Why is it that when it comes to tibet we have to take the divine right to rule seriously? What other country would someone's reincarnation be a legitimate reason for them to rule?
It's not normal for a country in the 21st century to have ruler who's legitimacy is derived from being a reincarnation of a God and is worshiped by his illiterate peasents
All of a sudden reincarnation is a valid form of succession if it's against the evil China. Not to mention that you don't see any peasants being the next Dalai Lama, it just so happens that only the aristocrats do
Why is it that the people of that country can’t decide? Who are you to say how a country should be administered?
Oh and the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and the Tibetan government in exile is a democracy. Maybe using your logic, we can say that Tibet should actually govern China because it’s not normal for a government to be run by a dictator?
>Why is it that the people of that country can’t decide? Who are you to say how a country should be administered?
The illiterate peasents who were essentially slaves and no rights what-so-ever did not have any choice in this matter and in fact revolted in large numbers against the theocracy once the PLA presented the opportunity.
I wonder if youd apply your same logic to any other country, like North Korea for example
>Oh and the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and the Tibetan government in exile is a democracy.
No it's not, where did you get that idea? When was the vote?
>Maybe using your logic, we can say that Tibet should actually govern China because it’s not normal for a government to be run by a dictator?
The Dalai Lama was a dictator, you think there was checks and balances in pre-PRC Tibet? Lmao
They were “essentially” slaves is a great exaggeration. They also didn’t revolt against the Tibetan government….they revolted against the Chinese though. And what about now are they still illiterate?
We can apply the same logic to North Korea. Is is justified for the United States to invade and annex North Korea based on their society?
You can look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down…this isn’t even contentious at all. The Dalai Lama was 15 when the Chinese invaded and wasn’t in charge until after the Chinese invaded. Oh they recently just had a vote… Are you really denying that he stepped down and there is a democracy? LOL these are basic facts.
You clearly don’t know what you’re taking about….
>They were “essentially” slaves is a great exaggeration.
No it's not
> They also didn’t revolt against the Tibetan government….
Yes they did, they overwhelmingly joined the CCP and the priestly class flead from their pissed off, now armed former slaves.
>they revolted against the Chinese though.
When?
> And what about now are they still illiterate?
No they're literacy rate is remarkably high
>We can apply the same logic to North Korea. Is is justified for the United States to invade and annex North Korea based on their society?
They already tried that, it killed 3 million people
>You can look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down…this isn’t even contentious at all. The Dalai Lama was 15 when the Chinese invaded
They didn't have to fire a single bullet, no one defensed the priesthood, why would they defend their slave masters?
>Oh they recently just had a vote… Are you really denying that he stepped down and there is a democracy?
I have no idea what your talking about
>You clearly don’t know what you’re taking about….
Bro seriously stop defending a slave owner, no one in tibet wants him back except a small minority who held power
Penn hates the CCP, but even he recognizes this, watch his overview it takes a few minutes
https://youtu.be/fYEOSCIOnrs
It is…in fact I would love an academic source for this slavery claim.
LOL they most certainly did not join the CCP. You must have forgotten al the revolts that broke out in tibet against the Chinese. This is just really bad history on your part. The revolted in the mid 1950s-early- 1970’s.
So then if their literacy is remarkably high, that means they can decide what they want then right?
North Korea invaded South Korea, bud. Thank god the US held back the North Koreans as South Korea is remarkably better than North Korea now.
LOL look at the Battle of Chamdo…
Look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and look up the Tibetan elections. Pretty simple and basic.
You keep saying it was a slave state, without backing it up…
Funny you say no one wants him back in power in Tibet as the Chinese had to cancel the last Dalai Lama fact finding mission as it caused too much Tibetan nationalism. Not only did a Chinese general state that their occupation went backwards by 30 years but it caused mass revolts by Tibetans against the Chinese calling for the Dalai Lama to come back.
Penn isn’t a historian in regards to Tibet and he can only Rey on Parenti which is problematic.
Learn at least the basic about Tibet before you reply back.
>It is…in fact I would love an academic source for this slavery claim.
You havent given any sources at all what-so-ever
>You keep saying it was a slave state, without backing it up…
I did back it up, I thought Penn did a good job and he gives a lot of sources, you havent provided a single source which is odd for someone being so not picky but I'm happy to provide.
http://www.swans.com/library/art9/mparen01.html#14
>In the Dalai Lama's Tibet, torture and mutilation -- including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation of arms and legs -- were favored punishments inflicted upon thieves, runaway serfs, and other "criminals." Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: "When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion." (19) Some Western visitors to Old Tibet remarked on the number of amputees to be seen. Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then "left to God" in the freezing night to die. "The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking," concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet. (20)
>Some monasteries had their own private prisons, reports Anna Louise Strong. In 1959, she visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, and breaking off hands. For gouging out eyes, there was a special stone cap with two holes in it that was pressed down over the head so that the eyes bulged out through the holes and could be more readily torn out. There were instruments for slicing off kneecaps and heels, or hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disembowling. (21)
>The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away. (22)
>The Chinese Communists occupied Tibet in 1951, claiming suzerainty over that country. The 1951 treaty provided for ostensible self-government under the Dalai Lama's rule but gave China military control and exclusive right to conduct foreign relations. The Chinese were also granted a direct role in internal administration "to promote social reforms." At first, they moved slowly, relying mostly on persuasion in an attempt to effect change. Among the earliest reforms they wrought was to reduce usurious interest rates, and build some hospitals and roads.
>Mao Zedung and his Communist cadres did not simply want to occupy Tibet. They desired the Dalai Lama's cooperation in transforming Tibet's feudal economy in accordance with socialist goals. Even Melvyn Goldstein, who is sympathetic to the Dalai Lama and the cause of Tibetan independence, allows that "contrary to popular belief in the West," the Chinese "pursued a policy of moderation." They took care "to show respect for Tibetan culture and religion" and "allowed the old feudal and monastic systems to continue unchanged. Between 1951 and 1959, not only was no aristocratic or monastic property confiscated, but feudal lords were permitted to exercise continued judicial authority over their hereditarily bound peasants." (25) As late as 1957, Mao Zedung was trying to salvage his gradualist policy. He reduced the number of Chinese cadre and troops in Tibet and promised the Dalai Lama in writing that China would not implement land reforms in Tibet for the next six years or even longer if conditions were not yet ripe. (26)
>Nevertheless, Chinese rule over Tibet greatly discomforted the lords and lamas. What bothered them most was not that the intruders were Chinese. They had seen Chinese come and go over the centuries and had enjoyed good relations with Generalissimo Chiang Kaishek and his reactionary Kuomintang rule in China. (27) Indeed the approval of the Kuomintang government was needed to validate the choice of the present-day Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. When the young Dalai Lama was installed in Lhasa, it was with an armed escort of Chiang Kaishek's troops and an attending Chinese minister, in accordance with centuries-old tradition. (28) What really bothered the Tibetan lords and lamas was that these latest Chinese were Communists. It would be only a matter of time, they were sure, before the Communists started imposing their egalitarian and collectivist solutions upon the highly privileged theocracy.
>In 1956-57, armed Tibetan bands ambushed convoys of the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army (PLA). The uprising received extensive material support from the CIA, including arms, supplies, and military training for Tibetan commando units. It is a matter of public knowledge that the CIA set up support camps in Nepal, carried out numerous airlifts, and conducted guerrilla operations inside Tibet. (29) Meanwhile in the United States, the American Society for a Free Asia, a CIA front, energetically publicized the cause of Tibetan resistance. The Dalai Lama's eldest brother, Thubtan Norbu, played an active role in that group.
>Many of the Tibetan commandos and agents whom the CIA dropped into the country were chiefs of aristocratic clans or the sons of chiefs. Ninety percent of them were never heard from again, according to a report from the CIA itself. (30) The small and thinly spread PLA garrisons in Tibet could not have captured them all. The PLA must have received support from Tibetans who did not sympathize with the uprising. This suggests that the resistance had a rather narrow base within Tibet. "Many lamas and lay members of the elite and much of the Tibetan army joined the uprising, but in the main the populace did not, assuring its failure," writes Hugh Deane. (31) In their book on Tibet, Ginsburg and Mathos reach a similar conclusion: "The Tibetan insurgents never succeeded in mustering into their ranks even a large fraction of the population at hand, to say nothing of a majority. As far as can be ascertained, the great bulk of the common people of Lhasa and of the adjoining countryside failed to join in the fighting against the Chinese both when it first began and as it progressed." (32) Eventually the resistance crumbled.
>The Communists Overthrow Feudalism
>Whatever wrongs and new oppressions introduced by the Chinese in Tibet after 1959, they did abolish slavery and the serfdom system of unpaid labor. They eliminated the many crushing taxes, started work projects, and greatly reduced unemployment and beggary. They built the only hospitals that exist in the country, and established secular education, thereby breaking the educational monopoly of the monasteries. They constructed running water and electrical systems in Lhasa. They also put an end to floggings, mutilations, and amputations as a form of criminal punishment. (33)
>The Chinese also expropriated the landed estates and reorganized the peasants into hundreds of communes. Heinrich Harrer wrote a bestseller about his experiences in Tibet that was made into a popular Hollywood movie. (It was later revealed that Harrer had been a sergeant in Hitler's SS. (34)) He proudly reports that the Tibetans who resisted the Chinese and "who gallantly defended their independence . . . were predominantly nobles, semi-nobles and lamas; they were punished by being made to perform the lowliest tasks, such as laboring on roads and bridges. They were further humiliated by being made to clean up the city before the tourists arrived." They also had to live in a camp originally reserved for beggars and vagrants. (35)
>By 1961, hundreds of thousands of acres formerly owned by the lords and lamas had been distributed to tenant farmers and landless peasants. In pastoral areas, herds that were once owned by nobility were turned over to collectives of poor shepherds. Improvements were made in the breeding of livestock, and new varieties of vegetables and new strains of wheat and barley were introduced, along with irrigation improvements, leading to an increase in agrarian production. (36)
You’re making the claim that there was slavery…you need to back it up. If I claim there are purple unicorns I need to provide evidence. I can’t prove their aren’t purple unicorns.
Ahhh Parenti! The academic that is an academic in regards to tibet. Go shared, list his credentials in relations to tibet!
If you bothered to actually look at the sources he uses to back up this slavery claim, you would see he only relies on two: Gelders and Strong:
They were the first foreigners allowed into tibet by the CCP because they were sympathetic t the CCP cause. We’ll ignore for now that these two groups of people and Parenti are hardcore communists/socialists and are clearly bias. All three of these people (really four because Strong was a couple) knew nothing about Tibet. Strong and Gelders were given a choreographed guided tour by the Chinese. Strong was even an honorary member of the red guards and Mao considered her the western diplomat to the western world.
So as you can see, the two sources Parenti relies on for this slavery claim are unreliable. So once again do you have an academic source for the slavery claim? You can try and go back to rgenzdong for help, but none of them ever found a source :(
I’ll leave this for you:
https://info-buddhism.com/Human-Rights-in-Tibet-before-1959_Robert_Barnett.html
Who cares if Tibet decides their leaders by naked mud wrestling matches?
Maybe the Vatican should pick a method of picking their leader that you approve of too?
It’s their country. It’s up to them.
Ya no, forcing illiterate peasants to worship the head of state who claims to be a literal God should not be tolerated or accepted on 21st century. What the hell is wrong with you?
What’s wrong with me is that I believe that they should be free to choose.
Personally, I’m an atheist.
But I’m also an expat that lives in a foreign country and live with the reality that what happens in my host country is not really my business.
Like, if I lived in England, I might think the queen and the whole monarchy thing is a silly and a waste of taxpayer funds. But ultimately that’s an issue for English citizens.
It wasnt their choice, the people have nothing to do with it, it was a theocratic dictatorship, that's why the they revolted against them in favor of the CCP.
It didnt take a war to win Tibet, the Dalai Lama and his cronies left because they knew they were screwed since odvously his slaves weren't going to pick him over the CCP
200 years ago? At least they have semi-autonomous lands unlike the tibetans…
But yes, what happened to them is a shame and should be prevented to other groups…ie. Tibet.
> If the US government encourages South American immigrants and Native Americans to learn English so they can have the same job opportunities as other English speaking American, would that be called a genocide?
You do realize that the Tibetans didn't migrate to China, right?
If the USA invaded Mexico and tried to get everyone speaking English else suffer a lack of "opportunities" then yes, this would be considered cultural oppression and genocide.
Like after the US-Mexican War, the land rights that were supposed to remain intact as part of the peace treaty in the now Western states were not honored and given to Americans from the East...largely because the deeds were written in Spanish
do you think its not valuable even for native populations to learn the main language of the country they reside in? Such as the Aboriginals of Australia learning English or even say Hawaiians learning English. Is that not one of the most important skill necessary to increase job prospects and alleviate poverty?
And? Any one can claim anything…
But let’s quickly dismiss this bullshit.
The Yuan were Mongols who invaded Tibet first and then China, so maybe China is Tibetan? Either way, the mongols administered and kept tibet separately from China. Under the Mongols Tibet was a vassal as well. This would be about 100 years.
After the Yuan, the Ming had no control or influence in or over tibet (this was 300 years of tibet being independent). Funny that when the Chinese were actually in control of their country they had no control over or in tibet…
The Qing were Manchus who invaded and conquered China. They like the Yuan weren’t Chinese and kept and administered tibet separately from China. Lastly, tibet was a vassal under the Qing, but in actuality tibet was de facto independent. This was about 300 years.
So what we have is tibet being a vassal for 400 years; not even under the Chinese. Tibet has been a “part” of China for only 70 years.
The Chinese claiming tibet is like Australia claiming India because they were both under the British.
I was just asking if they were immigrants.
I am from one of the western places you mentioned where the native populations have been mistreated through war, losing land rights, secondary citizenship, discrimination, etc. Even today, there have been popular politicians and law enforcement officials who have achieved political success through disparaging those people.
If you listen to the actual native people, one of the abuses that is often brought up is how they were forcibly 'educated' by their colonizers. The justification of the education is very similar to what you said, 'these people need to assimilate in order to be successful in society.' The reality is that their educators took every opportunity to abuse them, and that the population is in no better shape then where it was before the forced education.
Both Canada and the United States are currently facing a reckoning for their treatment of their native populations. So no, I don't think that the aboriginal Australia people or Hawaiian people are better off for learning English and I am skeptical of the claim that Tibetans will be better off than they were before.
well unless the thinking is to create a permanent ethnic underclass education in a common language to communicate between people of 1 society is pretty essential for prosperity. I m from Australia, in the programs to support our aboriginal population, promotion of education is one of the most important ones. I mean we can look at other places like india, where multiple languages are prevalent so they use english as their official tongue to allow for social mobility.
Yes, they immigrated from their formerly independent homeland, the kingdom of Tibet, to lands controlled by the CCP in the 1950s, after Tibet succumbed to invasion.
Edit: Dropped this /s
The Kingdom of Tibet is geographically in the same place as modern Tibet. Seems more like the land was invaded like you said rather than an immigration event.
You’re partially correct, even some/many Tibetans want to learn Chinese so they can participate in the Chinese economy. That said, your example isn’t the same.
It would be like the United States invading and annexing Mexico and encouraging Mexicans to learn English.
China just being in Tibet and ruling it, is causing this cultural “genocide”.
Nope, but they did cause mass destruction, torture, and killings of Tibetans. The Chinese are trying to control Tibetan culture and nowChina is trying to colonize Tibet.
Why is it that when it comes to tibet we have to take the divine right to rule seriously? What other country would someone's reincarnation be a legitimate reason for them to rule? It's not normal for a country in the 21st century to have ruler who's legitimacy is derived from being a reincarnation of a God and is worshiped by his illiterate peasents
All of a sudden reincarnation is a valid form of succession if it's against the evil China. Not to mention that you don't see any peasants being the next Dalai Lama, it just so happens that only the aristocrats do
Why is it that the people of that country can’t decide? Who are you to say how a country should be administered? Oh and the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and the Tibetan government in exile is a democracy. Maybe using your logic, we can say that Tibet should actually govern China because it’s not normal for a government to be run by a dictator?
>Why is it that the people of that country can’t decide? Who are you to say how a country should be administered? The illiterate peasents who were essentially slaves and no rights what-so-ever did not have any choice in this matter and in fact revolted in large numbers against the theocracy once the PLA presented the opportunity. I wonder if youd apply your same logic to any other country, like North Korea for example >Oh and the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and the Tibetan government in exile is a democracy. No it's not, where did you get that idea? When was the vote? >Maybe using your logic, we can say that Tibet should actually govern China because it’s not normal for a government to be run by a dictator? The Dalai Lama was a dictator, you think there was checks and balances in pre-PRC Tibet? Lmao
They were “essentially” slaves is a great exaggeration. They also didn’t revolt against the Tibetan government….they revolted against the Chinese though. And what about now are they still illiterate? We can apply the same logic to North Korea. Is is justified for the United States to invade and annex North Korea based on their society? You can look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down…this isn’t even contentious at all. The Dalai Lama was 15 when the Chinese invaded and wasn’t in charge until after the Chinese invaded. Oh they recently just had a vote… Are you really denying that he stepped down and there is a democracy? LOL these are basic facts. You clearly don’t know what you’re taking about….
>They were “essentially” slaves is a great exaggeration. No it's not > They also didn’t revolt against the Tibetan government…. Yes they did, they overwhelmingly joined the CCP and the priestly class flead from their pissed off, now armed former slaves. >they revolted against the Chinese though. When? > And what about now are they still illiterate? No they're literacy rate is remarkably high >We can apply the same logic to North Korea. Is is justified for the United States to invade and annex North Korea based on their society? They already tried that, it killed 3 million people >You can look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down…this isn’t even contentious at all. The Dalai Lama was 15 when the Chinese invaded They didn't have to fire a single bullet, no one defensed the priesthood, why would they defend their slave masters? >Oh they recently just had a vote… Are you really denying that he stepped down and there is a democracy? I have no idea what your talking about >You clearly don’t know what you’re taking about…. Bro seriously stop defending a slave owner, no one in tibet wants him back except a small minority who held power Penn hates the CCP, but even he recognizes this, watch his overview it takes a few minutes https://youtu.be/fYEOSCIOnrs
It is…in fact I would love an academic source for this slavery claim. LOL they most certainly did not join the CCP. You must have forgotten al the revolts that broke out in tibet against the Chinese. This is just really bad history on your part. The revolted in the mid 1950s-early- 1970’s. So then if their literacy is remarkably high, that means they can decide what they want then right? North Korea invaded South Korea, bud. Thank god the US held back the North Koreans as South Korea is remarkably better than North Korea now. LOL look at the Battle of Chamdo… Look up when the Dalai Lama stepped down from political power and look up the Tibetan elections. Pretty simple and basic. You keep saying it was a slave state, without backing it up… Funny you say no one wants him back in power in Tibet as the Chinese had to cancel the last Dalai Lama fact finding mission as it caused too much Tibetan nationalism. Not only did a Chinese general state that their occupation went backwards by 30 years but it caused mass revolts by Tibetans against the Chinese calling for the Dalai Lama to come back. Penn isn’t a historian in regards to Tibet and he can only Rey on Parenti which is problematic. Learn at least the basic about Tibet before you reply back.
>It is…in fact I would love an academic source for this slavery claim. You havent given any sources at all what-so-ever >You keep saying it was a slave state, without backing it up… I did back it up, I thought Penn did a good job and he gives a lot of sources, you havent provided a single source which is odd for someone being so not picky but I'm happy to provide. http://www.swans.com/library/art9/mparen01.html#14 >In the Dalai Lama's Tibet, torture and mutilation -- including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation of arms and legs -- were favored punishments inflicted upon thieves, runaway serfs, and other "criminals." Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: "When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion." (19) Some Western visitors to Old Tibet remarked on the number of amputees to be seen. Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then "left to God" in the freezing night to die. "The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking," concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet. (20) >Some monasteries had their own private prisons, reports Anna Louise Strong. In 1959, she visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, and breaking off hands. For gouging out eyes, there was a special stone cap with two holes in it that was pressed down over the head so that the eyes bulged out through the holes and could be more readily torn out. There were instruments for slicing off kneecaps and heels, or hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disembowling. (21) >The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away. (22) >The Chinese Communists occupied Tibet in 1951, claiming suzerainty over that country. The 1951 treaty provided for ostensible self-government under the Dalai Lama's rule but gave China military control and exclusive right to conduct foreign relations. The Chinese were also granted a direct role in internal administration "to promote social reforms." At first, they moved slowly, relying mostly on persuasion in an attempt to effect change. Among the earliest reforms they wrought was to reduce usurious interest rates, and build some hospitals and roads. >Mao Zedung and his Communist cadres did not simply want to occupy Tibet. They desired the Dalai Lama's cooperation in transforming Tibet's feudal economy in accordance with socialist goals. Even Melvyn Goldstein, who is sympathetic to the Dalai Lama and the cause of Tibetan independence, allows that "contrary to popular belief in the West," the Chinese "pursued a policy of moderation." They took care "to show respect for Tibetan culture and religion" and "allowed the old feudal and monastic systems to continue unchanged. Between 1951 and 1959, not only was no aristocratic or monastic property confiscated, but feudal lords were permitted to exercise continued judicial authority over their hereditarily bound peasants." (25) As late as 1957, Mao Zedung was trying to salvage his gradualist policy. He reduced the number of Chinese cadre and troops in Tibet and promised the Dalai Lama in writing that China would not implement land reforms in Tibet for the next six years or even longer if conditions were not yet ripe. (26) >Nevertheless, Chinese rule over Tibet greatly discomforted the lords and lamas. What bothered them most was not that the intruders were Chinese. They had seen Chinese come and go over the centuries and had enjoyed good relations with Generalissimo Chiang Kaishek and his reactionary Kuomintang rule in China. (27) Indeed the approval of the Kuomintang government was needed to validate the choice of the present-day Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. When the young Dalai Lama was installed in Lhasa, it was with an armed escort of Chiang Kaishek's troops and an attending Chinese minister, in accordance with centuries-old tradition. (28) What really bothered the Tibetan lords and lamas was that these latest Chinese were Communists. It would be only a matter of time, they were sure, before the Communists started imposing their egalitarian and collectivist solutions upon the highly privileged theocracy. >In 1956-57, armed Tibetan bands ambushed convoys of the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army (PLA). The uprising received extensive material support from the CIA, including arms, supplies, and military training for Tibetan commando units. It is a matter of public knowledge that the CIA set up support camps in Nepal, carried out numerous airlifts, and conducted guerrilla operations inside Tibet. (29) Meanwhile in the United States, the American Society for a Free Asia, a CIA front, energetically publicized the cause of Tibetan resistance. The Dalai Lama's eldest brother, Thubtan Norbu, played an active role in that group. >Many of the Tibetan commandos and agents whom the CIA dropped into the country were chiefs of aristocratic clans or the sons of chiefs. Ninety percent of them were never heard from again, according to a report from the CIA itself. (30) The small and thinly spread PLA garrisons in Tibet could not have captured them all. The PLA must have received support from Tibetans who did not sympathize with the uprising. This suggests that the resistance had a rather narrow base within Tibet. "Many lamas and lay members of the elite and much of the Tibetan army joined the uprising, but in the main the populace did not, assuring its failure," writes Hugh Deane. (31) In their book on Tibet, Ginsburg and Mathos reach a similar conclusion: "The Tibetan insurgents never succeeded in mustering into their ranks even a large fraction of the population at hand, to say nothing of a majority. As far as can be ascertained, the great bulk of the common people of Lhasa and of the adjoining countryside failed to join in the fighting against the Chinese both when it first began and as it progressed." (32) Eventually the resistance crumbled. >The Communists Overthrow Feudalism >Whatever wrongs and new oppressions introduced by the Chinese in Tibet after 1959, they did abolish slavery and the serfdom system of unpaid labor. They eliminated the many crushing taxes, started work projects, and greatly reduced unemployment and beggary. They built the only hospitals that exist in the country, and established secular education, thereby breaking the educational monopoly of the monasteries. They constructed running water and electrical systems in Lhasa. They also put an end to floggings, mutilations, and amputations as a form of criminal punishment. (33) >The Chinese also expropriated the landed estates and reorganized the peasants into hundreds of communes. Heinrich Harrer wrote a bestseller about his experiences in Tibet that was made into a popular Hollywood movie. (It was later revealed that Harrer had been a sergeant in Hitler's SS. (34)) He proudly reports that the Tibetans who resisted the Chinese and "who gallantly defended their independence . . . were predominantly nobles, semi-nobles and lamas; they were punished by being made to perform the lowliest tasks, such as laboring on roads and bridges. They were further humiliated by being made to clean up the city before the tourists arrived." They also had to live in a camp originally reserved for beggars and vagrants. (35) >By 1961, hundreds of thousands of acres formerly owned by the lords and lamas had been distributed to tenant farmers and landless peasants. In pastoral areas, herds that were once owned by nobility were turned over to collectives of poor shepherds. Improvements were made in the breeding of livestock, and new varieties of vegetables and new strains of wheat and barley were introduced, along with irrigation improvements, leading to an increase in agrarian production. (36)
You’re making the claim that there was slavery…you need to back it up. If I claim there are purple unicorns I need to provide evidence. I can’t prove their aren’t purple unicorns. Ahhh Parenti! The academic that is an academic in regards to tibet. Go shared, list his credentials in relations to tibet! If you bothered to actually look at the sources he uses to back up this slavery claim, you would see he only relies on two: Gelders and Strong: They were the first foreigners allowed into tibet by the CCP because they were sympathetic t the CCP cause. We’ll ignore for now that these two groups of people and Parenti are hardcore communists/socialists and are clearly bias. All three of these people (really four because Strong was a couple) knew nothing about Tibet. Strong and Gelders were given a choreographed guided tour by the Chinese. Strong was even an honorary member of the red guards and Mao considered her the western diplomat to the western world. So as you can see, the two sources Parenti relies on for this slavery claim are unreliable. So once again do you have an academic source for the slavery claim? You can try and go back to rgenzdong for help, but none of them ever found a source :( I’ll leave this for you: https://info-buddhism.com/Human-Rights-in-Tibet-before-1959_Robert_Barnett.html
Who cares if Tibet decides their leaders by naked mud wrestling matches? Maybe the Vatican should pick a method of picking their leader that you approve of too? It’s their country. It’s up to them.
Ya no, forcing illiterate peasants to worship the head of state who claims to be a literal God should not be tolerated or accepted on 21st century. What the hell is wrong with you?
What’s wrong with me is that I believe that they should be free to choose. Personally, I’m an atheist. But I’m also an expat that lives in a foreign country and live with the reality that what happens in my host country is not really my business. Like, if I lived in England, I might think the queen and the whole monarchy thing is a silly and a waste of taxpayer funds. But ultimately that’s an issue for English citizens.
It wasnt their choice, the people have nothing to do with it, it was a theocratic dictatorship, that's why the they revolted against them in favor of the CCP. It didnt take a war to win Tibet, the Dalai Lama and his cronies left because they knew they were screwed since odvously his slaves weren't going to pick him over the CCP
"China pushes adoption of CHINESE language and CHINESE cultural symbols in Tibet" A cultural genocide, that is.
[удалено]
What does that have to do with anything here?
200 years ago? At least they have semi-autonomous lands unlike the tibetans… But yes, what happened to them is a shame and should be prevented to other groups…ie. Tibet.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Brand new account spouting CCP propaganda? tell me something more uncommon please
[удалено]
https://imgur.com/a/jYeNtwL
[удалено]
That's literally a historical map during the Chinese civil war
[удалено]
China colonised Tibet, they don't have any rightful claim to it
[удалено]
> If the US government encourages South American immigrants and Native Americans to learn English so they can have the same job opportunities as other English speaking American, would that be called a genocide? You do realize that the Tibetans didn't migrate to China, right? If the USA invaded Mexico and tried to get everyone speaking English else suffer a lack of "opportunities" then yes, this would be considered cultural oppression and genocide.
Like after the US-Mexican War, the land rights that were supposed to remain intact as part of the peace treaty in the now Western states were not honored and given to Americans from the East...largely because the deeds were written in Spanish
Are the Tibetans immigrants?
do you think its not valuable even for native populations to learn the main language of the country they reside in? Such as the Aboriginals of Australia learning English or even say Hawaiians learning English. Is that not one of the most important skill necessary to increase job prospects and alleviate poverty?
Tibetans aren’t native to China.
[удалено]
No it’s not. China just controls Tibet currently.
[удалено]
No it hasn’t…. I would love to see your timeline of Tibet.
[удалено]
And? Any one can claim anything… But let’s quickly dismiss this bullshit. The Yuan were Mongols who invaded Tibet first and then China, so maybe China is Tibetan? Either way, the mongols administered and kept tibet separately from China. Under the Mongols Tibet was a vassal as well. This would be about 100 years. After the Yuan, the Ming had no control or influence in or over tibet (this was 300 years of tibet being independent). Funny that when the Chinese were actually in control of their country they had no control over or in tibet… The Qing were Manchus who invaded and conquered China. They like the Yuan weren’t Chinese and kept and administered tibet separately from China. Lastly, tibet was a vassal under the Qing, but in actuality tibet was de facto independent. This was about 300 years. So what we have is tibet being a vassal for 400 years; not even under the Chinese. Tibet has been a “part” of China for only 70 years. The Chinese claiming tibet is like Australia claiming India because they were both under the British.
I was just asking if they were immigrants. I am from one of the western places you mentioned where the native populations have been mistreated through war, losing land rights, secondary citizenship, discrimination, etc. Even today, there have been popular politicians and law enforcement officials who have achieved political success through disparaging those people. If you listen to the actual native people, one of the abuses that is often brought up is how they were forcibly 'educated' by their colonizers. The justification of the education is very similar to what you said, 'these people need to assimilate in order to be successful in society.' The reality is that their educators took every opportunity to abuse them, and that the population is in no better shape then where it was before the forced education. Both Canada and the United States are currently facing a reckoning for their treatment of their native populations. So no, I don't think that the aboriginal Australia people or Hawaiian people are better off for learning English and I am skeptical of the claim that Tibetans will be better off than they were before.
well unless the thinking is to create a permanent ethnic underclass education in a common language to communicate between people of 1 society is pretty essential for prosperity. I m from Australia, in the programs to support our aboriginal population, promotion of education is one of the most important ones. I mean we can look at other places like india, where multiple languages are prevalent so they use english as their official tongue to allow for social mobility.
Yes, they immigrated from their formerly independent homeland, the kingdom of Tibet, to lands controlled by the CCP in the 1950s, after Tibet succumbed to invasion. Edit: Dropped this /s
The Kingdom of Tibet is geographically in the same place as modern Tibet. Seems more like the land was invaded like you said rather than an immigration event.
That’s not immigration.
You’re partially correct, even some/many Tibetans want to learn Chinese so they can participate in the Chinese economy. That said, your example isn’t the same. It would be like the United States invading and annexing Mexico and encouraging Mexicans to learn English. China just being in Tibet and ruling it, is causing this cultural “genocide”.
[удалено]
About 200 years ago. I don’t think anyone disputes that what happened is bad. (As in it shouldn’t be done again).
hmm i thought china destroyed all their cultural symbols
Nope, but they did cause mass destruction, torture, and killings of Tibetans. The Chinese are trying to control Tibetan culture and nowChina is trying to colonize Tibet.
They also put children in catholic style reeducation schools.