The Dalai Lama’s Tibet: now that was hell on earth
|
The Dalai Lama knows how to generate publicity for his dubious cause. This time, he is using the 50th anniversary of his failed uprising against the Chinese in Tibet, to tell the world that the years since the events of 1959 have brought “untold suffering and destruction to the land and people of Tibet.” Naturally, the Western media swallows this statement lock, stock and barrel, even though it is simply brazen intellectual and historical dishonesty on the part of the well heeled, formerly CIA funded, Tibetan monk. The reality of life for Tibetans when the Dalai Lama and his predecessors ruled Tibet was simply ghastly. It was truly “hell on earth”, a phrase the Dalai Lama is using to describe the impact of China’s presence in Tibet today. In his 1996 book, The Making of Modern Tibet, Tom Grunfeld describes the feudal system that existed in Tibet in the lead up to 1959. Tibetans, he writes, were ruled by a system of feudal theocracy, and the Dalai Lama was at the pinnacle of that structure. It was a society in which land owners and nobles made life as hellish for peasants as was the case in medieval England. Nobles collected taxes, beat their “serfs”, took bribes and ensured that the serfs, who lived in hovels on their estates, starved while their banquet tables heaved with produce grown on the estate. Serfs, and the vast majority of Tibetans were in this category, had no power. They had to gain permission to attend a monastery or to get married. There was, Grunfeld writes, little class mobility in Tibet. It was a rigid and thoroughly elite driven society in which slavery was tolerated. Grunfeld’s bleak assessment of living conditions in Tibet up to 1959 is not a maverick one. Another scholar, Michael Parenti from the University of California, has researched and written extensively on the issue of Tibetan society prior to the Chinese intervention in 1959. Parenti, writing in academic journal New Political Science in 2003, observes that in “the Dalai Lama’s Tibet, torture and mutilation — including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation — were favored punishments inflicted upon runaway serfs and thieves.” Parenti cites the work of one Western observer who in 1929:
Sexual abuse in monasteries was rife, and starvation among the serfs a regular occurrence, despite the plentiful conditions for agriculture that existed in Tibet. The Tibet that the Dalai Lama presided over, until his exile in 1959, was far from the Shangri-la that dewy eyed supporters of the Free Tibet movement pretend it to be. Unless you were a member of the small elite class, or a monk, life was, in Thomas Hobbes’ memorable phrase, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” The Dalai Lama speaks today of “repressive and violent” campaigns by China over the past 50 years. What he has not told you, and nor has any media outlet that has quoted his gibberish today, is that he and the system he represents made life intolerable for millions of Tibetans over hundreds of years. The history books record this. |
|
|
|
39 Comments
Unbelievable, it’s alright for you Greg to sit and pontificate, but it’s not for us to decide. What do the Tibetans want? I’m sure that the chinese have been model invaders. It doesn’t seem that the people of tibet are all that happy with the current system either. It’s not like the chinese have used any instruments of torture over the past 50 years have they?
Mark Freyne, good link although the author does little to give an account of what he understands life in pre-1950 Tibet to have been like. Some quick googling lead me to http://tajemnice.org/content/view/121/42/ which gives an interesting description.
While he seems like a very nice fellow, I’m unclear about what the Dalai Lama actually stands for. He wants “autonomy” but many of his supporters campaign for independence. He’s no democrat given he was selected for his role via some apparently absurd religious ceremony as a child. Maybe we shouldn’t count this because he’s a Buddhist and they’re nice. The notion that replacement of the current oppressive Chinese rule - with all the excesses that entails - with an equally anachronistic feudal theocracy will improve the lot of Tibetans is as absurd as the process by which the DL was annointed. If the proposed form of Government is to be something else - what?
Thanks Greg, for putting your head into the lion’s mouth to say it.
Nice work, Greg, and a useful corrective to the usual feting of the Dalai Lama that you find among us bien-pensants. I find it beyond peculiar that people who are normally liberal to the core experience no apparent cognitive dissonance when lionising the cause of a would-be theocrat. But you get accused of being a CCP plant, or an apologist for Tiananmen, the latter of which is more than a little obscene.
Damien Anderson, I anticipated such a response. You fall into the trap of judging others by your your own jaded and cynical values. You wish to now expand the discussion. I never sought to put “a gimlet gaze on western religious leaders”. And I smile at your reference to “more fashionable faiths”… I am not going to lower myself to take your bait, Damien, nor to attempt to educate you. Suffice it to say that you do yourself no credit denigrating the Dalai lama. I support the Tibetan people’s right to choose.
The Dalai Lama ” harassing” someone. As that old AFL add used to go, ” I’d like to see that!!!” But this article and some of the postings with it, are classic Left wing theatre.
There’s Dave ” without knowing what I’m really talking about” Liberts ( never a truer word spoken, Dave) trying to draw some obscure parallel with Israel and China, then Lucy “bien-pensants” who is telling alll those Tibetans that the bien-pensants, sipping their lattes, know whats best for them and finally anonymous Kate, who clearly endorses that other great Chinese social policy initiative of ONE CHILD, resulting in the literal slaughter of millions of unborn and newborn baby girls. But then Kate what’s-her- name is really fighting for womens rights. How I love the Left! Living testimony to that other great adage, that while God may have placed obvious limits on our intelligence, He has placed absolutely none on our stupidity.
Warning to Crikey subs: This reads like this was lifted from China’s People’s Daily, which not only explains the slant, but the shrill tone and the poor expression.
Life was pretty bad for Serfs under the Tsars, but that doesn’t excuse atrocities committed by the Soviets.
I hope you never get into politics Greg Barns.
Damien Anderson again seeks to change the subject. The issue was not about how the Dalai lama is identified. Damien, what business is that of yours (or mine)? Whatever my opinion may be, I do not seek to commentate on such matters. Again, back to my point - I respect the Tibetan people’s right to choose (or not choose) independence. And, in response to your last criticism of Tibetan culture, I respect the right of the Gelugpa Tibetan Buddhist monks to select whoever they want as the head of their school of Tibetan Buddhism, by whatever means they wish! And you have not offended me, much as I find your digressions and your judgements tiresome. I would be surprised if you have offended the Dalai lama, but I would wager that your views are offensive to many other Tibetans.
This is the typical Left trash that Crikey loves to peddle and I love taking apart, hence my subscription. Ask survivors of Tiannamen who is repressing who. What was their crime? Well, they were ‘capitalist, revisionists”, probably religious, enemies of the state, intellectuals, yada, yada, yada…
Just read to-days editorial, unsigned, as well it might be, lauding a measure that will see overseas aid foisting the killing of their unborn children onto poor mothers. A healthy mother and child has always been a bridge too far for the apologists for the abortion industry. Multinationals like International Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes rubbing their hands at the ‘Aus Aid’ that will flow into their coffers.
Are you saying that the appalling situation for the majority of the Tibetan people pre-1959 somehow justifies the appalling situation for the majority of the Tibetan people after 1959? I’ll have to disagree with you there.
Yeah, Tibet before the Chinese was not a particularly nice place to be, but the Chinese “liberation” hasn’t exactly ushered in a new golden age for the people of Tibet, has it now?
What we need is a parallel universe where we can see what would have happened to Tibet if the Chinese hadn’t invaded it. It is interesting to contemplate Greg’s benevolent Chinese dictatorship ruling Tibet from Beijing. A dictatorship that killed its own children with tanks not so many years ago and one that has dispossed thousands of people of their land as a consequence of it’s dam building. Many people in rural China itself, live a life that as TH puts it is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
The DL is unfortunately irrelevant in the face of the Chinese occupation, but it is a poor student of history that assumes, in a time where change is the norm rather than the exception, that the DL could have perpetuated the barbarity of his predecessors. Or that he would have wanted to.
@john James #4 — — > “that while God may have placed obvious limits on our intelligence, He has placed absolutely none on our stupidity. “
High-larious. You clearly have no idea how ironic that is.
Surprised to see you haven’t commented on this one yet either, JJ: http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20090311-Australia-gets-an-F-for-sexual-and-reproductive-health.html#comments. Seems right up your alley. Would you like me to go back & cut-&-paste a couple of your old all-purpose “contraception-and-abortion-are-evil-you’re-all-going-to-hell” comments to save you the bother?
Holy man? Give it a rest! The DL is as holy as the Pope and as prone to represent traditional and regressive social and political values. Imagine a similar argument used in relation to some Christian leader - you’d be laughed of this forum. Why are we so intent on putting the gimlet gaze on western religious leaders yet are prepared to view those from more fashionable faiths only with a very soft focus?
John James, what makes you think you are less anonymous than Kate? What’s your address and phone number? Pompous git.
btw, Greg, I saw something the DL said once to the effect that Tibet could not return to its previous isolation - I don’t think that they want to return to the 13th century - they just want their country back. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.
As to what attitudes the Dalai Lama holds today, well tolerance ain’t one of them. His harassment of followers of Buddhists who worship the ‘wisdom deity’ Dorje Shugden is a case in point. Chronicled superbly by Brendan O’Neill in Spiked on May 20 last year - http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5170/.
The Dalai Lama is no fan of democracy and the liberal values that underpin it, despite what his supporters would have you believe.
Just to open another can of worms without really knowing what I’m talking about, the parallel which occurs to me is the Palestinians, who (like the Tibetans) are denied fundamental freedoms they never had prior to their current occupation. A Palestinian state makes sense to many, but there was no chance of this during either the Egyptian or Syrian occupations of their territory.
Ultimately, the Chinese deserve criticism for their occupation of Tibet and the Tibetans deserve basic rights. I don’t know what the Dalai Lama has said about pre-1959 Tibet, but he would do well to criticise it in no uncertain terms as part of his campaign for freedoms for Tibetans today. Any less would be hypocrisy.
da dalai lama ciA trained??/?…in da words of dat other famous historian,homer simpson…”it’s funny coz it’s true”
People talk about monolithic corporations that should be broken up to encourage healthy competition. China fits this category easily. It’s way too big. And so is India for that matter. How any country so huge can claim cultural unity and cohesion while respecting the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is never explained.
“The history books record this.”
Do they indeed — which books would they be? Please enlighten this history buff so he can see for myself.
It sounds to me ,more like Chinese government propaganda A China(&Tibet) where life is nasty, brutish and short unless you are a member of a particular clique &/or race.
My critics misunderstand the point of this piece. It is not to justify China’s conduct in Tibet, but it is to observe that the Dalai Lama is the representative of a system in Tibet that brought misery to many. Or is the Dalai Lama beyond reproach?
I was saddened and disappointed to read Greg Barns’ poorly researched and ill-informed article. He is, wittingly or unwittingly, spreading Chinese government propaganda. It is filth. I point Barns and Crikey readers to the following article: http://www.studentsforafreetibet.org/article.php?id=425. Here is a challenge to Barns, Grunfeld, Parenti and the Chinese government: allow the Tibetan people the free choice of independence. They have never been offered that choice. Does anyone seriously believe that the Tibetans would choose to be part of China, if offered the choice? Oh, and let’s not forget, the Dalai lama is a holy man.
At least the Chinese in Tibet have one supporter.
Hello Lana
one of the many similar Warning to Crikey subs: This reads like this was lifted from China’s People’s Daily, which not only explains the slant, but the shrill tone and the poor expression.
Life was pretty bad for Serfs under the Tsars, but that doesn’t excuse atrocities committed by the Soviets.
I hope you never get into politics Greg Barns.
Greg, The Dalai Lama is certainly not beyond reproach. Just because he was representative of the system in tibet in 1959 does not mean that he fully endorsed that system then or now. It is very hard to change a system that has been entrenched for centuries. I don’t believe that we can judge his intentions now by that 1959 standard. At the end of the day we must ask ourselves, what do the tibetan people want? I believe that it is the Dalai Lama, not China.
The reactions to this piece would shame the usual RWFDBs elsewhere. There are enough descriptions of life in Tibet before 1959 (Heinrich Harrier, Lady Niven, et al) to demolish the Shangri-la drivel perpetuated by the bien pissants.
To be current, for those who prefer to remain ignorant (of history or reality), take trip to McLeod Ganj where DL & his troupe still hang out, gouging starry eyed westerners. Not pretty.
JJ, the abortion discussion is down the hall.
Here’s the link: http://www.crikey.com.au/Crikey-Says/20090311-Crikey-says.html.
You’re welcome - have a nice day now.
The current Dalai Lama is not responsible for what happened in 1929. He’s not really the same person as the previous Dalai Lama. The current DL, who has never subscribed the Shangri La myth, is quite right to object to chinese state persecution of Tibetans, and to the attrocity you euphemistically refer to as “the chinese intervention” in 1959. By the way, the best, most balanced book on Tibetan history is The Tibetans by Matthew Kapstein. Stick to what you know Greg, domsetic Australian politics.
Spot on Lucy and thank you Greg Barnes too for injecting a needed reality-check into the Tibet debate. Thanks also to John James for his amusing contributions; John, you’d make Rush Limbaugh proud.
I read that article Greg, it may well be true, not all that widely reported though. All people in a position of power have detractors no matter how pure. I still don’t believe that you can discount the man or his intentions completely. Whether or not, as you state, he is not a fan of democracy, depends on what form of democracy you are talking about. There are many different forms of democracy, usually decided by the people. Therefore I still believe that Tibetans would prefer the Dalai Lama to China.
Kate, print your full name instead of hiding behind your anonymity, like your Left wing, abortion loving mates.
This article suggests that Chine ‘liberated’ Tibet, despite Barnes’ denials. When the Left talk of” Liberation” watch out, just like when they speak of “Rights”. The innocent and helpless have no rights, just ask Kate ?who. The blood of the unborn cries out to heaven.
Mark, while my earlier speculation about attitudes to religious leaders of other faiths may have been a digression, I reject your assertion that my values are jaded and cynical. The point is that I cannot see how a child selecting a combination of trinkets to “prove” he is the reincarnation of a dead absolute ruler provides political legitimacy or how, in fact, it constitutes a reasonable or rational basis for a system of government.
Sorry if I offended you.
Dear me greg
I first read this stuff in China Reconstructs in 1973. Hysterical even then. A strawman of mammoth proportions as I see nobody justifying the previous regime in Tibet.
Quest your post is the most amazing piece of backwards logice I have read in a long time. I congratulate you.
While you’re at it, read a few descriptions of life under Mao before 1959 and the that great Left leap forward, the ‘Cultural revolution” Westerners have got nothing on the ‘starry-eyed” left boof-heads posting here.
As a lefty I’m glad this comment thread gave me what I love the most, which is a nice abortion.
bravo greg barns for saying what very few in the idealising west will say about the ridiculous dalai lama.
many say old tibet’s excesses don’t excuse china’s brutal treatment of tibet now, and they are right, but surely the reverse is also true: china’s excesses now do not excuse the brutality of the dalai lama and the medieval system he headed 50 years ago. the dalai lama was tibet’s principal slave owner before being deposed. one thing the chinese did that was right was to abolish slavery in tibet something the dalai lama would never have done.
the dalai lama was, and probably still is, a paid intelligence asset of the americans and the british in their ongoing “behind the scenes” war against a burgeoning china. tibet should get rid of him AND the chinese: the country needs neither tyrant!
John James, at least I’m prepared to admit I might not be 100% right 100% of the time. This evening’s PM program discussed the change in policy relating to international aid being used for family planning, and an aid worker described how it will help improve the health of women who attempt their own abortions when faced with the prospect of having another mouth to feed when there isn’t adequate food for their family already. Your committment to opposing abortion or assisting those who have attempted it themselves creates far more losers than winners. Do you really want these women to die and leave their families to face further hunger and disease? If so, you really are vicious.
Kate,he title of this article refers to “hell on earth”. You obviously feel butchering the innocent and helpless is therapeutic. The road to hell is hell itself. At least your ‘on song’ here.
This is the same argument we’ve used to justify our destruction of indigenous Australian culture. No matter how brutish or short serf life was, it is better than being forcibly sterilised, dispossessed or slaughtered. Improving the lifestyle of serfs has never motivated invasion. History books record this.