What is happening in Tibet, and in the reporting of what is happening?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

Related post now added at Tibet protests . . . hope for Diego Garcians. . .?

This post has an updated link at What is happening in Tibet, 2:

Firstly, I deplore the human rights situation in China, and was dismayed that it was chosen to host the Olympics in the first place. But having had some contacts with a few Tibetans, and watching the way some of the Tibetan protests are portrayed in the news here, I cannot help but seek answers to a few questions before jumping on board the free Tibet movement. Certainly I would support an increase in human rights in Tibet, as anywhere in China, but independence or even quasi-independence protests are another matter.

Questions that keep coming to mind:

Are the monk-dominated images I see on TV footage representative of the identity of the main body of protesters in Tibet? If so, what is the role of the population who are not monks in the clashes with Chinese authorities?

When TV footage comes with a voice over saying that it is showing monks coming between Chinese troops and other protesters, then why am I unable to see much evidence of the other protesters, and even see some monks throwing rocks and bars at the troops?

When a leader of the protesters was interviewed on a BBC film clip recently, was he translated correctly when he appeared to say: “That’s why we (the monks) have ordered (sic) these demonstrations”?

Why do so many commentators seem to trace Tibetan history in their commentaries back no farther than the 1950’s? At best, I have read of the time Tibet was prised away from China during the time when nineteenth century foreign imperial powers were intent on weakening and breaking up China. Is there any significance in the 1950’s time-frame of historical recollection in the news media coinciding with early Cold War attempts by the U.S. to attempt to undermine the new government of China?

What is the actual evidence that the bulk of the lay population of Tibet is strongly opposed to being part of China? To what extent are the Tibetans at the “free Tibet” booths and stalls one often sees at festivals, fairs, etc, in the West truly representative of the average Tibetans “back home”?

How can one be sure that by supporting Tibetan independence one is not playing into the hands of a well funded attempt by the U.S. in their games with China?

This post has an updated link at What is happening in Tibet, 2

See also Human Rights in China

The GOOD legacy . . . : 9 — afterthought

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

by Neil Godfrey

Revised again (1). . . .

In addition to life in the fringe cults I should have discussed more the life and legacy of the more mainstream fundamentalist groups, too. But in both types, one will almost surely be exposed to many examples and contacts with some highly memorable people of deep compassion, self-sacrifice for others less fortunate, generosity and personal kindness. (It would be interesting to survey how many of such examples are found among the ordinary members as opposed to those higher up the hierarchy, but this series is looking at the “good” side for now.) Of course there are such acts among those not part of fundamentalist groups too, but I suggest that chances of encountering them are concentrated in relative frequency within the membership of a group devoted to being serious “lights” in the world.

Such memorable acts, people, moments, will always hold a special place in one’s life and continue to serve as inspiring reminders throughout life. And a post-fundamentalist life, once the dividing of the world between godly and satanic camps is a thing of the past, frees one to apply them even towards sectors of society and individuals that were not considered worthy of such acts as an erstwhile believer.