Tibetan Uprising

[Snoopy]

"There have been violent clashes between protesters and security forces in Tibet's main city of Lhasa as rallies against Chinese rule, said to be the largest in 20 years, continue. Witnesses have been describing the protests and the Chinese security forces' response."

BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | Eyewitness accounts: Tibet clashes


"The Dalai Lama has said he fears there will be more deaths in Tibet unless Beijing changes its policies towards the Chinese-controlled region."

BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | Dalai Lama's Tibet bloodshed fear


On the anniversary of the invasion of Tibet in 1959 and the oppression of the Tibetan people...just what Beijiing doesn't want, what with its shiny Olypmics coming up and all...

Beijing Olympics



s.

[greymare]

its terrible. what can we do, though snoopy, apart from boycott the olympics.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by greymare

its terrible. what can we do, though snoopy, apart from boycott the olympics.

Whatver you might think or can grey...

Have a look here grey...

Free Tibet Campaign - Chinese occupation of Tibet | Tibetans' human rights

...or maybe try to avoid buying Chinese goods...the more that do that...

s.

[greymare]

thanks for that snoop

[Snoopy]

s.

[Snoopy]

At least 80 people have been killed in unrest following protests by Tibetans against Chinese rule, the Tibetan government in exile says.

Indian-based officials said the figure was confirmed by several sources, even though China put the death toll at 10.

The Dalai Lama condemned China's "rule of terror" in Tibet and accused it of "cultural genocide".




BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | 'Eighty killed' in Tibetan unrest


s.

[Francis king]

Tibet is a small country in the middle of a country most people in this country will never see. Small countries get taken over by bigger countries all the time. Just as they get taken, they are also given back. This is the cycle of life in our brave new world.

Just like a man has a cycle of his life, so too does a dog, and so too does a country.

Imposing your will on a regime which is bigger than you and has more power than you is not enlightened- it is ridiculously foolish.

As far as I am concerned they should start practising what they preach.

Buddhism is an intelligent religion but here it is in the hands of peasants, and look at how it has become no better than any other religion- a fixed and rigid oddity which spawns bigots and tolerates fairy tales instead of facts.

That is why, instead of watching enlightened beings using intelligence to get what they want I am watching monks in their robes in the street throwing stones and smashing windows like small children who cannot get their own way. This does not make me feel sorry for them- rather- it annoys me.

I appreciate that people feel like their way of life is in danger- but as far as I'm concerned that's just peasant rhetoric.

The Chinese are not rounding Tibetans up and packing them onto trains and taking them away to be gassed. They are not invading Tibet and ethnically cleansing the area- they have not bombed anyone's temples or destroyed ordinary people's homes and livelihoods. Apart from being swamped with a lot of tourists, Tibet is not that much different to how it was before. In fact, I would go so far as to say they should actually be grateful to the Chinese for boosting their economy.

I read that Tibet is being taken over by the Chinese. I hear exactly these same words from the BNP supporters in Barking, who feel that their way of life is changing and there are too many foreigners, and who are also campaigning and having marches in the street.

But somehow that's different. Buddhists equals good, BNP equals bad.

The Chinese are doing what any other country would do- they are using riot squads to deal with non peaceful demonstrators. If I was in London, on a march, and people started smashing windows and setting fire to cars what would happen?

Of course, the boys from the Met would close the area off, remove their shoulder numbers and steam in. They would charge us with horses and plastic riot shields and beat us with big sticks, and if that didn't work they would use water cannons and tear gas.

Why would you want to take the Met on, on their own turf, when all you have are ideologies to defend yourself with?

But no... ooh, Tibet, the magical kingdom. Ooh, Tibet, the place the Dalai Lama used to live in 50 years ago. Ooh, the Chinese are such human rights abusers. Let's boycott the games.

Then maybe we can boycott all of China and woo hoo! Why not Russia too (as let's face it, this is the only way Europe and America can compete with the new Russia and China...yet I digress)

Far better it would have been to wait, and organise somethig big for the games, just when all those foreign journalists are actually inside China and there's no way the news won't get out and international attention will come their way and all the Westerners will run out into the street to protest about the treatment of a meager and unimportant country and China will suffer.

Behaviour like this does not end violence. It triggers international conflict.

Surely that's not the point?

Lets not forget why the Chinese got involved here in the first place this week.

Some monks wanted to take a commemorative march to a temple which was important to them in the great struggle of the 1950's because it was one of the few battles the monks actually won.

So, although these monks would be classed as agitators, and although these monks would be considered "anti-party", and should be worthy of destruction or reeducation, the Chinese have allowed this proccession to continue ever since, and it has always been a peaceful event.

China are desperate not to recieve any more bad press because they are hosting the games next. It's a chance for them to show China off to the world as a contender on the global field, not just some Communist and Totalitarian ran impoverished backwater producing plastic tat. So they stopped the people marching.

This happens here too. You inform the authorities you are marching down so and so street at so-and-so time. Most of the time, it's okay. Other times- they say no. Or they say- you must march down X street instead of Y street.

Now... if these monks were German Nazis, and they wanted to walk into Belsen every year and whoop it up, most people would find this distasteful. But no, of course, there can't be anything distasteful here, as these are the holy beings of Tibet which we western buddhists are supposed to doff our caps to, and the Chinese are oppressing them...

Tenzin has been shot in the back, and we're all supposed to feel sorry for him, because he's a monk who throws stones at the evil regime. Call Tenzin "Terry", take his robes away and give him a LeCoste tracksuit, and although in his way he is still throwing his stones at the evil regime when Terry takes a bullet we cheer that another ASBO bound lout has been removed from society.

Direct conflict and violent demonstrations- even when that violence is not personal, and involves the destruction of property, is a foolish game to play when the opposing side has control. That is the reality of the situation.

Smashing the windows in the local fruit and veg shop simply because it is owned by a Chinese man who now lives in Tibet is not going to help your cause.

You should make your mind up whether you want to wear the robes or smash windows. You shouldn't do both.

[Pathless]

Francis, I agree with some of what you say, but other parts of it bother me. It seems like you are advocating maintenance of the status quo and believe that popular movements and protests are stupid things, and that everything should be mediated by "intelligent" people, not "peasants," who after all exist only to be ruled, because they are stupid.

Alright, so I am exaggerating my interpretation of what you have posted.

Originally Posted by BBC

The violence - the worst in Tibet since 1989 - erupted on the fifth day of largely peaceful protests that began on last Monday's anniversary of a 1959 uprising against Chinese rule.
The demonstrations - like those last September in Burma - were initially led by Buddhist monks and then attracted crowds of ordinary people.

Are the monks resorting to violence, or is that the "peasants"? Does it matter? Is it incongruent to practice Buddhism and also destroy property?

Originally Posted by Francis king

So, although these monks would be classed as agitators, and although these monks would be considered "anti-party", and should be worthy of destruction or reeducation, the Chinese have allowed this proccession to continue ever since, and it has always been a peaceful event.

Why should the Chinese government be able to deem anyone "worthy of destruction or reeducation"? Simply because they have the authority of the state, it would seem. Beyond the absolute authority of the state, which is itself ultimately based on violence, restraint, and enforced order, is there any reason that one group of human beings should be able to condemn another group or individual to destruction or re-education?

I don't know anything beyond what is posted in this thread about the context of the protests. I know very little about the situation in Tibet--just the general awareness of it being a highly popular target for human rights sympathizers from far away to get worked up about while possibly ignoring so many issues and problems in their own neighborhoods and countries. In some ways, Francis, I'm sympathetic to what you post:

Originally Posted by Francis king

Tibet is a small country in the middle of a country most people in this country will never see.

Where I would go from here is that we all have plenty of issues with our own authoritarian governments to deal with, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to get unduly distracted by situations of repression across the world that we cannot have much effect on. While we can sympathize with those movements and express solidarity, ultimately we must leave those struggles in the hands of the people who are involved with and directly effected by them.

At the same time, I don't think that condemning the protests as unenlightened or hypocritical is really very sensible, unless you are someone who puts a considerable amount of faith in governments and the ideology of might-makes-right, the ruled and the rulers, and think that self-determination is a silly fantasy, a fairy tale for the plebes.

[Francis king]

Pathless...

I am not advocating maintenance of the status quo, as such. Instead, I think that people would be better off just living their lives and getting on with things, as this "fight" and "struggle" is, in itself, futile, when the form it takes is badly organised street protests which are quickly crushed.

Buddha said to Rahula,

Rahula, Before committing an act, ask yourself this: Will this act harm me, or another? If the answer is yes, do not commit the act.

The fundamentally most important part of buddhism is not compassion- it is insight. Insight into the nature of how things are, moment to moment, without us, the viewer, imposing our own interpretations upon things based on nothing more than assumptions and inferences and stereotypies and conventions.

Now, while on a human level I can appreciate that people feel they need to fight to overthrow the regime they are forced to live under, an occupied people with no nation, no flag, no king, on the level of even an elementary buddhist this behaviour and mindset is not buddhism, it is Nationalism.

Realistically... each side has its own agenda. The Tibetan reports are saying around 100 people have died, mostly monks and native Tibetans. The Chinese are saying 10, all Chinese, hurt by the Tibetans and monks.

As for peasants... I believe the majority of people in any country think and act like peasants- they are not intelligent, self-supporting, self-regulating self-actualised individuals, they are stupid, they defer resposibility to the "higher ups", they cling to half-baked ideologies and supersitions to give their mundane and irrelevant lives meaning and purpose, and they will never self- actualise because they do not have the capacity to see beyond the confines of their own small minds and small worlds.

This is my definition of a peasant. These peasants exist everywhere- Eton, Yale, The House of Lords- they don't just live in sink estates and trailer parks...

...As for the "worthy of destruction or reeducation" part...

maybe I get carried away with myself. I did not mean to say the state does deem them unworthy, or that it should, or even that it does- these activities are the activities most people associate with communist states- when dealing with hostiles they might deem them worthy of reeducation or destruction- yet that has not happenned here was my point, I think.

I am not "someone who puts a considerable amount of faith in governments and the ideology of might-makes-right", but yes, I am conscious that our world is made of "the ruled and the rulers"- I might not agree with it, but its right there, in my face, every day.

Can I, personally, change that?

It's not very likely.

Should I devote my time railing against it and being constantly drained by the weight of oppression upon my shoulders? Should I campaign to take my little world back to the glorious days of the 1950's, when bread was bread and you could leave your back door open all night without getting burgled by junkies, even if that place no longer exists and things change and time moves on...?

So, instead of looking back in anger, or looking to the future in rapturous hope, we should instead look to the here and now, and attend to those things which need attention in the here and now.

Can you get an education? Do you have access to health care and medcines? Do you get enough food to eat? Do you have a roof over your head? Are you able to go about your business relatively unhindered by others?

Beyond that then, what more do you need to survive and be relatively content? A flag of your own? Nice flag, but you can't eat flags. You want to one day govern yourself? How will that happen, exactly? "You", personally, the individual, will still have to follow rules. Adopt policies. You will not make the rules for others- somebody somewhere will make them for you. So, what's changed? All you do is swap one dictaor and his fawns for another. You are still as far removed from being autonomous as you always were- it's all fiction, dreamt up by ideologues.

To have control of your self, your existence, in the here and now, as an individual- that's about as much control of anything you will ever hope or need to have.

The rest? Rackets, games of gain and loss, delusions to cling to.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Francis king

Tibet is a small country in the middle of a country most people in this country will never see. Small countries get taken over by bigger countries all the time. Just as they get taken, they are also given back. This is the cycle of life in our brave new world.

Small relative to the size of China yes. But in land area you'd have to add France, Germany, Spain, the UK, and Portugal togther to equal the area of Tibet I think. Population wise it would be miniscule to China and much less than that area in Europe.

Why they take it is it just about indefensible from any other direction.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Francis king

Tibet is a small country in the middle of a country most people in this country will never see.

So you only care if it’s something happening in Liverpool then?

They are not invading Tibet

No, they’ve already done that.

and ethnically cleansing the area-

Yes they are, de facto. There are more Chinese in the capital of Tibet than there are Tibetans, by deliberate Chinese policy.

they have not bombed anyone's temples or destroyed ordinary people's homes and livelihoods.

The invasion and oppression of course involved troops, violence, destruction and killings.

Apart from being swamped with a lot of tourists, Tibet is not that much different to how it was before.

Rubbish. It’s being turned into a Chinese province for the economic use of the Chinese government.

In fact, I would go so far as to say they should actually be grateful to the Chinese for boosting their economy.

I’m sure the scales will fall from their eyes any day now.

I read that Tibet is being taken over by the Chinese.

It has been. Did you miss that?

I hear exactly these same words from the BNP supporters in Barking, who feel that their way of life is changing and there are too many foreigners, and who are also campaigning and having marches in the street.

But somehow that's different. Buddhists equals good, BNP equals bad.

Your attempted analogy is appalling.

Lets not forget why the Chinese got involved here in the first place this week.

Let’s not forget why the Chinese got involved here in the first place.

Now... if these monks were German Nazis, and they wanted to walk into Belsen every year and whoop it up, most people would find this distasteful.

Again, your attempted analogy is appalling.



A breath taking post. An apologist for the Chinese government.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Francis king

The fundamentally most important part of buddhism is not compassion- it is insight. Insight into the nature of how things are, moment to moment, without us, the viewer, imposing our own interpretations upon things based on nothing more than assumptions and inferences and stereotypies and conventions.

I’m sure you’re aware that the most venerated of the Bodhisattvas is Avalokitesvara, the Bodhsisattva of compassion.

s.

[Francis king]

but not venerated by me... I happen to think Avalokiteshvara is only Brahma in buddhist clothing...

I am not a superstitious peasant who needs godly figures to cling to... pray to Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of compassion... why pray to a figure who doesn't exist, except in pictures and in other peoples' minds?

You believe these figures exist? Then by all means, pray ur little heart out, but I can assure nobody's listening...

There is no point being a buddhist if all you are going to do is replace one ridiculous belief system with another... you may as well be a catholic if all buddhism is is another religion with Buddha as God and all the bodhisattvas flying about in the sky like sweet little angels devoting their time and energy to assisting the world...

That's not buddhism... that's religion... u can find the same idiotic and childish ideas in any one of them...

As for caring only if something is happenning in Liverpool... I don't even care then... unless it directly effects me... and why should I?

I should care, because..? Ah yes, I should care, because being compassionate is upheld as the height of good taste...

of course, I don't want to see other people miserable and unhappy, but there's very little I can do either way...

So they were invaded in 1958/9... that's 50 years ago... watch the news... how old are the people involved here, roughly?

they're not 60+ old men and women who remember the past, are they?

Nope... they are, in the main, under 40...or at least, that is how it appears on my TV...

So... most of the peope involved here were not even born when Tibet was invaded...

So... why are they still grasping this hatred? Because although they are buddhists, they are only people...

they cling to this hatred and this anger and this "identity" because they have listened to the stories of others... they have listened to their grandmothers, and their old uncles, and thanks to their ignorance and grasping they cling to this idea of a free Tibet...

Marvellous advertisement for buddhism, isn't it? "Come, be a buddhist- its no different from any other tin pot religion!"

Let's go to Barking and kick a few Polish heads in- they don't belong here! they're stealing our jobs, the very food from our mouths! Let's smash up a few paki shops- they shouldn't be "here" either...

as for my attempted anologies... u dislike them Snoopy because they are effective...

...hate and violence is still hate and violence, whether it be the BNP or our buddhist pals in Tibet... u cannot dress them up and pretend its okay for some people to behave like this and then despise others for behaving the same way based soley on which side of the fence you sit on...

As for the tibetan way of life...

The Dalai Lama is now an old man and is thinking about a successor...

...now, as you probably know, this has been done traditionally in a certain way- the Lama dies, then his mates take some of his personal items to villiages surrounding Tibet and look for small children who say they recognise these objects, and this is taken as a sign that the Lama is now in a new body and has entered a new incarnation...

I personally think this is a crock of sheet, but I digress...

Currently the Dalai Lama is reviewing the situation, and instead of the old way, he's going to choose a successor while he is alive.

Gadzooks!

What does that tell us?

Well, I don't know about you, but it tells me the old Tibetan buddhism is on its knees and might even die...

Is that neccessarily a bad thing for buddhism?

[China Cat Sunflower]

What can we do? Boycott Chinese goods. This will have the added effect of supporting the American worker. Boycott the summer Olympics. Don't watch it, tell your friends not to watch it, tell your senator and congressman you're not going to watch it. While you're at it, tell your government representatives what you think about MFN status for China.

Chris

[Pathless]

Originally Posted by Francis king

I am not a superstitious peasant who needs godly figures to cling to... pray to Avalokiteshvara, the bodhisattva of compassion... why pray to a figure who doesn't exist, except in pictures and in other peoples' minds?

Why bother with buddhism at all? It doesn't exist, except in scriptures and in peoples' minds.

Originally Posted by Francis king

You believe these figures exist? Then by all means, pray ur little heart out, but I can assure nobody's listening...

How very condescending.

Originally Posted by Francis king

There is no point being a buddhist if all you are going to do is replace one ridiculous belief system with another... you may as well be a catholic if all buddhism is is another religion with Buddha as God and all the bodhisattvas flying about in the sky like sweet little angels devoting their time and energy to assisting the world...

That's not buddhism... that's religion... u can find the same idiotic and childish ideas in any one of them...

As for caring only if something is happenning in Liverpool... I don't even care then... unless it directly effects me... and why should I?

I should care, because..? Ah yes, I should care, because being compassionate is upheld as the height of good taste...

of course, I don't want to see other people miserable and unhappy, but there's very little I can do either way...

Francis, why bother with buddhism indeed? Do you really need buddhism to be a cynic? You could drop the spiritual trappings--which as a side note seem not spiritual at all, but more like an exercise in intellectual or cultural elitism--and the adjective, and just be a plain ol' cynic. But then again, Francis king: buddhist cynic does have a nice ring to it.

Originally Posted by Francis king

So... why are they still grasping this hatred? Because although they are buddhists, they are only people...

they cling to this hatred and this anger and this "identity" because they have listened to the stories of others... they have listened to their grandmothers, and their old uncles, and thanks to their ignorance and grasping they cling to this idea of a free Tibet...

How easy it is to know these people of a foreign culture, Francis king! Wow! And I must say that I, in the same way, know why you cling to your loathing of 'religion' and your cynicism, your ill-mannered spitting on compassion. It's because you, as a child, were neglected by your parents, who cared more about clinging to the strictures and dogmas of a religion that seemed superstitious to you. Must be. It's all so obvious and clear.

Originally Posted by Francis king

Marvellous advertisement for buddhism, isn't it? "Come, be a buddhist- its no different from any other tin pot religion!"

And your advertisement? "Come, be a buddhist--it's not different than your average brand of intellectual cynicism!"

Originally Posted by Francis king

as for my attempted anologies... u dislike them Snoopy because they are effective...

...hate and violence is still hate and violence, whether it be the BNP or our buddhist pals in Tibet... u cannot dress them up and pretend its okay for some people to behave like this and then despise others for behaving the same way based soley on which side of the fence you sit on...

I can't speak for Snoopy, but I do believe that your approach is simplistic in some ways, as it doesn't take into account the varying degrees of oppression in different situations. I don't know all the subtleties of the situations myself, but I do imagine that the Polish army did not invade Barking and take it over. which is quite different from the Chinese and Tibetan scenario. Comparing the two seems a bit ridiculous to me.

Originally Posted by Francis king

As for the tibetan way of life...

The Dalai Lama is now an old man and is thinking about a successor...

...now, as you probably know, this has been done traditionally in a certain way- the Lama dies, then his mates take some of his personal items to villiages surrounding Tibet and look for small children who say they recognise these objects, and this is taken as a sign that the Lama is now in a new body and has entered a new incarnation...

I personally think this is a crock of sheet, but I digress...

Currently the Dalai Lama is reviewing the situation, and instead of the old way, he's going to choose a successor while he is alive.

Gadzooks!

What does that tell us?

Well, I don't know about you, but it tells me the old Tibetan buddhism is on its knees and might even die...

Is that neccessarily a bad thing for buddhism?

It may not be a bad thing for buddhism as a whole or in general, but we aren't just talking about buddism in general. The issue here is more cultural than religious, perhaps. Yes, cultures are transformed. No, it is not necessarily bad. But, it seems to me much less than compassionate and sensitive for any of us to peek over at other cultures and their struggles and snidely say, "Ha. Serves them right, stupid violent buggers. Screw them. It's clearly their fault, the fault of their lack of perspective and intelligence."

Is that enlightened? Is enlightenment all about insight and perspective? I think not. Compassion and love are essential. A person can have all the insight in the world and still be a jackass. It's fairly easy to say that enlightenment is a personal struggle to free oneself from suffering. That's the Theravada trip, and don't worry about everyone else. Don't get me wrong; I don't think it's bad to have a healthy ego and self-awareness in spiritual practice. I think those are both essential, but without a real and felt experience of the unity of all things--interdependent co-arising, I believe, is a fashionable buddhist term--so-called spiritual practice can become an intellectual and egotistical trip.

Maybe it's just my own trip, but without compassion and love and concern for other people's struggles, any practice of spirituality or even intellect seems vain, empty, and ugly.