• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

China marks 50 years of direct control over Tibet

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
59,299
Reaction score
26,919
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
China marks 50 years of direct control over Tibet

China celebrated 50 years of direct control over Tibet with a lavish international Buddhist conference Saturday featuring a rare appearance by Beijing's hand-picked Buddhist leader — underscoring efforts to promote its image as a protector of the faith.

March 28 marks the date when China ended the 1959 Tibetan uprising, sending Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama over the Himalayas into exile in India and placing Tibet under its direct rule for the first time.

In China's official version of events, Tibet in mid-century was a remote medieval backwater where most people lived in servitude to the Buddhist theocracy and nobility until the Communist government stepped in. To support that contention, China commemorated a new political holiday Saturday — "Serfs Liberation Day."

"Just as Europe can't return to the medieval era and the United States can't go back to the times before the Civil War, Tibet can never restore the old serf society era," Zhang Qingli, the Communist Party boss of the region, told a crowd of more than 13,000 in Lhasa, the Tibetan regional capital where the government held a separate ceremony for the holiday.

More and more I'm starting to doubt the whole Dalai Lama thing. I mean. Yes. China is a very oppressive country has shown it's willingness to use force in Tibet to quell any kind of uprising but at the same time what was Tibet like before China took over? All I've read about Tibet post-Communist China seems to infer that it was a religious monarchy with an entire population devoted to the servitude of a bunch of monks that kept banning foreigners from entering Tibet. Not that much different from what China is currently doing. If you ask me Tibet really hasn't changed that much. Only difference is a different guy in management. Free Tibet. Yes. But why? So that they can go back to what they were before which isn't that much different from what they are now?
 
Last edited:
Buying into Chinese propoganda, eh? That is NOT for the Chinese to decide. I find it incredibly ironic that they proclaim a doctrine of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries yet they use the alleged internal system of Tibet to justify their illegal invasion, occupation, and incorporation of Tibet.

Of course, anytime China whines that the US and Western countries are interfering in the internal affairs of others, we should remind EVERYONE of what they have done and are doing to Tibet.
 
In the early years following the invasion Tibet was forming and using resistance fighters supported by the US and other nations. After a lil bit though the Dalai Lama ceased resistance by armed means... 54-55 or so.
He has decided that China will be worn out instead of fought out.

Maybe in he'll change his mind one day.. 200 years from now.

...
Tibets Monastic "government" on top of a warrior people is nothing like Communist China's government over the people via a godless one party lets all be ants ideology.



What post-communist China?
The Peoples Republic of China is one party, one state.
Karl Marx meets 1984. Grade A+++ Communist...or Maoist if you prefer the lil red book version.
Mind your manners in Tiananem.
tiananmen%20square.gif

_1090269_tiananmen_ap300.jpg
 
Last edited:
More and more I'm starting to doubt the whole Dalai Lama thing. I mean. Yes. China is a very oppressive country has shown it's willingness to use force in Tibet to quell any kind of uprising but at the same time what was Tibet like before China took over? All I've read about Tibet post-Communist China seems to infer that it was a religious monarchy with an entire population devoted to the servitude of a bunch of monks that kept banning foreigners from entering Tibet. Not that much different from what China is currently doing. If you ask me Tibet really hasn't changed that much. Only difference is a different guy in management. Free Tibet. Yes. But why? So that they can go back to what they were before which isn't that much different from what they are now?

You, sir, are absolutely correct. Most liberals of the "Free Tibet" persuasion are not able to think further than what their bumper sticker says.

Karl Marx meets 1984. Grade A+++ Communist...or Maoist if you prefer the lil red book version.
Mind your manners in Tiananem.

This statement is either hilariously ignorant or hilariously hypocritical.:roll:
 
Last edited:
You, sir, are absolutely correct. Most liberals of the "Free Tibet" persuasion are not able to think further than what their bumper sticker says.

So, it is ok for CHina to impose their will on the Tibetan people? Do you actually think the Dalai Lama is advocating feudal rule (though it wasn't TRULY feudal as the Chinese would have you believe) in Tibet today?

And what IS your position on the US and its opening Iraq to Democracy?
 
So, it is ok for CHina to impose their will on the Tibetan people?

I never said that.

Do you actually think the Dalai Lama is advocating feudal rule (though it wasn't TRULY feudal as the Chinese would have you believe) in Tibet today?

I believe that the Dalai Lama will be just as bad, if not worse than, the Chinese.

And what IS your position on the US and its opening Iraq to Democracy?

What is your opinion of the support of the Mujahideen during the Afghan-Soviet conflict?
 
I never said that.



I believe that the Dalai Lama will be just as bad, if not worse than, the Chinese.

THen you have no idea that the Dalai Lama has advocated DEMOCRATIC rule of Tibet. You are obviously a victim of Chinese propoganda on the subject.


What is your opinion of the support of the Mujahideen during the Afghan-Soviet conflict?

Supported it. The Soviet invasion was naked aggression and illegal under international law.
 
THen you have no idea that the Dalai Lama has advocated DEMOCRATIC rule of Tibet. You are obviously a victim of Chinese propoganda on the subject.

Okay.

Supported it. The Soviet invasion was naked aggression and illegal under international law.

You realize that the Mujahideen that was supported at the time as "freedom fighters" then went on (actually, about the same time that the resistance was going on) to implement Shar'ia Law in the manner that the Talib'an would become renowned for years later. So, just wanted to let you know that, as it was my entire point.
 
Funny how you can always find Communists who have never lived under Communism but you can rarely find Communists who have.
 
Okay.



You realize that the Mujahideen that was supported at the time as "freedom fighters" then went on (actually, about the same time that the resistance was going on) to implement Shar'ia Law in the manner that the Talib'an would become renowned for years later. So, just wanted to let you know that, as it was my entire point.

THe point being? The Chinese invasion of Tibet was illegal. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was also illegal. Now, do you honestly think the Dalai Lama and his followers is going to morph into a Taliban-like repressive regime that will blow up Buddhist statues and make women wear burkas?
 
Funny how you can always find Communists who have never lived under Communism but you can rarely find Communists who have.

OMGZ UR A WINNER:roll:

The Chinese invasion of Tibet was illegal. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was also illegal.

These are both completely irrelevant.

Now, do you honestly think the Dalai Lama and his followers is going to morph into a...repressive regime...?

Most petit-bourgeois/bourgeois "democratic" liberation movements don't succeed without some sort of repression and betrayal of the base on which they relied to get there. So yes, I do think that they will "morph into a...repressive regime".
 
Last edited:
China marks 50 years of direct control over Tibet



More and more I'm starting to doubt the whole Dalai Lama thing. I mean. Yes. China is a very oppressive country has shown it's willingness to use force in Tibet to quell any kind of uprising but at the same time what was Tibet like before China took over? All I've read about Tibet post-Communist China seems to infer that it was a religious monarchy with an entire population devoted to the servitude of a bunch of monks that kept banning foreigners from entering Tibet. Not that much different from what China is currently doing. If you ask me Tibet really hasn't changed that much. Only difference is a different guy in management. Free Tibet. Yes. But why? So that they can go back to what they were before which isn't that much different from what they are now?
Hatuey supports communism, because liberals a communist lite.
 
Hatuey supports communism, because liberals a communist lite.

Moderator's Warning:
:sigh: Unnecessary, American. Knock off the trolling or there will be further consequences.
 
OMGZ UR A WINNER:roll:



These are both completely irrelevant.

In what way is the invasion of both countries being illegal irrelevant?


Most petit-bourgeois/bourgeois "democratic" liberation movements don't succeed without some sort of repression and betrayal of the base on which they relied to get there. So yes, I do think that they will "morph into a...repressive regime".

And the current regime isn't repressive? So, you think alien repression is better than the POSSIBLITY of home grown repression?
 
In what way is the invasion of both countries being illegal irrelevant?

Because it has nothing to do with the point I was making?

And the current regime isn't repressive?

Yes, it is repressive.

So, you think alien repression is better than the POSSIBLITY of home grown repression?

No, I think that both are equally unsupportable.
 
Buying into Chinese propoganda, eh?

Which would be what exactly? Did Tibet not on many occasions keep expelling foreigners? In the 1850s Tibet banned all foreigners from going into the country. Then before that the Capuchins and Jesuits. Before that Christian missionaries. So what exactly am I 'buying into'? Tibet's long and I'm sure 'proud' history of expelling foreigners? They only turned to the West and the very foreign community they expelled when they were pimp slapped by the Chinese a few times. Tibet has no history of democracy or even close. Let us remember that the Dalai Lama was not only the religious but political leader of Tibet. To this day he's still regarded as such. The calls for 'democracy' are the standard for any deposed political leader. Saying that he wants to return to lead a country wouldn't get him much sympathy.
 
Which would be what exactly? Did Tibet not on many occasions keep expelling foreigners? In the 1850s Tibet banned all foreigners from going into the country. Then before that the Capuchins and Jesuits. Before that Christian missionaries. So what exactly am I 'buying into'? Tibet's long and I'm sure 'proud' history of expelling foreigners? They only turned to the West and the very foreign community they expelled when they were pimp slapped by the Chinese a few times. Tibet has no history of democracy or even close. Let us remember that the Dalai Lama was not only the religious but political leader of Tibet. To this day he's still regarded as such. The calls for 'democracy' are the standard for any deposed political leader. Saying that he wants to return to lead a country wouldn't get him much sympathy.

Screw "democracy." Democracy is a means to an end - preserving liberty and justice. It may or may not be the best way of doing so. I'd rather live as a feudal serf under the rule of Bhuddist monks than as a peasant under the racist and oppressive CCP. The Dalai Lama considers himself a "Bhuddist Marxist." Obviously, he's confused Marxism with communism, but ya know what? Communism might have made a nice fit for the small agrarian society in Tibet. The CCP has screwed that up with their "Cultural Revolution," mass migrations and forced "modernization."

Check this article out.

March 28 is the day that the regime celebrates “Memorial Day of Liberating Millions of Serfs in Tibet.” Beijing has intensified its criticism of the Dalai Lama and “old Tibet.” Tibetan writer Ms. Tsering Woeser commented that these media reports and articles are only propaganda to demonize Tibet.

It may or may not be completely accurate, but there are a lot of good points.
 
Back
Top Bottom