[68c12c16]

I feel the human rights issue in Tibet could be more complicated than you think...For instance, there was an article from the Guardian describes some aspects of the old traditional system in Tibet before the Chinese government took control of the region in 1950s [1],

Some extreme cruelties were practiced in Tibet before 1950, including mutilation as punishment and using human body parts for constructing religious instruments. The latter is documented in an article published in 1923 [2].

--

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/10/tibet-...

[2] https://library.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/read/skulls.pdf

[intended]

No... kidding?

underdeveloped nation in an underdeveloped region in the 1950s has non modern social practices.

In other news, The world is round, and the sky is blue.

So, taking over a country, eradicating their culture, deciding who reincarnates, diluting the population is ok?

Are we saying ethnic Chinese are superior to tibetans China basically has the money to bully people into submission.

Also it’s funny that the people who support North Korea, murdered most of their educated class during the great revolution, have locus standii on this issue.

[jonhendry18]

Yes, that's the Chinese government propaganda line that always gets trotted out.

In fact, the writer actually states:

"Last December, Ye Xiaowen, head of China's administration for religious affairs, published a piece in the state-run China Daily newspaper that, although propaganda, rings true. " And argues some of the same points from the propaganda piece.

The author of the piece you link to formerly worked for the China Daily in Beijing, run by the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China.

Finally, you do realize that skulls are easily obtained via death by natural causes, right? Especially before the adoption of antibiotics and vaccination?

Tibetans practice sky burial, where bodies are left out in a charnel ground and picked clean by wildlife. (Probably because digging graves is difficult and cremation would be a waste of scarce fuel.) I suspect they have a different attitude about the dead and their parts than you.

[68c12c16]

  > the author of the piece you link to formerly worked for 
  > the China Daily in Beijing, run by the Publicity 
  > Department of the Communist Party of China.

Yes, I read about that too in the comment section of the Guardian article...I just feel that if there are some facts in that article, those facts are still facts even if the article was written by Satan himself, right? But of course, the organization of the facts is important and sometimes crucial too, but then it would require each individual reader to parse and incorporate those knowledge...But again wouldn't this be applicable to any book or any article, even if those written by the most famous or most authoritative figures -- if that's what people value in them?

  > Finally, you do realize that skulls are easily 
  > obtained via death by natural causes, right? 
  > Especially before the adoption of antibiotics 
  > and vaccination?
  > 
  >  Tibetans practice sky burial, where bodies are 
  > left out in a charnel ground and picked clean by 
  > wildlife. (Probably because digging graves is 
  > difficult and cremation would be a waste of scarce   
  > fuel.) I suspect they have a different attitude 
  > about the dead and their parts than you.

Yes, I am aware of that and I respect their decision, if this is out of their own volition and informed mind...I am not an expert on such traditions...but as I read in the article that I previously cited as [2], it states that, on page 2,

  There are trumpets made of human thigh-bones, 
  the bones of criminals of those who have died a 
  violent death being preferred for this purpose.

And as another instance, on page 17,

  the bones of Father Brieux killed in 1881 [happened 
  in Tibet] were 1881 were taken from his grave, and 
  his skull was made into a drinking-cup.

There are a few other instances in that article if you want to know more...I will skip them here for the sake of brevity...

My point is the matter could be more complicated than either you or I currently think...I am not an adherent of the Chinese government propaganda...but as averse to those propaganda as I am, this does not mean that there is no information or valuable points in their propaganda...I also hate to have to dig out knowledge from propaganda, but if that helps me to get closer to any fact or truth, then I feel I have to do that, instead of simply throwing all their words away without any discretion...

BTW, the article [2] I cited was published in 1923 by Berthold Laufer , supposedly before CCP's Propaganda Division became full-fledged enough to be capable to have any influence on that...

[dvfjsdhgfv]

Yes, they were using bones of dead people to construct ritual objects. You do realize that actually killing someone for that purpose would be considered an insanely stupid act causing a rebirth in hell? And how on Earth this custom can explain the Chinese invasion and the atrocities committed until this day?

You know what life is in Tibet for Tibetans? The horrors are so great that once a while they prefer to publicly kill themselves, suffering a terrible death rather than going on like this. That's the sad reality of living under the Chinese rule. There were many things wrong in ancient Tibet, such as feudal fights, the abuse of power by the central government and so on, but nothing of this justifies the invasion and the current treatment of Tibetans by the Chinese.

[christophilus]

> using human body parts for constructing religious instruments.

That’s not far off from the current western use of relics. I’m glad the Italian government hasn’t raided the Vatican and turned it into a museum or government offices. The idea that this would be defensible because Catholics have retained medieval practices— well, I hope that’s plainly absurd to anyone reading this.

[68c12c16]

sigh...to all the indignant replies that my previous comment might evoke, I just want to clarify that,

1. my original comment was not an attempt to justify the current policies by the Chinese government in Tibet;

2. I was just saying it is a complicated matter, with lots of historic elements in it;

3. I agree that lots of things need to be improved there.

4. I do not know a good solution to this problem at this time; but please do share with us if you do...

[seanmcdirmid]

A lot of that was just the standard "we communists will liberate you from serfdom" spiel that they applied to the rest of China as well. Tibet was no paradise in 1950, but it was about the same as the rest of China before the communists took over, which wasn't a pretty place (allowing the communists to take over in the first place!).

[68c12c16]

I am not trying to justify the current situation in Tibet...I am just saying it is a complicated matter...and I agree that lots of things need to be improved there -- and I honestly do not know exactly how...

The commuism is an umbrella term, that covers many great details...I personally don't like the totalitarian way of ruling by almost all existing or past communist governments...But I do think the social collaboration and universal fraternity among all human beings are good things -- but those aspects seems to have certain totalitarianism in themselves as well...so I honestly do not know a good solution about this too...

[seanmcdirmid]

The victors write the history to justify their actions, whether it is true or not, or even reasonable. To say that the PLA wanted to justify the L in its name is an understatement. And to muddy that further, it isn't unreasonable to think that the PLA's invasion of Tibet was simply territorial in nature and had nothing to do with the condition of its people (like the Siege of Changchun that wound up killing more people than they liberated).

But this is all par for the course for the human history of conflict!

[68c12c16]

  > The victors right the history to justify 
  > their actions, whether it is true or not, 
  > or even reasonable.

Yes, I agree. That's a saddening part of our real world, that veracity is not always the most enduring thing (and it is usually not)...

  > And to muddy that further, it isn't unreasonable 
  > to think that the PLA's invasion of Tibet was simply 
  > territorial in nature and had nothing to do with the 
  > condition of its people (like the Siege of Changchun 
  > that wound up killing more people than they liberated).

I feel you are making an assumption that PLA or Chinese government is a single entity with a universal will (similar to general will)...but the implementation of the actual strategies are quite often the work of individual commanders and they usually differ quite a lot -- as all individuals do...It's unfortunate and saddening to see there have been so many assholes in almost any country of the world -- and you cannot do anything about it, as they are much much more resourceful than us...

  > But this is all par for the course for 
  > the human history of conflict

Perhaps we should let those who want conflict to fight their own fight, and leave the majority of us to live our own lives...but as I said, those people in power are much much more resourceful than most of us...The result is that we are fighting their fight, and let them live our lives...