The Congressional Gold Medal was awarded to the Dalai Lama by Bush the other day. This prompted a shameful display of protest from the Chinese communists who have occupied Tibet since their brutal invasion in 1950. I don’t pretend to be an expert on the history of this region but I do accept Tibet’s right to autonomy and independence from the Chinese regime. In the same breath I reject communistic aspirations anywhere they present themselves in the world, this is an ideology that should be permanently wiped out from the collective consciousness of the world. Of course, a Buddhist theocracy may not be the best alternative either but at least this was Tibet’s cultural norm based on a tradition of non-aggression. Most of the global community offers support for the Dalai Lama’s struggle to return to the country from which he has been exiled and his aspirations towards a democratic Tibetan state.
This struggle resonates with me because I’ve been directly affected by the dismal failure of communism as a practical system of governance. The parallel I want to draw your attention to is between my parent’s homeland of Latvia and the Dalai Lama’s Tibet. Both are small and insignificant in terms of global influence and both are victims of communistic rule; the difference is that Latvia along with many other former ‘Iron Curtain’ countries now enjoy all the liberties of the free world whereas Tibet has yet to be released from the ‘dragon’s jaws’.
For China to suggest that the global call to Tibet’s freedom will somehow contribute to the division of China is simply laughable. China is a brutal regime, despite their public relations efforts to present themselves as a reasonable nation with respect for human rights and the environment.
How do I justify the purchase of cheap ‘Made in China’ widgets? I partially buy in to the idea that perhaps there is a way to liberating their population by going in through the back door via the free market economy, although I’m not so sure anymore that this is the best way.
Like
I think the truly shameful thing is that the Dalai Lama–a man recognized around the world as a symbol of peace–would stoop to accept any kind of award from George W. Bush, whose government has ensured that the United States, once a beacon of hope, now represents the very opposite. Talk about irony in optics. Maybe the Dalai Lama’s acceptance of this “honour” will advance the Tibetan cause, but it sure cheapened him in the process.
I agree with you, John, as far as the Dalai Lama is concerned, but I disagree with the “communist” label to describe the politics of the Chinese junta. That would be like attaching a “democrat” label to Harper. I would describe China as a capitalist society it in terms of economic policies, and as an oligarchy in terms of its politics.
Andre, call it what you will but as far as my perhaps limited view is concerned, it appears to be a perverted and contaminated manifestation of an inherently flawed ideology.
This idea called ‘communism’ has not revealed itself as useful to anyone except for the dictators that have exploited the proletariat probably worse than the ruling class that they replaced. It is also useful to multinational corporations that do business with the various varieties of ‘state capitalism’, be it China or Burma.
Besides, since when has a ‘communist’ state been anything other than an oligarchy?
Mark, there’s plenty of shame to go around, all of our hands are bloodied so to ask the Dalai Lama to avoid people like Bush would be like asking him to become completely islolated and non participatory.