Does china need the Old Tibet

[Rebiu]

You can't believe this?

 

Is this religious bigiotry?

 

So now sterilisation of Tibetan women and the destruction of an ancient, deeply spiritual culture is OK?

This is the best you can do. Distort my position then feign disbelief. Pathetic.

 

Does no one remember Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler?

That lame analogy has been so overused the last few years I am surprised you think is still has any sting left. If Europe was in the state that Tibet was in and Hitler provided what China has then yes.

[Rebiu]

It is all relative

 

It depends, very much , on your point of view

Yes it does and since you made the comparisons you should explain the point of view that has led you to your rather dubious conclusions.

[Buffy]

I said I did not see the relevance of Michaelangelica doing this. You have done it as well. Why the hell are you behaving as if it is I who initiated these comparisons?

You can have that opinion sir, but do not impugn us because you don't think its somehow "relevant." Michaelangelica simply has asked how *some* of the elements of the Tibetan culture might be a benefit to Chinese society. You are certainly welcome to believe that theocracy is bad, but that is not the topic at hand, and you're being politely asked to move that discussion elsewhere because it is not relevant to this particular thread.

 

Behave yourself.

 

Thank you for your cooperation,

Buffy

[Michaelangelica]

Distorting the position of the op Buffy. I am no fan of China but they are feeding the people, building infrastructure, and providing opportunity. You can talk all flowery about democracy and freedom like Bush does about Iraq but the fact is democracy and freedom come after food, shelter, security, stability and education. These are the things CHina brings to Tibet that were not there before.

Do you believe everything China tells you?

Australian AID doctors have not found the above to be the case.

Health services are primitive.

"food, shelter, security, stability and education" were never a problem in the old Tibet and they had more freedom than they have now.

There is little 'infrastructure' being built in Tibet.

If you call the railway "building infrastructure" I call it Imperialism. Why else spend millions on a difficult railway that goes no-where (except if you wanted to invade India/Pakistan or the disputed territories).

[Rebiu]

You can have that opinion sir, but do not impugn us because you don't think its somehow "relevant." Michaelangelica simply has asked how *some* of the elements of the Tibetan culture might be a benefit to Chinese society.

Is that why you have to interpret her statements?

You are certainly welcome to believe that theocracy is bad, but that is not the topic at hand,

Yes it is.

and you're being politely asked to move that discussion elsewhere because it is not relevant to this particular thread.

I doubt you judgment on this matter. It seems you loose any semblance of integrity when you are disagreed with.

Thank you for your cooperation,

Buffy

What do you think I have cooperated with you on? In fact it is you and Michaelangelica who are cooperating in the use of you position as forum moderator to try to maintain you erroneous assertion on the topic at hand when you arguments fall away like grains of sand. I would say shame on you but I do not believe you have any.

[Rebiu]

Do you believe everything China tells you?

Australian AID doctors have not found the above to be the case.

Health services are primitive.

"food, shelter, security, stability and education" were never a problem in the old Tibet and they had more freedom than they have now.

There is little 'infrastructure' being built in Tibet.

If you call the railway "building infrastructure" I call it Imperialism. Why else spend millions on a difficult railway that goes no-where (except if you wanted to invade India/Pakistan or the disputed territories).

 

The railway is to haul agricultural product out.

[Boerseun]

Just to bring a fresh perspective on the discussion:

 

Whether China brings anything to Tibetan culture or welfare is immaterial, whether China is denying the Tibetans any freedoms is also immaterial. Whether the Tibetans actually want to be independent of China is also immaterial, based on the initial question asked.

 

What it boils down to, is geopolitics. China needs a pro-Chinese Tibet, whether its in the form of a puppet government or as a genuine pro-Chinese democracy (chances of the latter is remote, however, and that explains the Chinese attitude). The reason for this is that the Tibet-Chinese border constitutes quite a few kilometers of border, which need to be protected (somehow). So, what's the answer? Get Tibet to do it, and take the burden off China. Or, at the very least, get a surrogate government in Tibet to protect against any problems from inside Tibet that might project towards China. And the Tibetans, their culture, their rights and their actual will as a people be damned.

 

You don't have to agree with the above, it is fundamentally wrong. I don't think it's particularly nice of them, either. But, based on the initial question, from a geopolitical point of view, yes, China needs Tibet. And the Tibetans don't really like China either, and the cult of personality surrounding the Dalai Lama unifies the Tibetans against the Chinese making for quite a formidable anti-Chinese block, which can only be put down by occupying and completely dominating Tibet.

[Michaelangelica]

Just to bring a fresh perspective on the discussion:

 

Whether China brings anything to Tibetan culture or welfare is immaterial, whether China is denying the Tibetans any freedoms is also immaterial. Whether the Tibetans actually want to be independent of China is also immaterial, based on the initial question asked.

 

What it boils down to, is geopolitics. China needs a pro-Chinese Tibet, whether

Yes, does the new consumer society of China need spirituality?

 

On the geopolitical question. Who is China defending itself from India? Pakistan?

 

A neutral Tibet would surely be OK? Like Switzerland in europe?

 

This is from the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize

It is with great sadness I report that the human rights situation in Tibet today has taken a critical turn in recent years.

The "strike hard" and "patriotic re-education" campaigns against Tibetan religion and patriotism have intensified with each passing year.

 

In some spheres of life we are witnessing the return of an atmosphere of intimidation, coercion and fear, reminiscent of the days of the Cultural Revolution.

 

In 1999 alone there have been six known cases of deaths resulting from torture and abuse.

Authorities have expelled a total of 1,432 monks and nuns from their monasteries and nunneries for refusing to either oppose Tibetan freedom or to denounce me.

 

There are 615 known and documented Tibetan political prisoners in Tibet. Since 1996, a total of 11,409 monks and nuns have been expelled from their places of worship and study.

 

It is obvious that there has been little change with regard to China's ruthless political objective in Tibet since the early sixties when the late Panchen Lama, who personally witnessed Communist China's occupation of Tibet from the 50s to the beginning of the 60s, wrote his famous 70,000 character petition.

 

Even today the present young reincarnate Panchen Lama is under virtual house arrest, making him the youngest political prisoner in the world. I am deeply concerned about this.

 

The most alarming trend in Tibet is the flood of Chinese settlers who continue to come to Tibet to take advantage of Tibet's opening to market capitalism.

 

This along with the widespread disease of prostitution, gambling and karaoke bars, which the authorities quietly encourage, is undermining the traditional social norms and moral values of the Tibetan people.

 

These, more than brute force, are successful in reducing the Tibetans to a minority in their own country and alienating them from their traditional beliefs and values.

His Holiness The Dalai Lama's 10 March 2000 Statement

 

MORE HERE:

His Holiness The Dalai Lama

[Buffy]

You are certainly welcome to believe that theocracy is bad, but that is not the topic at hand,

Yes it is.

Only if you interpret any involvement of spiritual beliefs to be tantamount to establishing a Theocracy. In that definition, most of the First World Powers are Theocracies since their leaders express or even lead some religious beliefs. I don't really think that's a useful definition of the word Theocracy and I don't think many people would agree with it...

What do you think I have cooperated with you on?

Actually that was a polite request. I'm sorry you misinterpreted it. I now know you have no intention of doing so. Oh well. There's really no need for moderation here since you do such a great job of it yourself:

I doubt you judgment on this matter.

 

It seems you loose any semblance of integrity when you are disagreed with.

 

I would say shame on you but I do not believe you have any.

 

Whether China brings anything to Tibetan culture or welfare is immaterial, whether China is denying the Tibetans any freedoms is also immaterial. Whether the Tibetans actually want to be independent of China is also immaterial, based on the initial question asked.

The initial question asked actually seems to be the *opposite* B! Ask not what China can do for Tibet, but what Tibet can do for China! From Michaelangelica's first post:

But the above article seems to say China is in need of a soul.

Perhaps some of the philosophies of the Dali lama could help?

 

Note it says "Philosophies" not "form of government" of course, but fair enough, its both a question about what Tibet can do for China both generally and spiritually.

What it boils down to, is geopolitics. China needs a pro-Chinese Tibet....The reason for this is that the Tibet-Chinese border constitutes quite a few kilometers of border, which need to be protected (somehow). So, what's the answer? Get Tibet to do it, and take the burden off China. Or, at the very least, get a surrogate government in Tibet to protect against any problems from inside Tibet that might project towards China.

Indubitably. Its interesting of course that that's all most folks who oppose China on this topic want to do. India was arguably more of a threat when it was (mostly) non-nuclear but pro-Soviet, however militarily, invading Tibet to attack China is foolish: you've got the worst supply lines in the world and no escape route. Even if Tibet were independent, they'd probably have no problem considering such a move a threat and would make mincemeat of any invaders. But this is getting way off topic...

And the Tibetans, their culture, their rights and their actual will as a people be damned.

Apparently! The question is, how can the Chinese benefit from not destroying Tibet's culture? The current regime in Beijing are awfully xenophobic, so I don't think they'll ever think so, but they may not be there forever. Do you think we should encourage them not to do the wrong thing?

 

Thinking different,

Buffy

[Rebiu]

The Dalai Lama is quite charismatic. This does not make him a competent leader. It cannot be known what the effects of implementing his plans and allowing his influence will be. Democracy comes after stability, security, education and some measure of prosperity.

 

The rural people of Tibet are quite poor. The hold on to their nomadic ways and are disinclined to sell their animals due to their religious beliefs. This is what holds them in poverty in spite of the opportunities provided by the Chinese. They are uninterested in modern education and careers so they do not get the high paying jobs that would go to them. They make these decisions for their children as well as themselves. Continuing a cycle of poverty. It is the backwardness, lack of education, and adherence to untenable theological dogma that make them suffer. The Dalai Lama is the culmination of this backwardness. He is the head of the religion that keeps them in the dark ages.

 

Every culture experiences trauma in the transition from rural agrarian to a technological society. This transition is essential if any part of the culture is to survive. If the Chinese were not there the Indians, Pakistani, or Americans would be. I doubt the Tibetans would be better of under anyone else’s control(help).

[InfiniteNow]

Continuing a cycle of poverty. It is the backwardness, lack of education, and adherence to untenable theological dogma that make them suffer.

Their theological dogma is that existence is suffering, and that what some people strive for materialistically is the exact cause of it. What you call poverty or backwardness might simply be an awareness of one of the deeper sources of their suffering, a manifestation of a path toward enlightenment. Nonattachment, my friend, is one the methods used to alleviate such suffering, and is a key tenet of the third of four noble truths, yet you piss on it as if your POV is somehow more informed.

 

Three jewels and eight noble paths later... :)

[Michaelangelica]

The railway is to haul agricultural product out.

Yes, of course, Tibet is such a big agricultural producer.

I think this is due to the mild climate,long growing season, and like the Nile, the abundance of flat, rich alluvial land from the rivers. Turnips are especially prised in Bejing, as are Yaks. (Deepfried yak, in yak butter, garnished with stir fried turnips, is an expensive, Mainland Chinese delicacy)

And let's not foget China's wonderful, generous and bounterful contribution:-

Not until Tibet's peaceful liberation in May 1951 was modern agricultural science and technology enabled to gradually develop in the region. After Tibe's Democratic Reform in 1959, it launched a large-scale campaign in capital construction on farmland, building irrigation works, improving soil conditions, spreading new farm tools and breeding new varieties of crops, improving the farming system and promoting the use of science and technology. The result was the rapid development of agriculture.

Who needs freedom when you a tummy full of of turnips?

The U.S. State Department said in its annual Country Report on Human Rights Practices, released on 8 March 2006, that China’s human rights record in Tibet “remained poor”.

. .

The State Department said the level of religious repression is high,

. . .

The State Department stressed that controls on information made it difficult determine accurately the scope of human rights abuses in Tibet.

Australia Tibet Council - Home

 

turnips and yaks do make for ahealthy robust populace however

sparsely populated province of 2.51 million people. It is home to approximately 45 per cent of the ethnic Tibetans in China, who are mainly subsistence farmers with low incomes. The region has poor health indicators - a maternal mortality rate of 136.9 per 10,000 live births and an infant mortality rate of 69 per 1,000; a moderately high incidence of diarrhoeal disease (3.7 episodes annually in children under 5 years of age); a high prevalence of wasting in children under 2 years of age (16% for children 1–11months and 18% for children 13–23 months); and a very high prevalence of stunting of children under 5 (47.1%), with the highest prevalence in children over 12 months of age.

Health care for Tibetan villages

CHINA'S TIBET FACTS & FIGURES 2002--Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Forestry

china could of course use the railway to bring iodine, fish and agricultural produce IN?

 

This guy has obviously got it wrong:-

The Tibetan economy consists of subsistence agriculture, or the growing of enough food to live off of

Tibet's Economy

 

You don't think this would have something to do with the railway?

It was a very expensive and difficult railway to build for 'agricultural produce'

Kashmir, site of the world's largest and most militarized territorial dispute with portions under the de facto administration of China (Aksai Chin), India (Jammu and Kashmir), and Pakistan (Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas); India does not recognize Pakistan's ceding historic Kashmir lands to China in 1964; about 90,000 ethnic Tibetan exiles reside primarily in India as well as Nepal and Bhutan;

https://cia.gov/cia//publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

or perhaps this

Tibet has large deposits of gold, copper, and radioactive ores.

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0861545.html

[Rebiu]

Their theological dogma is that existence is suffering, and that what some people strive for materialistically is the exact cause of it. What you call poverty or backwardness might simply be an awareness of one of the deeper sources of their suffering, a manifestation of a path toward enlightenment. Nonattachment, my friend, is one the methods used to alleviate such suffering, and is a key tenet of the third of four noble truths, yet you piss on it as if your POV is somehow more informed.

 

Three jewels and eight noble paths later... :evil:

If you read a bit of history you will see the effects of this "manifestation of a path toward enlightenment". How much free time and opportunity for leisure and learning to the poor in Tibet have? How much time do they spend educating their children? Do they have access to a variety of information sources?

 

Speaking of nonattachment I drive a $150 ford festiva that I work on myself and a house valued at $16K that I own free and clear. I work an average of 25 hours a week because my time with my children and for creative expression are what give my life meaning. I understand the notions of nonattachment better than you I bet. Being poor is not the same thing and it is being used as a ruse to cloud the obvious failures of Dalai Lama and his cult of personality.

[InfiniteNow]

If you read a bit of history you will see the effects of this "manifestation of a path toward enlightenment".

Please, do tell us all how much I've read and how much I know. I'm curious to hear. Frankly, it's just another point of view, and even effects themselves are defined by each observer. Just what do you think I'm missing? I'm privy to the same information as you, I just interpret it less venomously.

 

Speaking of nonattachment I drive a $150 ford festiva that I work on myself and a house valued at $16K that I own free and clear.

You've betrayed the implication of your first few words by the pride you espouse with those that followed. While I appreciate that you subside on minimal resource, I don't think that using it to martyr yourself is the best approach to prove a point.

 

I work an average of 25 hours a week because my time with my children and for creative expression are what give my life meaning.

Thank you for sharing.

 

I understand the notions of nonattachment better than you I bet.

One thing to which you're clearly attached right now is a defensive posture and your self-perceived interpretation that your view holds true over that of others. Attached to your belief in your intelligence perhaps as well.

 

Being poor is not the same thing and it is being used as a ruse to cloud the obvious failures of Dalai Lama and his cult of personality.

Failures as defined by whom? Do we not each set our metrics of success, and measure ourselves by them? Why do you think your definition of another's success or failure are relevant?

 

Anyway, I do not think that the beliefs of the Dalai Lama are a roadmap to running a society. I see them as a roadmap to a better self, and I'm sure that he simply wishes to end both his own and the suffering of others and be a good human being. Then again, maybe if all of society had such a roadmap we wouldn't be where we are culturally...hmmm...

 

Anyway, please argue the merit of the point, do not attack others, and be respectful. I guarentee that if you do, you'll be taken more seriously.

[Michaelangelica]

When I started this thread I was suggesting that China may need some of the gentler philosophies of Tibetan Buddhism if it is to survive its rabid materialism, dehumanization; disregard for other planetary life (including the lives of its own people); and environmental destruction.

 

The discussion has widened to the rights and wrongs of Chinese occupation of Tibet. That was not my intention

But. . .

Tibet wasn't ours, says Chinese scholar

DNA[Friday, February 23, 2007 12:50]

By Venkatesan Vembu

 

HONG KONG - A leading Chinese historian and a veteran of the committee that advises on official Chinese history textbooks has broken step with the official Chinese line on historical sovereignty over Tibet and said that to claim that the ancient Buddhist kingdom “has always been a part of China” would be a “defiance of history”.

 

In an article in the China Review magazine, Professor Ge Jianxiong, 62, director of the Institute of Chinese Historical Geography and the Research Centre for Historical . .

 

“It would be a defiance of history,” asserts Ge, “to claim that Tibet has always been a part of China since the Tang Dynasty; the fact that the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau subsequently became a part of the Chinese dynasties does not substantiate such a claim.”

 

 

Yet, Ge’s comments are controversial insofar as they deviate from the official Communist Party line that Tibet has always been an inalienable part of China; in the past China has regarded as any weakening of that theory as “anti-national” and “split-ist”. It will be interesting to see how the authorities respond to Ge’s scholarly article.

Like a red rag to a bull I would imagine. (pardon the pun)

http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=15637&article=Tibet+wasn't+ours%2c+says+Chinese+scholar

[Michaelangelica]

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/643219236

[Michaelangelica]

This is the sort of thing I meant when I first started this thread

Dalai Lama quotes Mao, says Communist Party cannot survive without criticism

The Canadian Press[Tuesday, October 30, 2007 20:48]

(Tibet's exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama ® talks with New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton (L), Liberal leader Stephane Dion (2nd L) and Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe in Ottawa October 30, 2007. REUTERS/Chris Wattie (CANADA)

 

OTTAWA, October 30 - With Beijing calling his Canadian visit "gross interference" in China's domestic affairs, the Dalai Lama said Tuesday that the country's Communist Party cannot survive without criticism.

 

"In China, (it's) a one-party system," the Dalai Lama said as he began a meeting with leaders of all three federal opposition parties at a local hotel.

 

The spiritual leader of Tibetan Bhuddists said the father of Chinese communism, Mao Zedong, insisted on criticism from both inside and outside the Communist Party.

 

He called Chairman Mao's philosophy "very wise" but added that domestic criticism of the Chinese regime has been "wiped out."

 

PLUS

Most societies (if not all individuals) seem to need some sort of spiritual life, or at the bare minimum some agreed upon ethics.

It seems all China has is rampant consumerism

Can she survive with this alone?

I am not a religious or spiritual person myself.

I just feel consumerism and capitalism to be philosophies that lack 'something'.

(Especially in an repressive Oligarchy)

I find it hard to find the right words.