I think the central misunderstanding is interference. They see the Tibet issue as a domestic matter, and anyone wishing to add their opinion as a colonial oppressor. Some of these people aren't even over the Opium Wars, as if everything was fine and dandy in China beforehand and Britain came in and ruined it forever.
Western society doesn't look down on imposing our values on others, even by force. We have a long history of invading for greedy reasons, so the idea that our interest in Tibet now is altruistic is not easy to differentiate from their point of view. I know very well pre-1949 Tibet was a feudal society with most people poor and covered in dirt (though their pictures of "slaves" are often just pictures of criminals, as the 13th Dalai Lama outlawed execution for murder and they had to come up with a new penal system). I know that China brought electricity, literacy, education, and even some scattered plumping to Tibet. I also know that Tibet was busy modernizing when China invaded, and probably would have outlawed feudalism on its own, but probably would be somewhat fine with China's rule if there was real autonomy and they were permitted to worship in freedom and the lama system was not interfered with or actively destroyed.
One of the things I just don't understand is when I say, "Well, I've read a bunch of history books, and uhm, I think you're wrong about this whole Tibet has always been part of China thing, and it seems like the Tibetans don't want you there." And they say, "Come to Tibet and see." And I say, "But you won't give me a visa." Argument kinda ends there.
Western society doesn't look down on imposing our values on others, even by force. We have a long history of invading for greedy reasons, so the idea that our interest in Tibet now is altruistic is not easy to differentiate from their point of view. I know very well pre-1949 Tibet was a feudal society with most people poor and covered in dirt (though their pictures of "slaves" are often just pictures of criminals, as the 13th Dalai Lama outlawed execution for murder and they had to come up with a new penal system). I know that China brought electricity, literacy, education, and even some scattered plumping to Tibet. I also know that Tibet was busy modernizing when China invaded, and probably would have outlawed feudalism on its own, but probably would be somewhat fine with China's rule if there was real autonomy and they were permitted to worship in freedom and the lama system was not interfered with or actively destroyed.
One of the things I just don't understand is when I say, "Well, I've read a bunch of history books, and uhm, I think you're wrong about this whole Tibet has always been part of China thing, and it seems like the Tibetans don't want you there." And they say, "Come to Tibet and see." And I say, "But you won't give me a visa." Argument kinda ends there.
Reply
Leave a comment