democracy.
Of course, the status of Taiwan in the UN and international community isn't an issue that college campuses are throbbing about, since it only involves twenty million, mostly Han Chinese trying to retain their democratic freedoms and economic prosperity from other mostly Han Chinese, rather than some smiling monk spouting Hallmark catchphrases that Steven Spielberg made a movie about, but that's neither here nor there.
I'm against a Free Tibet. I'm all for a Free China. Free from poverty and theocratic oppression, free from corruption and secular oppression. But those who are concerned about human rights in the Middle Kingdom should look to Taiwan, not Tibet; to the brighter future, not an even darker past.
If anyone can cite a different reason why the Free Tibet movement should be considered valid and not simply the mewling of angry and ignorant college students/Hollywood actors, let me know and I'll try to address it. Meanwhile, for a very good read on the great 20th century evils brought about by the idealization of the centralized, culturally homogenuous nation state, pick up a copy of Niall Ferguson's War of the World.
Comments
This article displays such amazing ignorance, it is not worth refuting.
Bob:
Anyone who doesn't think ignorance is worth refuting is an enemy of truth. Refute away.
it's amazing how such monkey interview posted here! Examiner? it's more like "Idiots".
your stupid country is even more repressive and extremely violent, who is killing innocent Iraqis and Afghans?
Good article.
It's unfortunate that there are so many people who don't know anything about the history of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism yet support the Dalai Lama.
I can only hope your article has enlightened some of your readers.
Jack, have you ever been to Tibet? Have you ever interviewed the Tibetans who live there? If you did then did you find many Tibetans who were happy watching their language and culture disappear as a trade off so they could earn more money working for the Han? I admire the research you have done, although your conclusions seem a bit cold hearted, but there is no research like actually assessing the situation from within the situation. I suggest you do the real research and report back to us. Thanks for the history lesson though.
Won't agree with everything you wrote - but definitely want to give you two thumbs up for independent thinking and not being a fool that go with the flow.
Vic,
Have you done the same? Note, I am not talking about "interviewing" in Dharmasala or in a welfare-sucking Tibetan "exile" comminity over here, but in TIBET, in a street, on a random sampling basis.
Even the Han-Chinese oriented Beijing Symphony Orchestra promotes Tibetan traditional dancing. This will be in Festspielhaus in Baden-Baden, Germany.
By the way, my relative have been to the Korean autonomous region in NE China years ago for business reason and I didn't see Korean people there turning Chinese culturally.
China is really taking care of their minority groups really well than what most people expected.
Dear X,
Yes i have spoken with many people in Tibet, on many random streets, with random people. I have also spoken with many Chinese people on the subject of Tibet and the tibetans. I would encourage anyone who has an opinion on this or any similar issue to actually do the same. Otherwise the opinion is worthless at best, as most opinions without a bit of diligent investigation are.
If one cannot afford to go but feels strongly about investigating then simply speak with people who have - that is people who HAVE personally done objective research.
Very few Chinese have talked with any Tibetans about the situation and very few Tibetans have spoken with many Chinese according to my experience. The situation could resolve if there was interaction. Most everyone else in the world with an opinion is just blowing off steam.
Thanks for asking, X.
This article is a good one. It is one of very few that are honest and not biased towards China.
Thank you so much
Great article. I especially like how this article tows the neutral line and yet manages to bring forth so much evidence and give it a light that is rarely used.
Here's to hoping more of journalism can follow this example.
I want to say I am sincerely impressed with your articles. They are very well thought out, above average. I (would) like to learn from them.
(I got here through your sig, I'm not actually American)
Hi, I saw your link on one of the youtube channels and I thought i'd check it out. you really impressed me with your research on the subject. Thanks for bringing out one of the most important points in the whole Tibet issue. I don't want to turn my comment into a long essay but I will write down one thing I feel very strong about, and this is to all the people who read this webpage.
Tibet is neither a mono-cultural geopolitical entity, nor a one-hundred percent Buddhist area, even though I feel the media in the west have been purposely misleading people to believe so. Especially if this Tibet we are talking about is not "Tibet Autonomous Region", but this "Greater Tibet Area" defined by the Dalai Lama and the exiled govt. (which includes Tibet, Qinghai and part of Sichuan, Gansu and Yunnan) I am very worried if this Greater Tibet area, if independent, will become a Buddhist theocracy as what their constitution says so. That will be a disaster for the millions of non-Buddhists living here, especially Muslim, considering the relationships of Muslims and Buddhists in the past, especially during the time of the Republic of China. The worst thing can happen is that we all get expelled by them as what Dalai Lama has stated in his five point peace plan.
Even if we don't get expelled, we don't want the exiled Tibet government which has a Buddhist monk as the head who is not choose by merit but incarnation. Take Qinghai (claimed by them as Amdo) as example, it would be very unfair in Qinghai becomes part of the independent Tibet. Muslims (Hui, Salar, Dongxiang, Uyghurs and Kazakhs are the ones in Qinghai) have a larger population than Tibetans in this province, and there's also Han, Mongolians, Tu Zu, Buyei, ... 41 ethnic groups in total have large communities in Qinghai, why should a Buddhism monk be the head of the government? If we were going to have a religious leader as the head of the government, why can't we have a Muslim Caliph as our government head in Qinghai since we have a larger population?
Chinese Hui Muslim, the Ma family warlord was already the ruler and provincial governor of Qinghai (part of the Republic of China) from 1912 to 1949. The current Dalai Lama was born here in 1937. Before the Ma family, it was Qing China who ruled here, after the Ma family, it is People's Republic of China, we certainly do not want a Buddhist monk as our government head. They tried to take over Qinghai before, but their troops (Tibetan Buddhist) were crashed by Ma's army (Muslims troops).
Same like all you guys have in the west, we want Religion and Politics to be separated, especially if the ruling class is not even from our own religion. From what I heard, in parts of Yunnan and Sichuan where the Dalai Lama claims, Christianity is the largest religion among the Lisu and Yi people. Remember, we all have lived here for thousands of years, some have been living here for a longer time than the Tibetans. What on earth makes people in the west think we want the exiled Tibetans to be our rulers? Just because they are closer with some people from the west?
Do not push a Buddhist monk on top of our head. The current Chinese government might not be good in your eyes, but it's much more fair than a Buddhist theocracy. We want move towards democracy, not move backwards.
Vic,
Every 3 to 4 out of 1000 people live in China is ethnic Tibetan, especially considering less than 5% of the Chinese population live in the western section of China where Tibet is. Are you surprised not many Chinese (what you meant was "Han Chinese") have talked with Tibetans? Also, have you talked with any non-Tibetans living in this Greater Tibet area? We live in this land, why should we be ignored?
Tibetans only make 20% the population of Qinghai. We, the non-Tibetans, make up 80% of the population here. We also form more than half of the population in this Greater Tibet area claimed by the Dalai Lama, and we are not immigrants. Qiang people dominated east part of Tibet plateau for thousands of years when Tibetans were still some tribes in the Yarlung Zangbo villages. Mongolians have lived in Qinghai ever since Genghis Khan conquered here (700 years ago), many other ethnic groups moved here earlier than that, some followed and we all have been living here for hundreds of years.
If the exiled Tibet government becomes our government, with their 100% Tibetan background, every single government official being an ethnic Tibetan, and with a constitution that does not allow anybody to challenge the Dalai Lama's position both as a religious leader and political leader (the head of the government). It is also for sure what you are worried about Tibetans would be a practical problem for us. Are we then, going to be "happy watching our language and culture disappear?"
Many people in the west use "distinctive language and culture" as a main reason to argue for Tibet independence. The truth is, Tibet has been a part of China for 700 years, and still has a language and culture you call distinctive. Many other minority ethnic groups have lived in China for thousands of years, and we still have our distinctive languages and culture, so why should our country break up now because of one (Tibetan) language and culture as the media in the west call for? If Tibet should be granted independence because of culture and language, should the other 20 traditional ethnic groups all be granted independence from Tibet?
Today, many Tibetans learn Chinese so they have more opportunities in finding better jobs, what is that so different from many Chinese learn English to find better jobs, both in China and in the US? I definitely think Tibetans should have a choice of not learning Chinese (which they do), but keep in mind, Chinese is the dominant language in China, almost everybody speaks it, you just have to learn it to be successful. We live at a time of globalization. English is not my native language, but do you think it's a bad thing for me after all that I can speak English? How else can I read Jack's article and write a comment here?
Anyway, after all, I support the communication between Han Chinese and Tibetans. But all the other ethnic groups living here should be included in this discussion. Tibetans are not so special as humans. Ignoring the rest ethnic groups is racist. I am not saying you are, but since you seem to sure you have done objective research. I feel I have to point out to you the things I have just said.
Excellent article.
To Vic:
If you have interviewed with Chinese people, not just Tibetans, living in China, what are their opinions on this issue?
Thx.
A.
Jack:
I am impressed with you and you research, I had not given Tibet that much thought, being so caught up in our USA problems, our divisions..and going down the wrong path.
I read the comments and think you are attracting very sensible readers and enjoyed
learning very sensible comments..good job..
Cara
A great article which is very informative. Thanks for your hard work and clear thinking. CNN should publish it.
even I don't believe what Jak's saying, you know i am the prisident of China. He is a China lover and I wish he is a human first.
Jack,
Regarding your reference to "British troops invaded Lhasa and occupied Tibet, demanding, amongst other things, that the Qing Dynasty pay the expenses of their invasion (a small taste, just in case you were wondering where anti-Western Chinese Nationalist sentiment came from)", there is an excellent analysis by
Mrs Shizuka Imamoto & Dr Nachiketa Das, two scholars based in Hiroshima, Japan in their recent article "The First Military Assault on Tibet" (to see the article, you would have to reconstruct the URL below by deleting the spaces around the . since this site does not allow including a link. hotnhitnews.com/first_military_assult_on_Tibet_by_Dr_Nachiketa_Das_n_Mrs_Sizuka_Imamoto_001_09012 . htm )
British killed half of the Tibetan young men, and "the size of the British indemnity would be anywhere between 5 billion pounds sterling (60 million X 1 pound X 80 = 4,800 million; based on retail price index), and 25 billion pounds sterling (60 million X 1 pound X 420 = 25,200 million; based on average earning index). Just as surely this amount would bankrupt a recession ravaged Britain in 2009, we would like our readers to realise that the indemnity imposed on Tibet by Britain in 1904 was designed to financially ruin Tibet and keep her as a bonded colony of the British Empire for ever."
Great article!! It is hard to see someone not repeating the Dalai Lama's words in the Tibet topic these days.
Bravo!
It is amazing that nobody had pointed out before the similarity between "ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer" on the famous Nazi propaganda poster and the phrase used by Dalai Lama "One People, One Nation", and of course, one Dalai Lama.
Great essay, very convicing.
You bring up many good points. However, regardless of what one makes of the PRC's attempt to "re"-assert dominion over Qing-era dependencies, or the relative suffering under old Tibet vs. new China, the fact remains that 99 % of Tibetans fervently wish that they could be rid of the Chinese. We can quibble about the numbers, but if the Chinese had substantial support there from anybody but their flunkies, the propaganda would be unnecessary.
The Tibetan culture and group identity are under threat from demographic swamping as well as political repression targeted specifically against them by what is basically an alien people. (Shanghai is relatively open compared to Lhasa, which is run like a police state.) The parallel with Kosovo (or Abkhazia) is pretty close.
If all of China were to become democratic, this would not necessarily improve matters for Tibetans. You will no doubt point to all the other minorities of the world who cannot possibly have their own states. Well, would you consider "genuine autonomy" to be a reasonable middle ground? That is in fact what the Dalai Lama is proposing.
If you suspect him of secretly harboring ambitions to become a dictator (and what about the secret ambitions of China's leaders, hmm?), then perhaps we could make a special effort to write democratic safeguards into the constitution of the Tibetan Genuinely-Autonomous Zone.
forget tibet......free willy
hey bob, i am interested.perhaps you could include some of your points. i for one am not well informed when it comes to tibet.this article has some very good points...share yours
To Dawud
"the fact remains that 99 % of Tibetans fervently wish that they could be rid of the Chinese"
Can you tell us how did you get the "99%"?
Do you have a stastics in all Tibetan?
There are nearly 10,000 Tibetans lived in Beijing and nearly 100,000 Tibetans lived in Chengdu. I knew many Tibetans in Beijing. None of them wish that they could be rid of the Chinese.
Please don't say 99% so easy just like Tibetan in exiled claimed that 1.2 million Tibetans were killed.
To Dawud:
You said: "We can quibble about the numbers, but if the Chinese had substantial support there from anybody but their flunkies, the propaganda would be unnecessary. "
Dawud, it 's clearly that you are just imaging what Tibet Issue it is.
You did not know the core problem of Tibet Issue
In fact, nearly 99% common tibetan(not including Tibetan CCP members) in Tibet hope Dalai lama could return to Tibet as Dalai is their religion leader. Dalai is the key man who mastered next life of Tibetan. That is why so many Tibetans went to India to met Dalai. Getting pray from Dalai is so important for Tibetan just as Muslims had a pilgrimage to Mecca.
But 100% tibetan would not like to get independent from China.Beacuse Tibetan have got used to the life with electricity power, tractors, motobicycles,cars,petrol... they knew if they got independent from china. they will lost all above. Understand????
BTW, Tibetan CCP members and their family don't want Dalai's return.Above ppls are nearly 10%-20% of all Tibetan population in TAR.Nearly all officers, judger, policeman in TAR are Tibetan.
If Dalai and his exiled gov returned, it would threat their now job. understand????
So, the core conflict of Tibet Issue IS:
Most common Tibetan eagered Dalai's return and at the same time they hope they can continue to enjoy electricty,cars, petrol,medicine that China provide to them. However.Dalai 's plan that is "meaningful autonomy" for "Greater Tibet" is unacceptble for China gov.Because this plan is the largest ethnic cleaning in the human being history just as A muslims in Tibet has said. So , there is no agreement can be made between Dalai and China gov, and Dalai can not return to Tibet.
That 's the core problem, Understand????
So, it is easy that you can understand why China's strategy is waiting 14th Dalai's death.
After 14th Dalai's death, 15th Dalai will reincarnate in China. The demand in religion for common Tibetan will be fulfilled.
And at that time, there would no Tibet Issue in the world at all!!!
So sorry i feel like repeating myself again.
The ready post is copied and pasted here.
------------
Tong zhi men hao! And hi everyone!
We the Chinese do not need to go back hundreds of years to make our point.
PRC was created out of ROC that was created out of the Qing. (No going back further is needed here. Hopefully, Western folks here can then understand my language and this leaves no room for ambiguity.) ROC was created along the theoretical and practical lines pioneered by West Europe and now accepted everywhere on this Planet. Another point further from what I'm going to say: during the Qing and before that, we the Chinese looked this Planet as Ours and all places and people outside of Zhongguo, or what YOU name us, China as Barbarian. Ok, ok. That was in the past.
Now, you Western folks, listen up. I'm now talking about Modern Things in a Modern Way. DO NOT confuse Modern Things with Ancient Ones.
Constitution of the Republic of China
(Adopted by the National Assembly on December 25, 1946, promulgated by the National Government on January 1, 1947, and effective from December 25, 1947.)
Article 26. The National Assembly shall be composed of the following delegates:
…
3. The number of delegates to be elected from Tibet shall be prescribed by law;
…
Article 64. Members of the Legislative Yuan shall be elected in accordance with the following provisions:
…
3. Those to be elected from Tibet;
…
Article 91. The Control Yuan shall be composed of Members who shall be elected by Provincial and Municipal Councils, the local Councils of Mongolia and Tibet, and Chinese citizens residing abroad. Their numbers shall be determined in accordance with the following provisions:
…
Eight Members for Tibet; and
…
Article 120. The self-government system of Tibet shall be safeguarded.
The Agreement of the Central Peoples Government and the Local Government of Tibet on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet (Beijing, 23 May 1951)
The Tibetan ethnic group is one of the ethnic groups with a long history within the boundaries of China and, like many other ethnic groups, it has performed its glorious duty in the course of the creation and development of our great motherland.
4. The central authorities will not alter the existing political system in Tibet. The central authorities also will not alter the established status, functions and powers of the Dalai Lama. Officials of various ranks shall hold office as usual.
6. By the established status, functions and powers of the Dalai Lama and of the Panchen Erdeni are meant the status, functions and powers of the 13th Dalai Lama and of the 9th Panchen Erdeni when they were in friendly and amicable relations with each other.
Peopple's Republic of China constitution
Article 30. The administrative division of the Peoples Republic of China is as follows: (1) The country is divided into provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government;
China is a unitary state.
A unitary state is a country whose three organs of state are governed as one single unit. The political power of government in such states may well be transferred to lower levels, to national, regional or local elected assemblies, governors and mayors (devolved government), but the central government retains the principal right to recall such delegated power.(widipeadia.org)
In simple words, in such a state, the power of local governments is given and taken by the central government. Let alone their independence.
In most older European and English-speaking democracies, political authority inheres in the central government, which is constitutionally authorized to determine the limited powers, as well as the geographic boundaries, of subnational associations such as states and regions. ("democracy." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica 2009 Student and Home Edition. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2009.)
Wake up.
People new to issues need saving from these columnist types who can't get off their arses to do thorough research. "Smarmy wanker" comes to mind when reading this article. This is a classic upshot of large-scale skimming and point highlighting for publicity.
You and this very confused ill-research are a disgrace to the free world/ human rights and obviously wrote this just to bring attention to the Examiner website.
If you believe this person you could do with some thorough and pro-active self-education on the subject of china / tibet and tibetan buddhism (as opposed to all other flavours).
"On the other hand, more recently he's put forward a proposed constitution. It guarantees religious freedom and freedom of speech, but then, so does the PRC."
Wow, we should all pay your flights, accommodation and expenses up front to see you exercise your proclaimed right to free and critical speech in PRC. (psst, anyone else thinking we should get a cheap deal on a one way ticket?)
Jack, you might try gardening or something that symbolises true freedom in our natural heritage before you go. Perhaps it'll help you salvage some perspective on life and what freedom truly means.
> www.hrichina.org/public/
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
> www.newsspoiler.com/world-news/more-inhumane-abuses-from-north-korean-to-come-007800.php
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_control_of_the_media_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China
>www.ibiblio.org/chinesehistory/contents/03pol/c06s01.html
>www.globalissues.org/article/144/china-and-human-rights
>www.cceia.org/resources/publications/dialogue/1_03/articles/515.html
>www.hrw.org/en/asia/china
The purest of intentions by all are what will set us free, none of the bullshit swallowed and so irresponsibly regurgitated by columnists paid (in publicity, credit or money) to create "atmosphere".
In fact Jack, perhaps you deserve hard-labour for ten years to life (literally) in a chinese reform camp for some remarks in your opinion? Oh but they don't exist, that's right. You'd do very well as a writer in the retail industry or real estate where bullshit is welcomed. In lieu of more suitable employment circumstances, the least you can do is show some respect to all those who've suffered first-hand or as a direct result of human rights crimes. As retarded as I feel that your opinion is, we’d all be saddened to hear of your experiencing just what this is all about.
Posted to numerous locations to see if Jack and the Examiner actually support free speech... just the way China does.
The language used by the Free Tibet hippies on this page show the true manner of them very well.
Here’s the demographic information of this territory of Tibet defined by the exiled Tibet govt. The composition of ethnicity is listed as follow:
Total 10,523,432 -100%
Tibetans 5,245,347 - 49.8%
Han Chinese 3,629,115 - 34.5%
others 1,648,970 -15.7%
I read the constitution of the govt of Tibet in exile, it is worse than what Jack described, it gives not just one reason, but a few very important reasons why people cannot accept this them. They don't even pretend they treat every one fairly. It is at least a discrimination of the non-Tibetans if not exclusion.
'amazing that nobody had pointed out before the similarity between "ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer" on the famous Nazi propaganda poster and the phrase used by Dalai Lama "One People, One Nation", and of course, one Dalai Lama.'
Perhaps if you realise that the Dalai Lama had a Nazi Storm-trooper as a personal tutor and mentor, maybe you may not be too suprised.
What a load of greasing-up-to-chinese-ass-crap! All this sort of junk helps is that more Chinese and more Tibetans suffer under one of the most repressive regimes in the 21st century in this world.
hello - just a little more fairness would do good most of you folks.. does the dalai talking about a theocracy.. for sure not! he wants to move of course toward democracy, absolutely - the tibetan people and all other people want to be free - free of hu jintao and his gang - rangzen
That was so cold! It's as if China or their government paid you for this article. Have you actually been to Tibet to confirm any of this? of course you will say that you don't have to go there to know. . . . . . But there are actually more Chinese than Tibetans in Tibet and the Chinese are the ones with the jobs. Who are you to say that they 're better off learning chinese? The "chinese way of llfe" may not necesarily be what's right for Tibetans or any other race occupied by China. You seemed to have left out all rapings of Tibetan women (to include nuns), encarserations of small children, and blatant shootings out in the streets without repercussions (just to name a few of the violations happening in this day and age). I am disgusted by you and your views!!
@Disgusted:
No, I haven't been to Tibet.
Of course, neither has the Dalai Lama in lo some fifty years, but he still wants to rule the place.
It would be better for Tibet, of course, if it were part of, say, Sweden, and had all the amenities of a first world, developed lifestyle, economy, social and political liberties, etc..
But that's not a possibility.
In the realm of the possible, it's part of China, and it's better for the Tibetan people to have access to education and economic opportunity as part of China, than squalor and poverty as their own nation.
I'd rather live in Hawaii than Haiti, to be honest with you.
Who in their right minds would want to be ruled by China? Just because the people of Tibet have suffered under the one oppresive regime, do you really think the answer to their prayers is another oppresive regime? It seems those poor Tibetan people are screwed any way you look at it.
I am so glad to see someone finally stand up and claim that "Tibetans don't deserve more freedom than the Chinese", "Free Tibet? How about Free China?" I am sick of those racist claims everywhere that try so very hard to equate every Chinese with the ruling party - which comes as no surprise, in fact, many people did exactly the same to post Nazi Germany, too. As long as you are a German, you are a Nazi - many people still hold this view today. And no surprise, to many of the similarly-minded people, "as long as you are a Han Chinese, you are a Communist".
Does everybody support Quebec independence from Canada? How about North Ireland? Catalonia? I know many do, but the supporters of Quebec independence have never been as insulting and condescending as supporters of Tibet independence. They assume the moral superiority that as long as you don't agree with them, you are either brainwashed, or your are taking CCP money. Ha!
I personally am neutral on the issue of Tibet. If after China has become a democracy, and by the choice of Tibetan inhabitants (I don't say people, because it is not one people in the so-called "Greater Tibetan Area") - which would probably take the form of referendum, they choose independence, then so be it. But discussing about the issue of Tibet without solving the China problem first is never going to yield the result you desire.
you're a crackhead. If you actually take a second and listen to what the Dalai Lama is saying, it isn't FREE TIBET. He is merely asking for religious freedom within the region and both cultural and environmental preservation. The Tibetan activists who are asking for a Free Tibet are different and are simply fed up with seeing their people/relatives/monks put into jail or tortured for simply speaking their mind.
NO ONE would be happy being so oppressed. You haven't been affected by this whole issue directly as our people have.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!