The Wishes of a Tibetan
The following blog post is published on the blog of a Tibetan living in China. The article suggests educational and cultural policies, including raising the status of the Tibetan language, that the Chinese government should adopt to meet the desires of Tibetans in China.
Especially interesting are the many pages of comments, mostly by Chinese educated Tibetans, often the children of cadres, who are sent for further schooling after elementary school to middle and high schools in Han areas in China, and then on to higher education. There are also some comments by ethnic Han people, all friendly and constructive. It would seem that most visitors to the website tibetcul.com (headquartered in Gansu Province), judging by the cyberpolice sticker at the bottom of the home page, are already quite favorably disposed to Tibetans. Translated by CDT.
These are the some hopes the Tibetan people have. We hope that the state support them.
1. We hope that a common Tibetan language will be designated. (86% of Tibetan want Lhasa dialect to be designated the common language.) Establishing a common Tibetan language will solve the problems people from different Tibetan areas have in communicating.
2. We hope that the state will recognize degrees granted by Tibetan monasteries. Tibetan monastery education has a long history and excellent record as an educational system. Many outstanding Tibetan scholars are graduates of the monastery schools. However since their degrees are not recognized by the state, they cannot get jobs in schools set up by the public (min ban xuexiao) or in state work units. The result is that institutions of higher education for Tibetans are short of teachers and talented people. The Dorampa degree should be equivalent to the bachelor’s degree, the Tsogrampa degree should be considered equivalent to the master’s degree and the Lhamrampa Degree equivalent to the PhD.
3. We hope that all the Tibetan areas will have the same educational system. (Except for Chinese language class, all other subjects should be taught in Tibetan.) Already in the Tibetan areas, experiments in implementing this type of education have been very successful. The language barrier has made it very difficult for students to understand the coursework. For example, if a teacher explains to students in Tibetan that one plus one equals two, all the students understand. However, if the teacher explains in Chinese that one plus one equals two, then the students don’t understand what the teacher is saying. Some people say that these young students are the world’s youngest interpreters.
4. We hope that Tibetan music, traditional arts and history all become part of the music, fine arts and history course from elementary school to university in the five provinces and autonomous regions of the Tibetan areas.
5. We hope that Tibetan elementary schools, middle schools and universities will be established in areas and cities in which there are concentrations of Tibetans. Many Tibetans move to the cities for the sake of employment. In the cities, all Tibetans run into the problem of getting education for their children. They all way their children to study the Tibetan language and Tibetan culture but there are no Tibetans schools in the areas. For example, cities like Xining in Qinghai Province, Chengdu in Sichuan Province, Lanzhou in Gansu Province, Kunming in Yunnan Province. We know that there is a school in Kangding, Sichuan named the Tibetan Elementary School, but there are only a very few classes in Tibetan there, nearly none really. We especially hope that the state will establish several Tibetan universities in the Tibetan areas.
6. We hope that government organs in the Tibetan areas will use the Tibetan language. In most of the government organs in the Tibetan areas, the language used is Chinese, not Tibetan. For example, meetings are held in Tibetan and most of the documents are in Chinese.
7. We hope that the state will establish more Tibetan language television channels in the Tibetan areas. At present, the two most popular television channels in the Tibetan areas are the Qinghai Tibetan language channel and the Tibet Tibetan language channel. In some Tibetan areas these channels cannot be received. Therefore we hope that the state will establish Tibetan language channels in Sichuan, Gansu and Yunnan. It is especially important to establish Tibetan language channels in the Tibetan autonomous prefectures and counties. The people very much like watching television channels with the characteristics of their Tibetan nationality.
8. We hope that schools in the Chinese interior that give Tibetans a Chinese education will have classes in Tibetan culture and history.
9. We hope that the state will train more Tibetan technical personnel.
10. We hope that in the Tibetan areas, all tests will be given in Tibetan. For example: for civil service and government funded institutions [shiye danwei] etc. Presently most people in most Tibetan areas take examinations in Chinese. Therefore there is a severe unemployment problem among students who study Tibetan.
We hope that the state will take our wishes seriously.
We offer our best wishes in advance for the success of the 2008 Beijing Olympics!!
Comments on the blog:
[2008-4-28 9:17:00 | By: 访客138Ldp(游客) ]— When we hope to get the support and help of the state, we also need to ask everyone to think what they can give to the state. It can’t just be gimme gimme. I am a citizen of the state and so have responsibilities. Only if I give back to society and the state can I get more respect.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-28 9:09:00 | By: leo(游客) ]
I support part of this. Some of the initial premises are good, but the result may not benefit the state, other minorities or the development of the Tibetan nationality. The proposal, in addition to considering the welfare of the Tibetan people, should also consider how this could benefit other nationalities and the expansion of interchange among the various nationalities such as trade. This would benefit the Tibetan nationality and the welfare of the Tibetan people.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-28 8:24:00 | By: 访客u85Bsf(游客) ]
虽然我是个汉族 人，但我仍然很理解您！支持您！您说得对！Although I am an ethnic Han, I still understand you very well. I support you! You are right!
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-28 4:12:00 | By: 访客01Uhy4(游客) ]I understand the feelings of the Tibetan nationality. I am confident that with economic progress these problems can be resolved. Just as we in the ethnic Han areas are urgently discussing how we can move ahead while we are under encirclement by western culture, by developing our own culture and arts. It will gradually get better, this is really an economic question. Once the country is rich, culture can bloom.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-28 1:51:00 | By: 访客Nsj7MY(游客) ]
[original in English] Hope the government can respect Tibetan culture and monastic Education System. Tibetan monastic Education System has very high reputation in the world and hope that the world can see its process in the modern society.
Tibetan students are facing very hard problem to get jobs because the rapid changes happened to the government exam policy, more and more Tibetan students lose their confidences and hopes from the result of failing the exams which should be taken in their own native language. Most of those students couldn’t write their names in Chinese. Hope all the exams for Tibetan students be in Tibetan and they also let them use their own language to apply for job interview or for other opportunities.
Hope we can change and process in our society!!!!
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-28 0:26:00 | By: 15(游客) ]— Persevering is right.
But language isn’t everything, because the most important function of language is communication. Communication is why language exists.
I am an ethnic Han of the Hakka [Kejia] group. Elderly Hakka people used to say “We can sell grandpa’s field, but we can’t forget grandpa’s words. I think “grandpa’s words”
means an excellent tradition. I already don’t speak Hakka – I speak Cantonese, Bai, and Mandarin. However I did inherit the hardworking tradition of the Hakka, and did well for myself in Guangzhou.
I like Tibet because it is a sacred land in our hearts. I also like Tibetan compatriots because they are warm, friendly, good-natured people.
I want to say something to my brothers and sisters of the Tibetan nationality. China is also your China. You can’t just be content to making contributions to your own Tibetan area but should make contributions to the whole state. This land needs you. Everytime I hear the tune Tianlaiban, I think of the clear skies.
The Zhuang, the second largest ethnicity of China has already become sinicized. The feel they are just as good as the Han and have the same place in society, except for some special minority policies that favor them, they are indeed the same as the Han. I have some friends who support Tibet – they have become Tibetanized (they believe in the religion, married a Tibetan girl and their children write in Tibetan). We are all a family. If the Tibetans were a majority in China, then we’d all Tibetanize. It is just a matter of being able to communicate, nothing more.
The transmission of an excellent tradition should not be confined to one nationality alone. I believe that Tibetan people are excellent; I hope that you will do well, and win glory for our national and people and enter into the glorious pages of history books just like King Gesar.
—- I know that that before May 4 and the Cultural Revolution, that Han culture was very deep and broad. We have been studying Chinese for quite a while (just look how all these Tibetans use your nationality’s script to express the feelings of Tibetans). I don’t know if the Zhuang nationality of today feels the way you think they feel. I don’t know if they really have the same status as the Han nationality (this is referring to your original meaning), as a Tibetan, our national culture has been recognized and promoted throughout the world. As for ourselves, we are constantly aware of how our culture is well suited to our environment. That kind of adaptation has been going on for thousands of years. It has already become a kind of instinctive custom for us. You are friendly and broad-minded. Your desire for exchanges with the Tibetan people is certainly sincere.
So, please try using the Tibetan language for exchanges with us. At least in Tibet. Would that be alright? That is because what is in our hearts and on our lips is the same. Therefore our language cannot be thought of as just “a tool”.
Thank you for your good wishes.
Wishing you a long life and good luck.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 23:08:00 | By: 02Vi04(游客) ]
Thank you. Everyone is thinking about this problem, and have for a long time. I support you 100%. You are saying just what we hope for; I hope that by all us Tibetans working together, that we can realize this dream before too long. I hope that our glorious culture will continue to brighten up the world. And thank you for giving voice to our heart-felt desires.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 21:00:00 | By: 15(游客) ]
Actually, I don’t want the state to implement some policy favoring us. Especially with regards to students, a favorable policy makes us less hardworking.
I understand that if person A and person B speak the same native language, and A and B are tested in their native language, then if 60 is a passing grade for A but 50 is a passing grade for B, then B is benefiting from a favorable policy.
Another situation is that if A and B have different native languages. The two take the same test but the test is in the native language of A, so if a passing grade for A is 60 and for B 50, this is what modern society sees as a preliminary try at being fair, so this is not a “favorable policy”.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 20:30:00 | By: 访客pULw50(游客) ]
I absolutely support this!
This is not an extravagant request for any minority.
I hope it can be realized.
I hope the government will take this seriously and implement these measures.
Wishing the 2008 Olympics success!
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 20:18:00 | By: 访客0gw3Am(游客) ]
Support, support.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 20:15:00 | By: 访客K5FRi7(游客) ]
Support this forever
Very well said.
I hope the state will take this seriously.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 19:59:00 | By: 访客sWNa61(游客) ]
Support.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 19:53:00 | By: 访客K52Rjv(游客) ]
I agree with this approach.
This is really “doing what one should done”
As a Tibetan, I believe that our national culture should not be buried. The beautiful Tibetan language and Tibetan script should not be forgotten. We need to get started with education and build up a foundation. This is the hope of many Tibetans. I hope that the state can help Tibetan culture be attractive forever.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 19:49:00 | By: 访客G30Ner(游客) ]
“Actually, I don’t want the state to implement some policy favoring us. Especially with regards to students, a favorable policy makes us less hardworking. ”
You aren’t certain just what a favorable policy is? Haha. Depressed, you are not hard working because you don’t have a sense of responsibility for the nationality and the state.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 19:19:00 | By: 访客G4CNf6(游客) ]
Very good. I love you. The most important thing is to start from ourselves.
LONG LIVE THE TIBET~!!
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 18:49:00 | By: 访客0f72Yl(游客) ]
I also want Tibetans to speak a common language. No matter whether it is Lhasa dialect or Amdo dialect or Kangba dialect, just as long as we are all speaking the same language I will be very happy.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 16:55:00 | By: 一个心愿(游 客) ]
Yes, most of this is what we feel deeply in our hearts. I hope the government will take this seriously. I just want to add one thing:
I hope that Tibetan government employees and Party members will be able to have the same rights to believe in religion and participate in Buddhist activities as ordinary Tibetans.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 14:41:00 | By: 访客vAQd7G(游客) ]
A good suggestion. There are so many people in China, we need to hand down and develop the culture that the various nationalities have created over thousands of years. All these cultures are our treasures, and we must not lose them. Now China is rich, and should be considering these kinds of problems.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 14:20:00 | By: 访客sWn0QD(游客) ]
I support this 100%. What you are saying is what we are all hoping for. I hope that with all Tibetans working together, we will realize this dream before long. I hope that our glorious culture will brighten the world. Thank you for saying what is in our hearts.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:55:00 | By: 央卓雍措 ]
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:52:00 | By: 访客1JAm15(游客) ]
I support this all the way. Let’s go, everybody.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:51:00 | By: 访客1JAm15(游客) ]
Well said!
I am sure that is will most Tibetans feel in their hearts.
We absolutely will not sinicize!
Compatriots, let’s persevere.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:49:00 | By: luoojiangbai(游客) ]
You have said what is in the hearts of all Tibetan people. Thank you! I support you very much.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:46:00 | By: 雪狮(游 客) ]
You have taken what has been in my heart for so long and said it out loud!! Thank you!! Thank you for saying what is in the hearts of the several million sons and daughters of the snowy land.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 13:01:00 | By: 访客I4DOg6(游客) ]
What you are saying is what is in the hearts of all the Tibetan people. I hope that it will be realized one day. This will need the support of the government. Thank you, your article is very good.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-27 10:35:00 | By: money ]
A beautiful dream, but it can’t be accomplished. Because you are placing all your hopes on other people. Only if you take action yourself can you succeed. Tibetans or people who call themselves Tibetans need to be realistic.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 20:43:00 | By: 游子(游 客) ]
You are very talented. This is my hope. I hope that some Tibetan leaders can play a role. Thank you. Wishing in advance the success of the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 18:38:00 | By: 微笑者 ]
Thank you,
This is what everyone has been thinking about, and has been thinking about for a long time. But you are the first one to write it (I saw it).
I thank you very much.
I also hope that the Beijing Olympics will be successful.
Blessings [note: zhashi dele – transcription of Tibetan in Chinese characters]
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 17:53:00 | By: 访客0GVi0M(游客) ]
Finally we hear a moderate voice!!!
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 16:36:00 | By: 访客L5HSk8(游客) ]
You have said what is in the hearts of all Tibetans, I strongly support this.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 16:32:00 | By: 访客8et2Xk(游客) ]
Support, support, I love you.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 15:17:00 | By: 15(游客) ]
I especially support adding Tibetan to the exam for Tibetan government officials. It can start with testing in oral Tibetan. If Tibetan officials can use basic Tibetan in their exchanges with the people and in their service to the people, they will certainly greatly improve their administrative and management capacity. I also suggest that in important industries in the Tibetan areas should increase the numbers of Tibetans they employ. For example the travel industry, which requires its personnel to know the local attractions and culture, and has lower technical requirements than other industries, are particularly well suited for increased employment of Tibetans. Tourism is a pillar of the economy in the Tibetan areas. What makes it a pillar is it has the greatest potential to employ more local people. I hope the state can pay special attention to this (actually this meets the needs of the travel market. We have done surveys. Tourists prefer to be led by local guides.) This can be a very practical matter for making Tibet more harmonious.
Here I also want to wish our country success in holding the Olympics!
I thank the website for giving me this platform for expressing the wishes of ordinary Tibetan people. I have two hopes.
1) I hope that real government officials will see this blog and can hear our voices!
2) We are not politicians who make up big slogans; we are only people who use our imperfect Chinese to express our feelings. So please don’t put on your political eyeglasses when you come and read this.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 14:35:00 | By: 访客s84Ar1(游客) ]
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 13:42:00 | By: 热巴人(游 客) ]
This still needs work. The Tibetan language is a [language] of one nationality of the PRC. The Tibetan as one of the large nationalities of China should see to it that Tibetan becomes an official language of the PRC. This is very important. This is important for the handing down of Tibetan culture. For the modernization of education, the modernization of the nationality, and the spread of literacy [in Tibetan], developing commerce and the economy of the Tibetan people, the position of the Tibetan nationality in China and in the world. This is also very important for the religious workers of Tibetan Buddhism who are being held down at the grassroots level.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 13:30:00 | By: 访客tYPb6F(游客) ]
Yes, my friend has spoken very well. With just a few changes it should be sent on to the National People’s Congress and the National People’s Consultative Congress. I hope that our country’s leaders accept these wishes of the Tibetan people.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 12:05:00 | By: 访客IMDp26(游客) ]
1. The hope a common language for Tibetan will be designated. —- The Han nationality has dialects too, and they don’t all speak Mandarin. However education in Tibetan schools should be mostly in Lhasa dialect.
2. We hope that state will recognize Tibetan monastery diplomas. – They should be recognized in the religious system. But like Party School diplomas, they should only be accepted in certain environments.
3. We hope that all the Tibetan areas will have the same educational system. (Except for Chinese language class, all other subjects should be taught in Tibetan.) If you want to communicate with the world, two or three languages should be taught.
4. We hope that Tibetan music, traditional arts and history all become part of the music, fine arts and history course from elementary school to university in the five provinces and autonomous regions of the Tibetan areas.
— This should be done if it is a Tibetan school, same as for Uighur and Mongol nationality schools.
5. We hope that Tibetan elementary schools, middle schools and universities will be established in areas and cities in which there are concentrations of Tibetans. –– This should be done, but it should depend upon efforts of the nationality people themselves because enrollments will not be stable and it will be hard to implement.
6. We hope that government organs in the Tibetan areas will use the Tibetan language. —- Both Tibetan and Mandarin should be used. In Singapore, English and Mandarin are the official languages.
7. We hope that the state will establish more Tibetan language television channels in the Tibetan areas. — I don’t know if each Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture has its own Tibetan language program. Each city and county will have to support it from its own finances.
8. We hope that schools in the Chinese interior that give Tibetans a Chinese education will have classes in Tibetan culture and history. —– Agree. Not only Mandarin language education but also education in the culture of the nationality.
9. We hope that the state will train more Tibetan technical personnel. —- That will depend more on Tibetan compatriots studying hard, and not just on a favorable policy.
10. We hope that in the Tibetan areas, all tests will be given in Tibetan. For example: for civil service and government funded institutions [shiye danwei] etc. —– It should be a bilingual test, as in Singapore, that will need skill to pass.
I am an ethnic Han, I hope that the 56 nationalities, the 56 flowers, can all live happily.
This is my response to the desires of the Tibetans:
This is not something some Han came up with in the office, but is the result of thinking these problems over Tibetan compatriots. This for our Tibetan compatriots is a very important problem and one that needs to be resolved quickly. Thank you for your views. You cannot compare China with Singapore. Switzerland has four official national languages and China has only one. This has particularly to do with the Tibetan areas and not other minority nationalities. I welcome your comments.Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 12:03:00 | By: 扎西(游 客) ]
The leaders of the Tibetan culture network should let more journalists in China and abroad know about this article. These are very good suggestions and very important ones. All people on the web should introduce this article to others or let friends who are journalists know about it.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 11:53:00 | By: 访客2KBn1R(游客) ]
This represents that wishes of the Tibetan nationality. Thank you. I hope the state will take this seriously. Here is the response to “wishes of the Tibetans” . Thank you.
Re:一个藏族人 的心愿
[ 2008-4-26 11:51:00 | By: norbu(游客) ]
This is just what is needed in our current situation. I strongly support and hope it can be implemented.
POSTED COMMENTS: 43 Responses
First of all, sorry for posting in English. Although I am an ethnic Han Chinese, I have lived the West (Europe and US) for more than 20 years before computers and Internet were commonly available in China (in fact even in the West), so I didn’t know how to type in Chinese (or Tibetan for that matter!). In fact, I rarely speak or write Chinese any more, and had difficulty doing both (but with no problem reading Chinese though).
In any case, I would like to thank this website for sharing the opinions and wishes of “common” Tibetan people — which I have been searching for a while — as in the West all we heard are the voices of Tibetans in exile, which I am no sure represent the true voices of common Tibetans inside Tibet. I have
to say that reading the posts here, I get a very feeling that is far different from the “cacophony” or “half-truths” one gets from the Western media (and the official Chinese state media!).
As a Han Chinese American, I fully support the wishes and proposals expressed by the Tibetan posters here.
I also wish the wise government officials in China would seriously consider the wishes and proposals put forth by the Tibetans here.
I’d like to add one proposal, I wish many Chinese universities in China would establish “Tibetan study” programs in China, just like many US universities have “African American study” program.
Finally, I think Tibet is a beautiful and unique place in the world, the Tibetan culture and language must be preserved, with the efforts only by Tibetans, but also by all people in China (and in the world).
P.S. I didn’t know that Tibetans in different regions speak vastly different dialects that are mutually un-intelligible.
P.PS. Another “trivia”: Han Chinese (as a language, not ethnicity) and Tibetan languages (together with Burmese) are linguistically most close, belonging to the so-called “Sino-Tibetan-Burmese” language family. In a sense, it implies the Han Chinese (which itself a diverse of mixture of ancient people) and Tibetan may have share common ancestry in far, far ancient time!
Sorry for the typos in my post above,
I meant to say:
“Finally, I think Tibet is a beautiful and unique place in the world, the Tibetan culture and language must be preserved, with the efforts _not_ only by Tibetans, but also by all people in China (and in the world).”
and
“n a sense, it implies the Han Chinese (which itself a diverse of mixture of ancient people) and Tibetan may have _a shared_ common ancestry in far, far ancient time!”
[...] of worsening. The religious and cultural dimensions of Tibetan insecurity are well documented (see here and here) but the import of this dimension to human insecurity in Tibet is sadly underappreciated [...]
I too appreciate this posting. It’s always nice to hear words written by my fellow Tibetans in Tibet, and even in China, who are fighting to keep their culture alive. This has sparked a whole new reality for me in fact. Because of the oppressive and racist communist policies adopted by colonialist China in Tibet, it is genious that young Tibetans go to China and educate themselves and educate the Chinese people in China about the situation in Tibet. This just might be the only way to get through to them actually, because of the constant and pervasive communist censorship.
To Jerry: The native languages of the three provinces of Tibet are Khamba, Amdowan and U-tsang (U-tsang being mostly what is now called the TAR). Though they are not entirely different. Anyone of the people from either of the provinces can basically understand each other.
And of course, we are all related to each other in ancient times. Even to the Africans or Europeans. Though because of the determination of the PRC to blurr the lines of reality that has anything to do with Tibet, we Tibetans are always quick to differentiate ourselves. We Tibetans are not like the Manchu or anyother minority in China Proper, we will never be completely assimilated to the majority in China. That does not mean that we hate the majority, but that we are proud of our race, culture, language, religion, etc. as it is completely different from the Han.
May one day the Tibetans be happy in Tibet, and the Chinese be happy in China.
Jerry, the language group “Sino-Tibetan” cannot be used to suggest common ancestry between Han chinese and Tibetans.
The so called “Sino-Tibetan language” group has been contested. Does it really exist at all? Is it politically motivated? Prominent scholars argue that Tibetan-Burman is NOT related to Chinese.
“May one day the Tibetans be happy in Tibet, and the Chinese be happy in China.”
“China” has not, historically, been an ethnic concept. Attempts to make it so will, I think, fail - both in terms of trying to assimilate the Tibetans into some imaginary “Chinese ethnicity” and in terms of trying to draw a clear national boundary between the “Chinese ethnicity” and others.
The more I study Chinese history, the more I realize that China is fundamentally a multi-ethnic state. It was formed out of warring kingdoms and expanded not by assimilating other ethnic groups into some intrinsic “Chinese ethnicity” but by merging with them. Did you know that the Chinese habit of sitting on chairs was imported during the Tang dynasty by Turkic migrants, who came into China after the fall of the Han Dynasty? Did you know that half of China’s emperors were not even “Han,” or that “Han” itself was a political term created by China’s foreign rulers to distinguish themselves from those they ruled?
The “Han Chinese” are simply those who happened to be classified under the same category by a particular dynasty. In truth they are a mixture of different peoples - Xianbei, Xiongnu (themselves tribal confederations), Huaxia, Wu-Han, Manchu, Mongolian, She, Yue, Qiang, etc. - all are part of “China” and all have influenced its civilization.
It is simply irresponsible to think of China as it were some “simple” nation-state divided between “Han Chinese” and “others,” as opposed to a continental region that is the size of Europe and potentially just as diverse. There are two ways forward for “China” - fragmentation (”Balkanization”) into provincial states ala Europe, or integration as a united post-ethnic federation. Given China’s history, I can see both.
“The land, long united, tends to divide. The land, long divided, tends to unite.”
Excuse me, I wrote “post-ethnic” when what I meant was “multi-ethnic” - I don’t think human beings are ready to be “post-ethnic” just yet.
Good Eventine Finally someone explain to those ignorants that Han is political concept and NOT RACIAL OR ETHNIC Concept
And instead of slaughtering the vanguish, Chinese intermingle and live side by side with people that they conquered until they on their freewill adopt the Chinese culture and way of life So it is pointles to make division between Han or Non Han But for those who decide to keep their own culture they still can. After millenia there are still 56 ETHNICITIES compare to none during 200 years of American settlement in North America The Indian culture languages disappeared
Well, I wouldn’t go that far, but yes - during certain periods of Chinese history the state was obviously more multi-ethnic than it was assimilatory. Manchu rule, for example, originally rested upon the concept of “one empire, many systems” - the Tibetans were ruled by their own regional leaders, the Mongols by theirs, the different “Han Chinese” provinces by theirs - all under a central Manchu court that largely did not worry about whether Tibetans or Mongols or Koreans were “Chinese” or “Manchu” enough.
Minorities had their own regional cultures & systems, and the Manchus left them alone insofar as they did not challenge Manchu power - it was strictly a matter of creating a regional system that served Manchu interests.
In much the same way, the interests of the Chinese government in Tibet are obvious - yet the approach they’ve adopted to advance those interests appear to do more harm than good. Geo-politically, a sparsely populated but strategically-placed country like Tibet has no choice but be influenced by the politics of the great powers around it (China, Russia, India) - this has historically been the fate of small states bordering large neighbors. But why allow that influence to become oppression? Why force the Tibetans to speak Chinese and denounce the Dalai Lama?
It has to do with the CCP’s paranoia about India’s intentions (it sees Tibet as a battleground between itself and India) and the Communist tendency to “homogenize” everything. Remember, the whole point of the Communist Revolution was “egalitarianism,” which effectively became “make everybody the same.” This failed, ultimately, and now China is moving away from that idea - yet in ethnic matters, it is still the same old. Yes, the CCP “promotes” minority cultures, but it is not willing to become a pluralist, heterogeneous society. It is not willing to tolerate dissent or to compromise.
There is no intrinsic reason, I suspect, why there cannot be a regional system that binds together a myriad of different peoples. But that regional system cannot depend on ethnic homogeneity. It cannot depend on forcefully assimilating other ethnic groups - regardless of what the Europeans did. It has to depend, instead, on consent and mutual benefit, and in a pluralist society that means there is always going to be some opposition to it.
The trick is not to destroy this opposition, it is to accommodate it sufficiently that it never becomes anything more. There are separatist movements in the US - Hawaii, Alaska, some Native American tribes - but America hasn’t fallen apart, nor does it have to send in the army to quell uprisings or instigate oppressive policies against its minorities.
Why? Because most people don’t stand to benefit enough from political independence that they’d fight for it. By contrast, in China, due to the oppressive policies of the CCP and its general ignorance of how to balance different cultures and religions (recall that the Communists are hardcore atheists and suspicious of all things religious), Tibetan (and to a lesser extent, Uyghur) independence has become a rallying cry for peoples who stand to gain tremendously from having their own separate states.
So long as this situation remains unchanged, China cannot “move forward” as a multi-ethnic society.
It’s not that multi-ethnic statehood is impossible (otherwise America, Canada, etc. cannot exist because they all have different ethnic and religious groups living alongside one another), it’s that it cannot be achieved through oppression and force. If the PRC cannot find an accommodation for Tibetan’s desire to express their separate national identity, then Tibetans will have no choice but to pursue formal separation from the state, as Warren Smith argues.
With the Tibetan population growing (both within Tibet and overseas), and the Chinese population shrinking (relatively speaking, due to the one-child policy), what does the CCP think will happen in the long-term? I can only imagine that the CCP hopes that future generations of leaders will solve what they cannot, and are just “blocking out the issue” because they fear that doing anything might affect China’s stability. Such paralyzing fear, unfortunately, is preventing the adoption of a more sensible and humane policy.
With the Tibetan population growing (both within Tibet and overseas), and the Chinese population shrinking (relatively speaking, due to the one-child policy), what does the CCP think will happen in the long-term? I can only imagine that the CCP hopes that future generations of leaders will solve what they cannot, and are just “blocking out the issue” because they fear that doing anything might affect China’s stability. Such paralyzing fear, unfortunately, is preventing the adoption of a more sensible and humane policy.
I don’t think that is true Tibetan comprises very small minority 6 million vs 1.3 billion people So China is not even remotely afraid is being swamped by Tibetan The problem all along is What is the realm of possibility Independence or quasi idenpendence is out of question due to Strategic location of Tibet But for long time it is not China that is dragging on the solution but Dalai lama and his cohort first of all they are betting as you say China will implode and they just refused anything less than independence. Than when they realized that China is getting stronger by day and they advance “MIddle Path” which is which is old wine in the new bottle
Not that the idea of Autonomy has not been tried before. The 17 point agreements in 1951 give Tibetan autonomy that no other part of China is enjoyed but the result is rebellion Now they regret it and want to turn the clock backward
To back it up they used the Olympic as lighting rod to prod China to make concession It blew infront of their face and for first time bring race in the picture They just lost all credibility in front of Chinese people It make “US vs them mentality” Instead of prodding it result in masses of Chinese in mainland or overseas lined up behind CCP
The Tibetan should accept less than ideal solution and developed trust first because China doesn’t trust Dalai Lama out of experience
You make sound as majority of Tibetan want independence Don’t you know that close to 30% of Tibetan is directly or indirectly employed by China And how is Tibetan going to pay for their budget when 90%of Tibetan budget is provided by China
I tell you what as soon as Tibet become independent they will become the client state of either India of US which is not acceptable to China regardless of Human right because survival of the nation is the primve responsibility fo the leader
Not to mention the jockeying for power between different sect of Tibetan buddhism like the black Hat or the red hat
The world is full of “Failed State” East Timor, Most of Africa So Independent not the panacea that will osve Tibet problem if anything it is the beginning of Chaos
the world is full of “Failed state East Timor anyone? or most of African Nation So Independent is the panacea that will solve Tibetan ill If anything it is the beginning of Chaos
It’s not that multi-ethnic statehood is impossible (otherwise America, Canada, etc. cannot exist because they all have different ethnic and religious groups living alongside one another), it’s that it cannot be achieved through oppression and force. If the PRC cannot find an accommodation for Tibetan’s desire to express their separate national identity, then Tibetans will have no choice but to pursue formal separation from the state, as Warren Smith argues.
I wish they do that and China can use Koguryo solution to resolve Tibetan problem And Forever eliminate Tibetan problem
The CCP might not trust the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan-government-in-exile, but it should know that compared to the DL and the TGIE, Tibetan independence activists are far more radical in their demands. The CCP might think that they’re capable of dealing with a general uprising, but it cannot be in their interests to have to deal with such uprising on a regular basis.
Granted, China is not Georgia, it is not Serbia, it is not Indonesia - it cannot be forced, necessarily, by guerilla warfare to give up Tibet (we might recall, here, that Native American raids against the encroaching Americans were ineffective at preventing the colonization of their country). But a state caught up in guerilla warfare within its own borders might very well waste more resources fighting that war than it’ll gain from controlling that region. That is the very basis of guerilla resistance (to bankrupt the occupation) and it is often very effective at achieving that end. Does the PRC, which is dependent on economic prosperity and which should understand guerilla warfare very well, want to go in that direction?
I have argued before that part of this issue can be understood as a conflict over territory. Fundamentally, strong peoples cannot be subdued - their identities cannot be changed by force, only by consent. But their control over a certain piece of land can be wrested from them by force - human history is the proof of this concept, as few nations that exist today have always controlled their present territories.
If the Chinese were bent on taking Tibetan land, and the settlers - like their counterparts in America - were willing to fight to the death for that land, then it is possible that Tibetans will not be able to achieve independence on their terms (that is, in control of all the territories they consider their own). This is what happened to many of the states created by World War II, where the state’s independence from European empires led to further calls for independence within the state itself - just as the PRC might have to deal with a Tibetan insurgency, Tibetans, in turn, might have to deal with a Chinese insurgency.
But the Chinese are not, I argue, that motivated, and that’s the reason the PRC has to resort to brainwashing the local population in the hope that they can be “assimilated.” That being the case, Chinese control over Tibet is actually fragile. Independence can be achieved, though not necessarily right now (it’ll probably have to wait for some internal crisis within the PRC).
Does the PRC assume that it’ll never suffer from any internal crisis? That it’ll never be in a position where it can no longer afford to control Tibet by force? If not, then it needs to pursue a more enduring solution. Whether that means autonomy, independence, or some other setup, the PRC - if it’s truly pragmatic - should understand that negotiating from a position of strength is preferable to negotiating from a position of weakness.
To illustrate this concept, let’s assume that the PRC held a meeting with the TGIE tomorrow about giving Tibet its independence. How much territory do you imagine the TGIE can ask for, in this context? What cards would the TGIE be able to play if the PRC suggested that it’s the TAR or nothing? If the TGIE agreed to this arrangement, China would retain control of half of “Greater Tibet” and have that control legitimized - further territorial disputes would be a breach of the agreement and then the Tibetans would be on their own. Contrast this with the situation in which the PRC loses Tibet because of, say, a war with India - then the Indians, in joint with the Tibetans, will have the final say as to what constitutes the borders between Tibet and China. This might very well lead to a unfavorable arrangement, relative to China’s interests.
Of course, I’m not suggesting that the PRC or the TGIE accept such an arrangement, I’m merely pointing out that the PRC seems close to overplaying its hand. Its complete rejection of any compromise ensures that it has to resort to oppression in order to control Tibet, and oppression is not the way by which you earn legitimacy. Sooner or later, this house of cards will collapse and the PRC will suffer for its failure to resolve the issue earlier.
Then it will have only itself to blame.
To illustrate this concept, let’s assume that the PRC held a meeting with the TGIE tomorrow about giving Tibet its independence. How much territory do you imagine the TGIE can ask for, in this context? What cards would the TGIE be able to play if the PRC suggested that it’s the TAR or nothing? If the TGIE agreed to this arrangement, China would retain control of half of “Greater Tibet” and have that control legitimized - further territorial disputes would be a breach of the agreement and then the Tibetans would be on their own. Contrast this with the situation in which the PRC loses Tibet because of, say, a war with India - then the Indians, in joint with the Tibetans, will have the final say as to what constitutes the borders between Tibet and China. This might very well lead to a unfavorable arrangement, relative to China’s interests
India is a weak country It has been beaten badly in 1962 There is not even a sliver a chance that India can win a war with China and India know too that’s why they have peace for 5o years
India had more immediate need than siding with Tibetan Poverty is rampant in India and not too mention Sectarian war that is ongoing compare to India China is paragon of religious tolerance
Well Tibetan revolt has been crushed again and again They failed in 1951, 1967,2008 and If they start armed insurrection They will invite harsher retribution like you never know I don’t think the majority of tibetan has stomach for armed rebellion And China is getting stronger and richer by the day
Only small minority incited by the west want independence
Thanks, eventine!
A very sober analysis all along. If only mainland Chinese bloggers could for once step outside their homogenous mindset and look at the issue “from a distance”.
The degree to which their minds have been programmed uniformly and the lack of capacity to transcend that are really an obstacle to any progress.
As Zhou Xiaozheng, a sociologist at People’s University in Beijing has noted:
“This just shows that Chinese people have lived too long in a world with unbalanced information. After listening too long to only one side of the story, we have developed zero tolerance for a difference of opinion. In this mindset, you are either on our side or you deserve to be stepped on forever.”
John,
I was always thinking that Chinese history text books call Japanese “devils” for having attempted to do to China what China is doing to Tibet…
Maybe the rest of the world supported the wrong side in that war… (only joking ;-)
Japan violate the Teritorial integrity of sovereign NATION recoqnized the world over Who recoqnized Tibet as independent country Tell me ?(only kidding)
So, because the Tibetans did not press for recognition of their sovereignity in time, the Chinese government can trample on them as it likes?
The issue of Tibetan sovereignity is only closed in the eyes of the CCP government, not in the eyes of the world. There are still open UN resolutions and the International Commission of Jurists found in its report in 1960:
“THE STATUS OF TIBET
The view of the COMMITTEE was that Tibet was at the very least a de facto independent State when the Agreement of Peaceful Measures in Tibet was signed in 1951, and the repudiation of this agreement by the Tibetan Government in 1959 was found to be fully justified.”
The CCP is gagging its people about “Tibet having always been a part of China” in the same way as it blocks out any discussion on June 4 1989.
De Facto independent is not sufficient by itself You have to have
De Jure independent And China never lost de Jure ownership of Tibet or Taiwan. Thinks it this way If you own the deed on a house even if you go overseas and neglect your house YOU ARE STILL THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE!
And the squatter who live on that house is not the owner unless he buy and tranferred the deed. And that is called “declaration of independence” and witness by the world in the form or recognition by other countries
Strange notion… Chinese “own” Tibet or Taiwan. Doesn’t most likely the person own the house who has lived there all his life, as well as his ancestors (if he hasn’t given it up voluntarily or if he hasn’t been robbed)? How come China “owns” Tibet?
What is this “China” that you talk about? Surely, the borders of “China” have changed over time to evolve into what Chinese take to be “China” today. This has been a process and is still an ongoing process. Why assume that it is being locked down now?
And laws (De Jure) have to follow realities on the ground (De Facto), not the other way round.
Because the owner sell their house to China in form recoqnizing Chinese authority and accept the validity of Chinese law in Tibet in return for installing Dalai Lama V as head of political Tibet that is the price that he pay
No not country in the world recoqnized Tibet as a country Not even India!
They may not have done as yet but history is forever happening anew. It is not sealed by some interpretation in Chinese history text books.
And surely China is pushing the Tibetans ever harder to want to live unmolested in their own country.
And to stay with our analogy:
For too long China has reckoned without the host…
Sorry, the correct phrase is, of course:
“History is forever in the making.”
John,
unfortunately you are right about India…
And there is a growing awareness in the Indian population that it was a blunder to give up the rights that India had in Tibet and the recognition of Chinese suzerainty only over Tibet for a make-believe Indian-Chinese post-colonial friendship.
The Chinese thanked them with their aggression in 1962 and continued posturing over the border.
That is also very much an issue in progress…
Yes of course this issue of Nation state ‘recognition’ always come up when talking about who has the ‘rights’ to Tibet. The latter of course being a rhetorical question in the minds of Tibetans and anyone who really knows anything about Tibetans and *their* history. This is merely political games to once again attempt to blurr the facts (kind of like the Republican party here in the US hinting to the people in the Midwest that Obama is a Muslim). Either the Chinese start to accept historical facts (and I dont mean their so called “facts” that are lies told at a distance) regarding Tibet and it’s people, or continue wearing this broken mask of ignorance in front of the world. Which will only lead to rebellion by the Tibetans and maybe other minorities, and then probably the majority.
George, the PRC did not uphold the agreements in the 17 point peace plan. Believe me…there is no way any Tibetan wants to turn back the clock to that time.
Instead of pointing out countless facts that can easily be accessed, let me ask; would any state/province of a nation have a separate monetary, postal, judicial, religious, etc. systems from the ruling central government. That my friends is unheard of.
Tibet has had all of these systems in place for hundreds of years.
sr, thanks for the hint about separate monetary and postal systems.
The case of the Tibetans for independence is strong enough to take it forward at every possible forum.
If China loses Tibet, it will only have itself to blame…
John, here is a better metaphor in this situation: Family T lives in their house on a hill and Family C lives in their house at the foot of this hill. Family T is living happily in their house that is completely secluded. In this seclusion they have deeply developed their culture and religion.
Family C at the foot of this hill has both prospered greatly and suffered greatly mostly due to the fact they are so accessible to the rest of the world. Family C has now grown in incredible numbers and hence influence. So much so that they have become drunk on their own accomplishments and ego. Family C is now becoming this ethnocentric mass of people that are too large for their own house because of sheer numbers and lack of resources. At this point, the family begins to look elsewhere…and they look up to the beautiful mountains above. Where none of them have actually been, but their father told them that he heard it belonged to distant family members and was a place of spirits and beauty. So they went on a conquest, and not only did they find people that were not related but people who were completely different in every way.
Once the Family C members found Family T’s house they inspected the deed to the house only to find it was written in a different language! But because these members were so filled with ego and ethnocentrism they tore the deed up because they could not understand it, and they proceeded to write a new deed in their language of which Family T could not read. But Family C promised that it stated all the things that the previous deed stated, in addition it guaranteed that Family C would be there for support in time of need. So Family T was very wary. And so Family T graciously asked them to leave because it was getting late, but Family C would only side-step. And then Family C starts to use force and weapons to kill members of Family T so that they were all living in a realm of fear. Now the hill has been stained with blood of its blood.
It’s getting late and I’m tired. Please understand what you Chinese have been told in China as far as I have heard in person and on most blogs and postings is FALSE. Tibetans have ALWAYS been free in their own land, Tibet! Free to live their lives under their own rules as Tibetans in Tibet!
Whether a country was ruled by another, in the past, doesn’t have much to do with its present right to self-determination. China could claim to have ruled Vietnam for a thousand years - such a long time would certainly justify “uniting” Vietnam with China if length of dependence was what mattered. But it’s not. A people could be ruled by force for a thousand years - and have yearned for independence all along.
The converse, however, is also true - it doesn’t matter how long a region was divided - if there is a will to unite, then unite it shall. Thus, if the PRC can convince the Tibetans that it’s in their best interests to remain within the PRC and that they will be guaranteed equal status, proper respect, and genuine autonomy, then perhaps the historical differences between the two peoples do not, necessarily, have to drive them apart.
But as long as the PRC’s role in Tibet is based on that of an occupier ruling an occupied, there cannot be trust between the two peoples, and therefore there cannot be genuine interest in a common state. The flame of independence will thus continue to burn - as it burned in Vietnam for a thousand years (though all of us, I think, would like to see a resolution much sooner than that). As many have already argued, it is not the responsibility of Tibetans to change themselves for China - being a distinct people, they have no natural reason or desire to join up with the Chinese state. Any unification, therefore, must begin with China convincing the Tibetans that common statehood is desirable - must, in other words, begin with Tibetan consent. And that’s the real issue here - the PRC should be focused on obtaining Tibetan consent, not on how to keep Tibetans from expressing dissent. The suppression of dissent does not produce consent - it just buries the former in a deeper place, where it becomes fuel for the aforementioned flame.
Whether a country was ruled by another, in the past, doesn’t have much to do with its present right to self-determination. China could claim to have ruled Vietnam for a thousand years - such a long time would certainly justify “uniting” Vietnam with China if length of dependence was what mattered. But it’s not. A people could be ruled by force for a thousand years - and have yearned for independence all along.
I believe you are confuse here Vietnam was ceded by China to France during Peace talk after the war In other word There is transfer of Power. And China reconized this fact. Tibet had NEVER BEEN CEDED TO ANYONE
But as long as the PRC’s role in Tibet is based on that of an occupier ruling an occupied, there cannot be trust between the two peoples, and therefore there cannot be genuine interest in a common state.
Sound like you are advocating independent for KASHMIR
And before you keep blabbering on freedom and democ_crazy Please take care of India first Here is passage from IHT
NEW DELHI: With national elections only months away, India is reeling from a rash of spiteful religious and ethnic clashes, prompting many in this country to ask why their vibrant, pluralistic democracy tends to encourage, rather than avert, the cruelty of neighbor against neighbor.
Tensions are growing in several corners of the country. The latest dispute was set off in Mumbai last week, when an upstart nativist party claiming to represent Marathas, the dominant ethnic group in the state, pounced on Indians who had come from elsewhere to apply for jobs at Indian Railways.
The party, which calls itself Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (roughly, the Army for the Reconstruction of Maharashtra) and has in recent months attacked northern migrants to Mumbai, wants those jobs to be set aside for local residents. On Oct. 21, the police arrested the party leader, Raj Thackeray, on a charge of inciting riots, after which his supporters went on a rampage across the city and its suburbs. Much of Mumbai was shut down.
A day later, a local court released Thackeray on bail, setting off a rampage in the northern state of Bihar, the source of the migrants attacked by Thackeray’s disciples. Protesters blocked trains, wrecked railroad stations and stranded passengers there and in several other parts of northern India.
Meanwhile, violence between Hindus and Muslims erupted elsewhere in Thackeray’s home state, Maharashtra, and spread south to the state of Andhra Pradesh, where a Muslim family of six was burned to death in their home in mid-October.
Today in Asia - Pacific
Bomb attacks in India kill at least 67
Afghanistan tests waters for overture to Taliban
Indonesia passes broad anti-pornography bill
Clashes between Hindus and Christians continued to sweep through eastern Orissa State. In northeastern Assam State, indigenous Bodos fought with Bengali-speaking Muslims, leaving more than 50 people dead.
All the while, Indian cities remained skittish after a spate of terrorist attacks attributed largely to Islamic militants. Other factors include the longstanding Kashmir insurgency in the north and Maoist guerrillas across central India.
The Hindustan Times recently carried a map of India, splattered with red stains to mark current trouble spots. Many more would have to be added in the two weeks since the map was published. In mid-October, speaking to the wishfully named National Integration Council, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called the rash of violence “an assault on our composite culture.”
He added: “An atmosphere of hatred and violence is being artificially generated.”
How can the world’s largest democracy fail to prevent such a fury of intolerance?
Ashis Nandy, a political psychologist and social critic, said that India is a democracy in a far more limited sense than many Indians care to recognize. In spite of its lively and largely transparent elections, he said, some of the other basic pillars of democracy, including tolerance and respect for the rule of law, are fragile at best.
Perhaps, he went on to suggest, India is gradually becoming less democratic, as a variety of small, factionalized political parties compete to mobilize their caste and ethnic constituencies. National elections are expected to be held next spring, and five state elections are scheduled for November.
“Some amount of virulent, strident rhetoric, as well as violence, is becoming a deepening part of the democratic culture,” Nandy said. He described it as an inevitable danger of all large, pluralistic democracies. Look at the increasingly aggressive campaign messages in the American presidential race, Nandy said.
George: “Tibet had NEVER BEEN CEDED TO ANYONE” …Yes your right George! The newly formed PRC merely invaded and forcefully overthrew the well established Tibetan Government in Tibet. Frist, Wake up from your misguided ethnocentric-chauvanistic stuppor and get real. Second, keep your BS political games out of this discussion, we are talking about Tibet not the issues of India.
Because she comparing Hell and brimstone China to paradise in the sky India People live in glasshouse should not throw stone As for Tibet you will always be Outsider looking In As long as Tibetan foolish enough that apeealing to the west is gonna forced China to make concession Tibet belong to China and that has been decided long time ago
With upcoming appointment with the destiny DL has not much time left After him the TIG will wither and split up in all direction like hen with not mother
foolish enough to believe
George:
-HH the Dalai Lama has been merely exercising a little something called diplomacy.
-Don’t confuse your dreams with reality.
You are correct eventine.
The Right to Self-Determination is a humane law of the World community that must be upheld in order to live in a world of, atleast, a relative common understanding and respect. And as human beings of the 21century we as a people of the human race can not keep making excuses for present injustices with mistakes and attrocities of the past (i.e. inhumane treatment of the Native American, Aboriginals, etc). The human race must learn from these attrocities of the past and socially evolve.
Plus, thank you for your clarification on the word “Chinese”. I realize that this designation is complicated. Though from the point of view of Tibetans, it is a mute point. Not that it is not interesting though. I am actually intrigued by all historical events and facts throughout asia and of course my own leanings to Central Asian history. The histories of Tibetans and the people of China Proper have been incredibly separate, considering their proximity. And it is this separateness/difference in race, religion, language, culture, etc that the PRC knows will lead to the formation of Tibet Proper. Whether it be as a truly autonomous region or an independent Nation.
I would argue that it is not necessarily the intrinsic separateness/difference in race, religion, language, etc. that gives rise to the need for division, but the abuse of that difference in everyday life. When Tibetans are looked down upon for practicing their culture, and prevented from paying homage to their spiritual leader, *that* is when difference becomes a cause for political division.
By contrast, immigrants from all corners of the world come to countries like the US and, at least initially, they are often as different as night and day. Yet, they manage to live together and flourish in such countries that accept everyone for who they are. Mind you, I won’t deny that there are problems, but by and large the US has been and remains a bastion of multi-ethnic statehood. Even now a minority candidate runs for presidency - and minorities have long been represented in the highest echelons of American society, from business to science to art to military to politics.
The trick is not to eschew difference, but to embrace it. Plurality, diversity, and heterogeneity can be strengths instead of weaknesses, and that is something that the PRC needs to understand. If, when a day comes, Tibetans find that they are respected for who they are and that their cultural separateness is considered a positive contribution to the diversity of the republic, then joint statehood may not seem so terrible. In the end, we are all different - it is by respecting those differences and cooperating in spite of them that better, fairer, and more inclusive societies can be built.
I think we are talking about additive issues. I’m outlining from personal experience the intrinsic cultural differences between the majority of Chinese and Tibetans that naturally repel each other, like oil and water. Political reasonings for division are, yes, the blatant intolerance, culture-genocide, covert genocide and historical events in Tibet.
Though I would love to be proven wrong here, but a large part of the animosity between Chinese and Tibetans has to do with not only these events of post-1951, but a sort of chauvanism that is very common among the common Chinese. This attitude is against just about every tenent of the Tibetan culture. And this is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, in terms of the oil and water issues.
Though I dont want to sound to dire. I have many Chinese friends, and they know where I stand. Some actually whole heartedly support the Tibetan cause, though amazingly even in America some are hesitant(mostly because they are intrigued by the Tibetan culture and I suspect they want to identify with it, and they think that “possession” is the only way). Regardless I think it is possible from my experience that peace and harmony is possible between these two great cultures. BUT I have not lived in Tibet for the past 50+ years! and that is a huge point. I can not even begin to understand the long term effect of the attrocities Tibetan people in Tibet have gone through over the years since. It is up to them.
sr,
it has been my own experience on travels through Tibet that contemporary mainland Chinese and Tibetans really are very much like oil and water, to use this analogy.
What I found, though, was that Taiwanese or Hongkong Chinese, at least the travellers that I met, still tended to represent some of that ancient Chinese culture that was wiped out by the Communists on the mainland.
And that did go along with Tibetan culture a lot better.
The incompatibility, from my point of view, is less Chinese vs. Tibetan but CCP authoritarian “non-culture” vs. Tibetan Buddhist culture of liberation of the mind.
Naturally, those two don’t meet…
I agree - it’s up to them. I was simply suggesting what Chinese society would have to become if it’s to run a truly enduring multi-ethnic state, as opposed to simply pay lip service to the concept. As for chauvinism, I think the same sort of tendencies existed in most societies before the advent of anti-racism and multi-culturalism. Certainly, if you look at American history, as recent as the 1950s non-whites were still viewed as second-class citizens. It was really the civil rights movements around that time that made the difference.
If the PRC is to move forward as a multi-ethnic state (and in many ways it must, because Tibetans aren’t the only minorities in China), it likely has to go through something similar. Failure to do so will ensure that calls for independence will become louder and fiercer. This is why I said, earlier, that China has a choice - it can fragment into several nation-states, or it can unite but under different terms than presently exist. Specifically, it cannot operate under the assumption that unity as a state is equivalent to ethnic unity or homogeneity. Tibetans are, as you say, not the same as “Han Chinese” (and to a lesser degree, “Han Chinese” are not the same as each other) - consequently, in order for them to prosper under the same state, a system that respects and accommodates differences must be created.
Whether such a system, implemented today, can still “fix” things, or if it’s already too late, is not something that I can predict. But surely it’s preferable to the CCP’s current “oppress and suppress” policies, which seem to generate only more suffering and resentment.
jh, that is an interesting point worth more understanding. Pre- and Post-Chinese Cultural Revolution and the effects of psyche and behaviors of the common Chinese. Now that you bring it up, I believe might be significantly different. Though a few Chinese friends of mine have confirmed that it is part of the Han Chinese culture to think they are superior to the rest of the Asian and really everyother culture. Granted they are Chinese-American and may be out of touch with their “true” culture. But it would be very interesting to do some research to find out if this is actually true and whether or not it is a post-1950 construct. I sometimes forget that this post-1950 Chinese psyche is, depending on how you look at it, really in its infantile or adolescent stages. Which makes SOOO MUCH sense when trying to communicate with the pro-PRC crowd, its honestly like trying to reason with a hyperactive child.
eventine, very good points. Anyone would be hardpressed to disagree…unless of course that someone was a hyperactive child with ADD ;)
Oh, also to do a complete study we would also have to investigate whether or not the HongKong and Taiwanese Chinese truly represent the ancient Chinese culture or maybe they are just more socially evolved or maybe a combination of both. Now lets put our phsyco-sociology hats on :)