Tibet Occupation 2

[RedStarOverChina]

"So solidly built into our consciousness is the concept that China is conducting a rapacious and belligerent foreign policy that whenever a dispute arises in which China is involved, she is instantly assumed to have provoked it. All commentaries, news reports, and scholarly interpretations are written on the basis of this assumption. The cumulative effect of this only further reinforces the original hypothesis so that it is used again next time with even greater effect."
---- Felix Green

Recently I further witnessed the powerof Western media. I was shocked to know that it could even spur hatred among communist comrades, as many people in this forum are effect by the Western media’s portraying of the People’s Republic of China. I decide to write this article in order for our comrades to consider the other side of the story.

Tibet has been an self governing province of China for the past couple of hundreds of years, except for a brief period of time during the British invasion of Tibet and Dalai's proclamation of Tibetan independence in 1943 (no single country recognized Tibet as an independent nation. thus, it was illegitimate).

Even tho a Hollywood movie called "seven years in Tibet"(based on a Nazi's adventure in Tibet) suggests that there was a massacre committed against the Tibetans after the reunification of 1950 (or 51), it never happened. The Chinese Communists weren’t dumb enough to incite racial hatred. In fact, the Chinese soldiers were extremely disciplined and known to be at one with the people, since they were proletariat revolutionaries. Any harmful behavior is strictly forbidden.

Persecution against Buddhist Monks did not happen until late 1950's land reformation, in which Buddhists were forced to abandon old feudal ways and distribute land to the serfs.

Did u know that Dalai was a slave master? Hundreds of serfs were forced worked in his orchard for nothing. all except one of them suffered from harsh physical abuse. In 1950, 18 of the serfs attempted an escape. Dalai made an circular order for their apprehension. After they were captures, they suffered tremendous physical and mental abuse. 5 were beaten to death, while the rest were either mimed or suffered from mental disorder. Dalai’s hands are still stained with the blood of Tibetan people.

This is what Dalai stands for. The world had been fooled by this terrific liar. I could list tonnes of other sins he had committed, but I should leave it for another day.

I had personally been to Tibet and I have great love for its people. (tho I never liked the priests. They suddenly became so rich recently, that they feel as if they are superior to others. Their soaring of income was due to tourism and a revival of Buddhism)

Today, people in Tibet practice their tradition and religion freely. Dalai’s numerous lies about Chinese abuses are shattered by the fact that 1 in 40 Tibetans are or once was a monk. Dalai himself knows that this is a struggle which he could not win, and have hence abandoned his call for independence. But there are still things to be done to unmask this hypocrite.

I think that, the beauty of the word "Chinese" is that, it is not the name of a specific nation (ethnic). Instead, it includes all 56 ethnic groups of China, such as Hans(majority), Tibetans, Manchus, Miaos, so on and so forth. This means that it's possible to be both a Tibetan and an Chinese just like how I am a Han and also a Chinese.

[novemba]

Sounds like propaganda to me. Maoist bullshit.

I think that this is outrageous. Aggressive actions were made. People WERE killed. I dont think the Dalai Lama would lie. Think of it this way ultimate goal of Buddhism = Enlightenment and Nirvana in a many was commusim is the buddhism of politics. Ive read a lot of the Dalai Lamas writings, listened to speeches, and spent time with buddhists, i think that thats really condecending.

But hey, id be a hypocrit if i didn't keep open ears, mind, and heart. Prove it, lets see some evidence, and maybe i will stand corrected.

[RedStarOverChina]

haha... u are truly adorable, comrade.

[RedStarOverChina]

Did u know that Dalai was a slave master? Hundreds of serfs were forced worked in his orchard for nothing. all except one of them suffered from harsh physical abuse. In 1950, 18 of the serfs attempted an escape. Dalai made an circular order for their apprehension. After they were captures, they suffered tremendous physical and mental abuse. 5 were beaten to death, while the rest were either mimed or suffered from mental disorder. Dalai’s hands are still stained with the blood of Tibetan people.


How's this for a evidence.

[RedStarOverChina]

I watched tons of videos recorded by westerners regarding Tibet b4 the land reformation in late 1950s. People had it worse than dogs! I'll come back on this tomorrow. It's too late tonight.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

The Maoist revolution meant liberation in Tibet -- from an extremely oppressive feudal-dogmatic monk-ruled theocracy.

Serfs got freedom. Women got major change. The living standards of the people improved greatly. And the population of Tibetan people doubled.

And all of this clashes with the liberal-imperalist fantasy that the Dalai Lama ruled over some kind of "authentic" utopian, new age Shangri-La before the revolution. Or that the revolution involved the "murder" and "conquest" of Tibet. It was not until after the death of Mao Tse-Tung that oppression of Tibet actually began.

Here is a thorough and detailed discussion of the "real history."

http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tib-in.htm

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

Another good thing:

I'm not that big a fan of Michael Parenti, since he holds the line of the revisionist CP-USA, but he has some interesting things to say in this article, "Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth", which is backed up with many good sources:

http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html


Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet, most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that "a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches. . . . In addition, individual monks and lamas were able to accumulate great wealth through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending."(6) Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries went mostly to the higher-ranking lamas, many of them scions of aristocratic families.


The greater part of the rural population---some 700,000 of an estimated total of 1,250,000---were serfs. Serfs and other peasants generally were little better than slaves. They went without schooling or medical care. They spent most of their time laboring for high-ranking lamas or for the secular landed aristocracy. Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners send them to work in a distant location.(11)


Early visitors to Tibet comment about the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under the "intolerable tyranny of monks" and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people. In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama's rule as "an engine of oppression." At about that time, another English traveler, Captain W.F.T. O'Connor, observed that "the great landowners and the priests . . . exercise each in their own dominion a despotic power from which there is no appeal," while the people are "oppressed by the most monstrous growth of monasticism and priest-craft." Tibetan rulers "invented degrading legends and stimulated a spirit of superstition" among the common people. In 1937, another visitor, Spencer Chapman, wrote, "The Lamaist monk does not spend his time in ministering to the people or educating them. . . . The beggar beside the road is nothing to the monk. Knowledge is the jealously guarded prerogative of the monasteries and is used to increase their influence and wealth."(20)


Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they became bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeated rape, beginning at age nine.(9)

With stories like these, I don't know how Tibet could have been some kinda happy Buddhist paradise with kind, gentle rulers, and it is VERY understandable why there were 1,000 Tibetan members of the Chinese Communist Party by October 1957, with an additional 2,000 in the Communist Youth League. And, to quote the Revolutionary Worker again, "Some people will be surprised to learn that the Cultural Revolution was not imposed on the Tibetan people by Communist Party authorities and by Red Guards "imported" from the rest of China. Even supporters of the Dalai Lama, like John Avedon and the "exile accounts," acknowledge that large numbers of young Tibetans joined the Revolutionary Rebels from the beginning and that many older Tibetan cadres enthusiastically joined the struggle."

Quite impressive for a oppressed nationality of 1,250,000 people!

[RedStarOverChina]

In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama's rule as "an engine of oppression." At about that time, another English traveler, Captain W.F.T. O'Connor, observed that "the great landowners and the priests . . . exercise each in their own dominion a despotic power from which there is no appeal," while the people are "oppressed by the most monstrous growth of monasticism and priest-craft." Tibetan rulers "invented degrading legends and stimulated a spirit of superstition" among the common people. In 1937, another visitor, Spencer Chapman, wrote, "The Lamaist monk does not spend his time in ministering to the people or educating them. . . . The beggar beside the road is nothing to the monk. Knowledge is the jealously guarded prerogative of the monasteries and is used to increase their influence and wealth."

U can understand how bad it got in Tibet, hearing these words from CAPITALSITS in the early 20th century.

Also, sexual abuse was not only reported, but also a tradition practiced by the monks. Children are often the victims of this practice. Monks would choose young girls (preferablly good looking ones) to live with monks in the monastery and they would rape them, in the name of religious practice.

I read something about this tradition and how it contributes to both the health and spiritual enlightenment of the monks, if it is "done in the right way", so to speak. But that's another inhumane process. For now, I'll just tell u that it is extremely painful for both parties.

I didnt know that until recently even tho i went to Tibet.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by necro_oner
I don't think the Dalai Lama would lie.

That's funny.

I don't think he could tell the truth if his life depended on it. :lol:

Like all religions, Buddhism is a lie.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[bolshevik butcher]

i'm not defending the dali lama. The invasion was an agressive action, just because it was done by a supposedly "socialist" country doesn't make it any better. Saddam was terrible, that doesn't justify the invasion of Iraq, anyone who appreoves of this invasion and agrees with tibet is a hypocrite. Red Star, i am an athiest, but you can't actually prove god doesn't exist, aggreably if he did he's an absolute prick, and i wouldn't worship him.

[RedStarOverChina]

The thing is, Tibet was never an independent country. It's declariation of tibetan independence in 1943 was organized by Dalai's small group of monks. It was illegitimate. China did not recognize its independence nor did any other nation on the face of the earth. So technically, the "invasion of Tibet" was only a chapter of Chinese civil war.

To say that China invaded Tibet, u will have to start with condemning Lincoln for "invading" southern confederacy, Lenin for "invading" the "white Russians", Ho Chi Ming and his followers for "invading" southern Vietnam, so on and so forth. According to this logic, every revolutionary movement is a unjust "invasion".

[bolshevik butcher]

What about the plight of scotland, ireland and palistine though? Where's oglach when you need him.

[RedStarOverChina]

U dont see Tibetans and Hans going around murdering each other? From wht I've seen, they are quite harmonious overall tho i do not attempt to deny there are minor conflicts, just like the ones we have here in Canada or the US.

[Andrei Kuznetsov]

I think this question of whether China invaded Tibet like the USA invaded Iraq is valid -- if only because this view is relatively common. And is the result of some rather intense media attempts.

All I can say is that a detailed look at what the Communist movement brought to Tibet, and its methods, leads to a radically different view.

Most people who think "Mao invaded Tibet" (frankly) know nothing about the history. They think Tibet was an independent country and a sovereign nation. They think the People's Liberation Army "invaded" in an expansionist sense. And they think a series of atrocities followed- so-called "massacres" and whatnot.

The fact that all three of these assumptions are totally removed from the facts is simply unknown to many people. Like I've said before, if you want to find out the truth, check out http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tib-in.htm

I'd also add that this is also true of many or most anti-Communist myths. People have been spoon-fed verdicts, and have often no basis for any critical analysis of them.

There are many great sources on Tibet, and we can get into the basic facts here in this thread if you want. (The Making of Modern Tibet by Grunfeld is a good source: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect...=books&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=sovietempire&path=subst/home/home.html/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1563247135/qid=1072532852//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-9273541-5097551?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) )

The short story:

1) Tibet under the Lamaists was a feudal nightmare, a place of ignorance, serfdom, and the most brutal oppression.

2) It was not independent in any modern national sense, and was not going to be. The Tibetan plateau would either remain part of China (which was now a country undergoing a revolution) -- or else it would fall under the control of the British and Indian governments (in a way similar to Afghanistan).

3) The policy of the Maoists was to "hasten and await" the development of social change in Tibet. They allowed the Lamaists (including the Dalai Lama himself) to remain in power for many years -- and sought coexistance with them -- explicitly because they did not believe it was right to impose a social order from without. At the same time, they trained a new generation (including from among runaway slaves) in modern medicine, science, road building and of course revolutionary politics.

4) Tibet was a place and a people that NEEDED liberation -- if anywhere on Earth does. Not "liberation" in the sense of "U.S. invades France at Normandy" -- but liberation in the sense of "Nat Turner rises up against Southern slave owners."

5) The subsequent years, after the CIA-Lamaist revolt of the late 1950s, is both inspiring and complex. But we can discuss those events too.

[Severian]

Y'know, this whole "Tibet was never independent" argument is bizarrely formalistic coming from people who consider themselves communist.

One, Tibet was de facto independent for roughly the first half of the 20th century. The Kuomingtang government was too weak to excercise any real control there....the British had more influence, in some ways Tibet was a British protectorate. Tibet was not internationally recognized as independent, true, which makes a big difference from a bourgeois "international law" standpoint but not a communist standpoint.

Two, borders are just imaginary lines anyway. What matters to communists are peoples, nationalities, and increasing unity between working people of different nationalities....regardless of whether a people has ever been independent in the past, they should have the right to self-determination.

Y'all are doing a whitewash on the Cultural Revolution as well. It's true that Tibetans joined both contending factions of Red Guards - more joining the relatively "conservative" faction, which was organized by the main bureaucratic cadres in Tibet. How many were joining voluntarily vs otherwise it's impossible to be certain. In any case, in both factions the leadership was Han and in the "radical faction" a fair number of Han "Red Guards" were imported.

Besides beating each other up, a major activity of the Red Guards was attacking all Tibetan language and culture...including forcing Tibetans to speak "Tibetan-Chinese friendship language" rather than Tibetan. This was also the one period where there was an attempt to forcibly suppress religion, including the burning of one of Tibet's 3 main monasteries.

The level of repression was sufficient to spark a desperate revolt in one rural area, the one real popular revolt to occur in Tibet since 1959.

Tsering Shakya's book has the most detailed account of all this. But even books published in China now contain personal accounts of the rampant thuggish repression during the Cultural Revolution.

[bolshevik butcher]

Severian, palistine hasn't been independant since 1947, sctoalnd and ireland haven't been for ages, so lets just forget about it? Is that your message?

[Severian]

Eh, no. It's more like: Palestine was never independent (it was under the British, the Turks, the caliphs in Baghdad, etc.): but who cares. As communists, we focus on the people, and their right to self-determination as a way of uniting working people of different nationalities.

RedStar over China was right about this, though:
To say that China invaded Tibet, u will have to start with condemning Lincoln for "invading" southern confederacy, Lenin for "invading" the "white Russians", Ho Chi Ming and his followers for "invading" southern Vietnam, so on and so forth. According to this logic, every revolutionary movement is a unjust "invasion".

My point's more about self-determination for Tibet today than about the '50s.

[bolshevik butcher]

Red star over china, is what an imperialist goverment did in the past relevant to tibet's indpendance TODAY.

[RedStarOverChina]

Red star over china, is what an imperialist goverment did in the past relevant to tibet's indpendance TODAY.

Well if u put it that way: Tibetans ARE NOT calling for independence!!!

Dalai knew that. Why do u think he abandoned his call for Tibetan independence? All he's got is the backing of a few imperialists, glorified under the name of "spirituality" and "religion".

Sure, he might have fooled the world into believing everything he said without questioning any of it, but even then he cannot go against the will of the Tibetan people.

Independence fot Tibet is not the solution, but the source for 1000 more problems.

Tibetans know that very well. As I mentioned b4, the conflict amongthe Hans, Tibetans, and other Chinese minorities living in that area is MINOR. U would NEVER hear about us killing eachother for racial reasons. Then wht's the point of all these argument?

I, for example, was tought from an early age, about Tibetan traditional and religious practices, and that we should respect the culture heritage of our Tibetan brothers.

Our conflicts should be resolved under this circumstances, not to be worsen by the western media.

The west tried everything they could to demonize the Chinese Communists, associating them with the Nazis and how they percuted Jews. I thought our comrades here in this forum would know better.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 05:38 PM
Well if u put it that way: Tibetans ARE NOT calling for independence!!!
How do you know? It's not so easy to be sure exactly what most Tibetans think, since open opposition to the PRC government, or advocacy of "separation" is illegal. If you have some actual information on this, I'd be interested.



Dalai knew that. Why do u think he abandoned his call for Tibetan independence?

Out of weakness - he's got no real leverage on China - and because none of the major imperialist powers supported it.

They don't want to set a bad precedent for their own colonial possessions. Which is the same reason they never gave diplomatic recognition to the Lhasa government.

I wouldn't make too much of this "abandonment" anyway. If you look at the DL's current "autonomy" proposals, they amount to de facto independence. For example, all Chinese military forces are to be withdrawn from Tibet. This is not typical of autonomous regions - usually the central government keeps control of defense and foreign affairs at least.

[RedStarOverChina]

It's not so easy to be sure exactly what most Tibetans think, since open opposition to the PRC government, or advocacy of "separation" is illegal. If you have some actual information on this, I'd be interested.

True. It is hard to tell with the misleading information the media fed us. I'd been to Tibet, seen it's progresses and talked to its people. That might not be enough to convince u, but use ur logic:

There is no racial tension; the Tibetans are currently free to practice their religion; the central government is pumping money into the province for developments that increases the living standards, even the priest dont want independence, now that they are making tons of money from tourism!(from mainly Chinese tourists). Separation would mean that Tibet would be once again cut off from the rest of the world, and that even things as staple food may not be sufficient.

Why on earth would any sane Tibetan want independence, unless he's gonna become something like an emperor after the independence?

[bolshevik butcher]

What about freedom? I mean from what I know there isn't a lot of that in china at the moment.

[RedStarOverChina]

And u think its gonna get better as Dalai or someother theocrat come to power?

No, its only gonna get 10 times worse. like i said, independence is not the solution to anything, but the source to 1000 more problems.

U wanna hear something funny? 2 years ago when I was in Tibet, I saw a picture(ad for promoting tourism) somewhere in a hotel, in which a Tibetan man was waving with a sweet smile.

Last year, I saw that same picture in my civics Textbook, only this time the Tibetan is holding a picture of Dalai. If u look closely, u can see its been cut and pasted onto the picture with Photoshop or something.

This is how ridiculous it gets. Just goes to show u dont trust wht the western media tries to get into ur brain.

Its only reasonable for u not to trust me, but im asking u to forget about the propaganda u've learned as well.

[novemba]

We're people killed during the invasion?

[RedStarOverChina]

Acutally i shouldnt have blamed Dalai for declaring Tibetan independence. He was way too young at the time. But his chief advisor did.

the battle of Tibet ended up with the Communists annihilating about 5700 Tibetan Forces(killed, wounded, captured). I dont know about the Communist casualties, but the number is expected to be minimal. After that, the situation was relatively stable, untill Dalai and his theocrats were upset by the Communist land reform in late 1950s.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 07:54 PM
I'd been to Tibet, seen it's progresses and talked to its people.
I didn't realize you've been there. If you wanted to go into more detail on your experiences there, people you spoke with, etc, that could be interesting. Impressions of other parts of the PRC could be of interest to a lot of other people on the board I'd guess.

I gotta point out, though, that someone might favor "separatism" but not say so to you, or other strangers. Since it's illegal.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 09:40 PM
And u think its gonna get better as Dalai or someother theocrat come to power?


Since when did the ruler of tibet have to be a theocrat?