The young woman approached the Tibetan student with a sincere question, “When the Chinese Communist Party is so good and gives so much assistance to the minorities in China, including Tibet, while the Dalai Lama lives a wealthy life in India while causing nothing but trouble for the Tibetan people, why would you still reject the Party and follow the Dalai Lama?”
The Tibetan student jumped up in anger and answered, “You don’t understand anything about the situation of the Tibetan people, so you have no right to make that statement!”, sending the curious girl back to her desk.
The young narrator of this story then sighed deeply and explained that the Tibetans feel a strong emotional attachment to the Dalai Lama, which makes it difficult for them to see the situation in a reasonable way.
***
In the eyes of the Han Chinese and the many minorities who feel deeply indebted to the Communist Party for its continuous efforts to drag them out of poverty through the means of economic and social benefits, the stubborn insubordination of the Tibetans makes very little sense. After all, why would you bite the hand that feeds you?
In modern Chinese culture, economic well-being is a top priority, which is not surprising given China’s long history of poverty followed by the recent steady climb towards greater material wealth. Another top concern is political stability, which serves as a necessary backdrop for economic growth. The Chinese Communist Party works hard to address these concerns, as much for its own benefit as for the good of the Chinese people. Given the status quo, the Dalai Lama and his team (or government-in-exile, whatever your perspective may be), is an obstacle to accomplishing these important goals.
February 7, 2010 at 4:21 pm |
You have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about. You should try doing research like a real journalist instead of parroting communist lies. You might learn something.
February 9, 2010 at 4:54 am |
Thanks for your comment. I’m sorry that my post caused so much anger. I would like to point out several things, however, to hopefully assuage your anger a bit.
1. I’m not sure how you interpreted my article, perhaps it was not sufficiently clear, but my intention was precisely to give the Chinese perspective, which certainly is a perspective heavily colored by the Party line. My intention was NOT to make a normative statement about whether that perspective has merit.
2. I am not a “real journalist,” nor do I aspire to be one. My post was an observation of a specific situation and a reflection based on years of living in China and trying to understand the position of the Chinese people. It is also part of a personal blog, where I do not claim to be an expert on political issues, nor do I want to be viewed as such.
Again, thank you for your comment, and I would be willing to engage in further discussion with you if you are so inclined.