Today marks fifty years after the 1959 uprising against Chinese rule. What's next?
[u][url=http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=24056]Fifty years of being too patient?[/url][/u]
Tibet, 50 years on
Tue, 2009-03-10 12:11
#1
Tibet, 50 years on
Tue, 2009-03-10 12:15
#2
[u][url=http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-03/09/content_7557101.htm]Hu Jintao calls for "Great Wall of Stabiltiy" in Tibet"[/url][/u]
Wed, 2009-03-11 09:47
#3
Refuge
What? What the H-E double Hockey sticks does that article say,
Tibet will mark the 50th anniversary of the abolishment of slavery and the theocratic regime of the Dalai Lama on March 28.
On March 10, 1959, in an attempt to preserve the old serfdom, the nobles and slave owners staged an armed rebellion, which was foiled by the central government of China.
Yeah, the man who received the Nobel Peace prize sounds like the guy who would do that!
You can see how many slaves he has in India too!
Puh-lease!
Wed, 2009-03-11 12:05
#4
That's the [i]China Daily[/i] for you. Today they declared Tibet "an earthly paradise."
[u][url=http://www.tibet.ca/en/newsroom/wtn/5692]Dailai Lama's March 10 statement[/url][/u]
Thu, 2009-03-12 14:16
#5
[u][url=http://blog.studentsforafreetibet.org/march-10-2009-roundup-of-global-pr... from global protests marking March 10[/url][/u]
[u][url=http://www.studentsforafreetibet.org/section.php?id=6]Students for a Free Tibet global news round-up of March 10[/url][/u]
Thu, 2009-03-12 20:25
#6
Refuge
thanks, Ze. The pictures from germany were good as well as the others.
Fri, 2009-03-13 21:47
#7
I'd like to see the UN designate the entire country of Tibet as a World Heritage Site. Which it deserves to be, in fact. This is one reason it's so horrible to see the Chinese laying waste to the place and its amazing culture. I don't know if a whole country has ever been made a World Heritage Site, but if anywhere in the world qualifies, it's Tibet.
Fri, 2009-03-13 22:55
#8
[url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8462][color=red][b... Tibet Card[/b][/color][/url]>by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
It seems that the US government excels at propaganda for it continues to win over the very people it has betrayed and caused to be killed; buying their trust, it offers a friendship that is only self-serving. Oblivious to the past havoc wreaked by the CIA in Tibet, the innocent gather around the storm, stare into the eye, ready to be sucked into it, says Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
During the Vietnam era, the United States eagerly supported the brutal regime of Ngo Dinh Diem, a man who brutally oppressed the Buddhists; yet today our government has risen in defense of the Dalai Lama and Tibet. Has our sordid history finally led to compassion for the people of Tibet? One must wonder which people we want to protect for there are 41 races in Tibet, including Tibetan, Menpa, Luopa, Han Chinese, Hui, Sherpa, Deng, and so on; although by far, the majority are Tibetans. Perhaps the US is reaching out to the Dalai Lama - again? ...
Fri, 2009-03-13 23:08
#9
Refuge
Not sure what the point of the article is. All I got from it was (suprise surprise) the American government may hav alterior motives for supporting the idea of a free Tibet. Did I miss something?
Wed, 2009-03-25 04:39
#10
[url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/25/content_11070368.htm][color... serf writes: Dalai Lama "chief representative" of Tibetan serfdom[/b][/color][/url]
Raidi was born to a poor herding family in August 1938. In 1959, he was in the first group of Tibetans to study for four years in Beijing, where he and his classmates met the late Chinese leader Mao Zedong.According to Raidi, in the old Tibet, officials, aristocrats and lamaseries monopolized the cultivated land and grassland and the majority of livestock, while serfs and slaves had no land.
Under theocratic rule, the religious upper class, which comprised the largest serf-owning group with 36.8 percent of the land, ruled the Tibetans politically, culturally and religiously. The old Tibetan law divided Tibetans into three categories and nine grades, under which serf-owners could lease, mortgage and sell their serfs.
In 1959, the central government launched Democratic Reform.
"Undoubtedly, once the Tibetan reactionaries dare to start a wide-ranging rebellion, the working people there will be liberated as early as possible," Raidi said, quoting Mao's prediction about the situation in Tibet a half century ago.
We cant even get decent light rail and bus service in Ottawa, the national capital, without squabbling over pork and political graft, never mind full train service in thirdworldized parts of neoliberalified Canada.
Wed, 2009-03-25 09:34
#11
Refuge
LOL. That's just laughable. Anyone who looks into the land use and history of Tibet before the Chinese invaded would see just how plausable that is. The least they could do when they hand out propoganda is cross check it with realities of land use, population, farming practices and nomadic behaviour in Tibet at that time. But oh well .
Not to mention the credibility of the Dalai Lama versus Mao in openess and access to their current communities!
Wed, 2009-03-25 10:08
#12
Sad that this pathetic thread was reopened. I'd avoided it in the hopes it would atrophy into nothingness (which it nearly did).
Since this thread's going again maybe we can cheerlead for the MSMs condemnation of the South African government's decision to ban the Dalai Lama while simultaneously defending the Canadian government's decision to ban George Galloway... it might seem like an inconsistancy but its actually consistent support for US imperialism... U.S.A U.S.A U.S... etc.
Wed, 2009-03-25 11:27
#13
What, a news thread on certain regions, which gives news from both "sides," is pathetic? Sorry, didn't realize we wanted to impose our own news blackouts!
Wed, 2009-03-25 12:01
#14
Sorry Ze.
There is nothing wrong with your posting of articles.
Wed, 2009-03-25 13:00
#15
Tibetan people need to change their way of liberation. Sitting down and talking with one of the oppressive government is not going to work. It's time that the Tibetan youth make a decision for the future of the Tibetan people.
Wed, 2009-03-25 13:21
#16
It's time that the Tibetan youth make a decision for the future of the Tibetan people.
Well it certainly would be a nice change to hear from Tibetans who weren't personally responsible for the feudal theocracy which existed before the revolution, and who've never been on the CIA payroll...
But which Tibetan youth? The ones in China, elsewhere, or both?
Wed, 2009-03-25 14:23
#17
And here's another non-Anglo-American view of old Tibet from US academic Michael Parenti: [url=http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html][color=red][b]Friendly Feudalism[/b][/color][/url]
Many ordinary Tibetans want the Dalai Lama back in their country, but it appears that relatively few want a return to the social order he represented. A 1999 story in the Washington Post notes that the Dalai Lama continues to be revered in Tibet, but
. . . few Tibetans would welcome a return of the corrupt aristocratic clans that fled with him in 1959 and that comprise the bulk of his advisers. Many Tibetan farmers, for example, have no interest in surrendering the land they gained during China’s land reform to the clans. Tibet’s former slaves say they, too, don’t want their former masters to return to power. “I’ve already lived that life once before,” said Wangchuk, a 67-year-old former slave who was wearing his best clothes for his yearly pilgrimage to Shigatse, one of the holiest sites of Tibetan Buddhism. He said he worshipped the Dalai Lama, but added, “I may not be free under Chinese communism, but I am better off than when I was a slave.”57
Apparently Mao said that thousands of Tibetan monks were a drag on the peasants. He said they needed to stop living parasitic lives and get real jobs. Personally, I cant imagine refusing to work my own land for fear of killing an earthworm. Sounds like a feudal setup to me.
Wed, 2009-03-25 17:14
#18
Thanks D. :)
Many ordinary Tibetans want the Dalai Lama back in their country, but it appears that relatively few want a return to the social order he represented.
I think that's agreed by all. Even the Dalai Lama's said much the same.
I'll break from posting only Tibetan and Chinese sources here, to include [u][url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5975252.ece]this mainstream report[/url][/u] speculating that recent Tibet protests are behind China's alleged ban on youtube.
Thu, 2009-03-26 00:08
#19
Refuge
Thanks D. :)
Many ordinary Tibetans want the Dalai Lama back in their country, but it appears that relatively few want a return to the social order he represented.I think that's agreed by all. Even the Dalai Lama's said much the same.
I'll break from posting only Tibetan and Chinese sources here, to include [u][url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5975252.ece]this mainstream report[/url][/u] speculating that recent Tibet protests are behind China's alleged ban on youtube.
He actually already has changed the way the government run, there was democratic reform in 2001 and parliment is elected every five years. So it never will return to the way it was run before. The Dalai Lama himself has said they needed to catch up with the rest of the world, and followed through on it with the change in government structure.
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/258961,dalai-lama-says-he-is-in-top-health-but-wont.html
Thu, 2009-03-26 02:57
#20
[url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8673][color=red][b... and America: The Tibet Human Rights PsyOp[/b][/color][/url]
The human rights issue has become the centerfold of media disinformation.
China is no model of human rights but neither are the US and its indefectible British ally, responsible for extensive war crimes and human rights violations in Iraq and around the World. The US and its allies, which uphold the practice of torture, political assassinations and the establishment of secret detention camps, continue to be presented to public opinion as a model of Western democracy to be emulated by developing countries, in contrast to Russia, Iran, North Korea and the People's Republic of China. . .
The Geopolitical Chessboard
There are deep-seated geopolitical objectives behind the campaign against the Chinese leadership.
US-NATO-Israeli war plans in relation to Iran are at an advanced state of readiness. China has economic ties as well as a far-reaching bilateral military cooperation agreement with Iran. Moreover, China is also an ally of Russia, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in the context of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Since 2005, Iran has an observer member status within the SCO.
In turn, the SCO has ties to the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), an overlapping military cooperation agreement between Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan. . .
China is an ally of Iran. Washington's intention is to use Beijing's alleged human rights violations as a pretext to target China, an ally of Iran.
In this regard, a military operation directed against Iran can only succeed if the structure of military alliances which link Iran to China and Russia is disrupted. This is something which German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck understood in relation to the structure of competing military alliances prevalent prior to World War I. The Triple Alliance was an agreement between Germany, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Italy formed in 1882. In 1907, an Anglo-Russian agreement paved the way for the formation of the Triple Entente made up of France, the U.K. and Russia.
The Triple Alliance ultimately came to an end in 1914, when Italy withdrew from the alliance and declared its neutrality, thereby paving the way for the outbreak of World War I.
It's not about human rights. It's about trying desperately to weasel their way out of what is another crisis situation with their imperialist economic system gone awry for the umpteenth time. Dont be sucked in by the colder war bs. There is no legitimate purpose for nuclear weapons! No more imperialist wars!
Thu, 2009-03-26 07:35
#21
Refuge
I agree, there is no reason for war, or nuclear weapons when it comes to China.
But because I believe in peace their human rights record disturbs me, just as what I find out about the States human rights disturbs me as well. I don't want those abuses happening anywhere and I most certainly do not want war which would just cause more suffering.
Thu, 2009-03-26 08:37
#22
He actually already has changed the way the government run, there was democratic reform in 2001 and parliment is elected every five years.
Sorry to inform you but the Dalai Lama has no role in the government of Tibet. In fact earlier in this thread Ze posted an article on the 50 year anniversary of the Dalai Lama having no role in the government of Tibet.
Here's a link to the offical website of the Tibet Autonomous Region, to help clear up your confusion: Tibet Autonomous Region
Thu, 2009-03-26 09:12
#23
Refuge
I think you misunderstood my post. I know the Dalai Lama has no role in the government now. I was refering to the post about the Dalai Lama also wanting a different government and just pointing out not only did he want a different government but he has done it already.
Thu, 2009-03-26 10:02
#24
I was just explaining that what the Dalai Lama wants is irrelevant. Concern yourself with what the people of Tibet want, if you really want to help them.
Thu, 2009-03-26 12:52
#25
Refuge
Just to clarify I was refering to this statement by Ze
I think that's agreed by all. Even the Dalai Lama's said much the same.
I left your quote in there as without it this statement does not make much sense because it does not mention she is refering to the change in government structure. Originally I was not refering at all to what you said.
what the Dalai Lama wants is irrelevant. Concern yourself with what the people of Tibet want, if you really want to help them.
I understand that not every Tibetan in and outside of Tibet wants what the Dalai Lama wants. There are a signifigant number of Tibetans in Tibet and outside who strongly believe in the Dalai Lama and his views on the situation. For thoses people what the Dalai Lama wants is relevant. I am not going to stop listening to those people just because there are people who think differently.
Thu, 2009-03-26 13:12
#26
Refuge:
In the post to which you are refering (#17) Ze actually quoted the Michael Parenti article originally posted by Fidel which said:
Many ordinary Tibetans want the Dalai Lama back in their country, but it appears that relatively few want a return to the social order he represented.
Fidel/Parenti's point, to which Ze agreed, was that few Tibetans (in Tibet) would like to see a return to the previous social order as it existed under the current Dalai Lama in Tibet over 50 years ago. Ze added that the Dalai Lama himself would not like to see a return to the previous social order and you expanded on that by commenting on the current structure of the Central Tibetan Adminstration.
When I replied to you it was to make the following point, which has apparently been lost:
It is for the people of Tibet (in Tibet - those people Michael Parenti spoke with in the article Fidel posted above - not the ones in Dharamsala, India) to decide what system of government they want. What the Dalai Lama wants is irrelevant. If it coincides with what the people of Tibet want then it does; there's a first time for everything I suppose. The point is the people of Tibet, who rarely get to be included in our discussions of their fate...
Thu, 2009-03-26 14:13
#27
It's none of my business anymore than it is for the American CIA or British.
Our own leaders in the west want to stop backsliding on democracy before anyone takes them seriously on human rights issues.
These two stooges in Ottawa and Toronto, for example, have 22 percent of registered voter support each. And Obama is still a cosmetic leader for the USSA.
Historians will say that for a true regime change of the old guard in any autocracy to happen, and depending on size of the country and government in question, thousands if not millions of political leaders and embedded bureaucrats necessarily have to be swept from power, otherwise those old guard politicians will represent dogs in manger in opposition to change, and fight it every step of the way. We can see this happening now in Obama's government. There are embedded bureaucrats and political hawks still hanging around from several decades ago and bucking change.
Thu, 2009-03-26 14:55
#28
Refuge
I am sorry I misattributed the quote to you but I stand by what I had said no matter who said it.
Ze talked about the Dalai Lama saying that he wanted things to be run differently.
Yes, I expanded on it using the current structure of the Central Tibetan Administration because that is where they have set up a Tibetan government in Ehxhile where the Dalai Lama is. This is a reflection of not only what he says but what he has done.
It was to stregthen Ze's point that the Dalai Lama does indeed want a different political structure for Tibetans and has proved it in his actions.
I never said that the Dalai Lama should be the one deciding what happens in Tibet.
It is for the people of Tibet (in Tibet - those people Michael Parenti spoke with in the article Fidel posted above - not the ones in Dharamsala, India) to decide what system of government they want. What the Dalai Lama wants is irrelevant. If it coincides with what the people of Tibet want then it does; there's a first time for everything I suppose. The point is the people of Tibet, who rarely get to be included in our discussions of their fate...
In reading this I am under the assumption that when you speak of the people in Tibet you are speaking of all people in Tibet, not just those who Michael Parenti spoke with, please correct me if I am wrong.
So where did I say that anyone besides those that are in Tibet should be deciding what happens in Tibet? And where did I even discuss the fate of the Tibetan people who are in Tibet?
Thu, 2009-03-26 15:25
#29
So where did I say that anyone besides those that are in Tibet should be deciding what happens in Tibet? And where did I even discuss the fate of the Tibetan people who are in Tibet?
And here we learn why my very first comment in the thread (right after Fidel posted yesterday, awakening this inactive thread, and you laughed off centuries of brutal oppression suffered by the Tibetan people prior to 1959) was:
Sad that this pathetic thread was reopened. I'd avoided it in the hopes it would atrophy into nothingness (which it nearly did).
Anyway I'm going to go back to lurking, having said my piece.
I appreciate the articles Ze and Fidel have posted, and will continue to read them.
Thu, 2009-03-26 15:39
#30
But which Tibetan youth? The ones in China, elsewhere, or both?
Both, specially the Tibetan youths in Tibet. Youths in Tibet should lead and make the decision as they are the ones who are under the Chinese occupation. Tibeten youths outside should do the political work and offer the what ever support required by the youths in Tibet.
Thu, 2009-03-26 15:51
#31
According to dr Parenti, Tibet was a province of China well before America became a country, and before the CIA was ever established, and a shadow government created, and before Wall Street became more powerful than Washington. And the Dalai has no claim to rule in Tibet. Not unless we believe in lady of the lake annointed leadership, Excalibur etc
Thu, 2009-03-26 16:32
#32
Both, specially the Tibetan youths in Tibet. Youths in Tibet should lead and make the decision as they are the ones who are under the Chinese occupation. Tibeten youths outside should do the political work and offer the what ever support required by the youths in Tibet.
I agree. Tibetans outside should support the decisions of those inside Tibet; impetus to greater autonomy or full independance should come from the people of Tibet, if that is their decision those outside should do everything they can to support it. And if that is their decision I will certainly support it as well. But I also agree with your earlier comment that, if liberation from China is their goal,
[the] Tibetan people need to change their way of liberation.
Thu, 2009-03-26 16:49
#33
Refuge
Okay so I am under the assumption that you agree that I did not say that since you provided me no examples.
and you laugh off centuries of brutal oppression of the Tibetan people prior to 1959Actually no, I was "laughng off" the reported opression under the current Dalai Lama, since I don't believe in reincarnation I am not convinced the person that I have read up on in this lifetime is the same Dalai Lama as previous lifetimes. I have not read up enough on previous Dalai Lamas to know how they ruled but have read up and talked to people about this Dalai Lama's time. I know from what I have learned of the Dalai Lama he is credible to me because of his actions and recognition by awards like the Nobel Peace prize and recognition of the struggle in Tibet since 1959 from the UN and his story during that time and stories I have heard. But it is direct opposition to pieces that are put out by places like the China Daily about the Current Dalai Lama.
Mon, 2009-04-13 16:06
#34
Stop the Executions!On April 8th, China sentenced two Tibetans, Lobsang Gyaltsen and Loyak, to death for their alleged involvement in last year's protests in Lhasa. Two others, Phuntsok and Kangtsuk, were also sentenced to death but with a two year reprieve, and Dawa Sangpo was sentenced to life imprisonment.
These harsh sentences signal an alarming escalation in the Chinese government's campaign to punish and intimidate Tibetans who dare to speak out against Chinese rule.
[color=red][url=http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/stoptheexecutions/iekxusdrq7k77x5d?]Click to send a protest letter, via Students for a Free Tibet[/url][/color]
Wed, 2009-04-15 21:44
#35
I'd like to see the UN designate the entire country of Tibet as a World Heritage Site. Which it deserves to be, in fact. This is one reason it's so horrible to see the Chinese laying waste to the place and its amazing culture. I don't know if a whole country has ever been made a World Heritage Site, but if anywhere in the world qualifies, it's Tibet.
A practical reason for the above, Al Gore put it roughly thus: 40% of the world's population gets water from river and spring systems fed more than half by meltwaters of the [now rapidly disappearing] Himalayan glaciers. This is very relevant to Maude Barlow on the right column there.
The Tibetan Plateau stands to become a major source of conflict (among SE Asia, India, China, others) unless more cooperative ways of "resource management" are adopted.
The 14th Dalai Lama has in the past advocated Tibet becoming a "Zone of Peace."
Also, if Tibet is spoken of as "a country," don't forget much of traditional Tibet territory (mainly the erstwhile provinces of Amdo and Kham) has been parted and parcelled as annexes to Chinese provinces, mainly Qinghai and Sichuan. One doesn't have to go to present-day "Tibet" to see old Tibetan culture and monasteries within the PRC.
Lastly, it's too simplistic to lay blame on "the Chinese." Many "Chinese" are adherents of Mahayana Buddhism. But go ahead and crap on the "Chinese government" for what amounts to a policy of slow motion genocide of Tibetans. (The same sort of intentions the Canadian government had for first nations.)
____________________________________________________________
http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/questions_and_answers/faq7/faq7.html
Wed, 2009-04-15 22:25
#36
Not to mention the credibility of the Dalai Lama versus Mao in openess and access to their current communities!
I wouldn't trust the dead guy's take on current communities...
___________________________________________________________
http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/questions_and_answers/faq7/faq7.html
Thu, 2009-04-16 07:58
#37
Refuge
Not to mention the credibility of the Dalai Lama versus Mao in openess and access to their current communities!I wouldn't trust the dead guy's take on current communities...
Ah yes your right slip of the time machine should have said PRC government for recent and current openess and credibility.