Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Allow me to share some of my perspectives.

I grow up in Seda County in the late 70 and early 80s, and am intimately familiar with culture there. Tibetan Buddhism is not what people in the west think what it is. It is actually quite repressive and brutal. After 1950s, many regular Tibetans were glad to worship the new religion of Chairman Mao instead. Yes, it was true. Chairman Mao was worshiped as one of major Gods at Tibet when I grow up there. Then Deng Xiaoping took power and demolished Chairman Mao worshiping (one of his major blunders, on the same scale as that of 89 Tienanmen massacre), now we got this huge slum town of "religious learning" at a hot basin of Buddhist rebellions. Yes, going unchecked, that town would surely become such a terrorists base, because Buddhist monks in that area had always been very militant and had launched numerous rebellions in 60 and 70s. As a child, I heard all kinds of horrific stories Tibetan monks and their rebellious army inflicted on the Chinese soldiers and civilians alike. For that reason, many Han Chinese families kept firearms at home in that area, a rare thing in China.

On the other hand, Tibetan people in general are good people. One of my cousins married a Tibetan man and we are good drinking buddies. However, Tibetan religious upper class are representatives of a theocracy at worst: greedy, deceptive and brutal.

I am surprised that this town was tolerated for so long. I guess Deng's power was still strong even after his death.



>As a child, I heard all kinds of horrific stories Tibetan monks and their rebellious army inflicted on the Chinese soldiers and civilians alike. For that reason, many Han Chinese families kept firearms at home in that area, a rare thing in China.

I'm guessing they didn't tell you about the horrific treatment many Tibetans suffered in the years after the PRC invasion. During the Cultural Revolution, the conservative estimates put the number of extra-judicial executions in Tibet at around 22,000.

Plus, over 6,000 monasteries, the vast majority that have ever existed, were ransacked during that time, which was only a few decades ago. It's rather one-sided to call the Tibetan religious leaders "brutal", and not acknowledge that they have been the recipients of far more brutality in the last few decades.


Of course we were told how those rebellions were subdued in the end, because the evidence was in plain sight. There was a ruin on the mountain across the river where we lived. I was told that it used to be a monastery. Some rebellious monks held up there for a long time and the army wasn't able to take it after suffered heavy losses, so they used heavy artillery to bombard it to the ground. When we played in the hills, it's not uncommon to pick up spent shells, etc.

As to cultural revolution, there's nothing special in Tibet. Fired up populace did all the damages. At that time, Tibetan common people were equally zealous about Chairman Mao, if not more so.


>going unchecked, that town would surely become such a terrorists base

Sounds a bit unrealistic to me. You haven't been getting your information from Chinese government controlled sources by any chance?

I see they called the Dalai Lama holding a prayer session for monks who had killed themselves terrorism in disguise so I can see how you could worry too much buddhism could lead to prayer. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/19/dalai-lama-pra...


Nah, I grow up there. I knew the people. Using a Game of Throne analogy, Tibetan people are like free folks (or wildings) and Han people are like people south of the wall. When I was there growing up, every male Tibetan carry weapons (including boys) on their body. They are a militant people, yes they are deviant Buddhists too, but that doesn't mean they are not militant.


How funny. In some Korean websites I visit, I regularly see posts about Chinese workers carrying knives everywhere and how they're being a "menace" to the Korean society.

I guess demonizing neighbors is a universal human tendency.


Not really. Chinese in Korean is in a foreign land as a minority. Tibetan carries weapons on their own land as a majority, minority Han there do not carry weapon on their body (but they do keep firearms at home, especially officials).


Can I ask if you are Han on Tibetian? To use an analogy that puts the Tibetians as the savage outsiders suggests you come from the civilised "good" side. Even if Tibetians are militant, they were invaded, surely that says something about their oppressors?


It should be obvious that I am Han. I agree that this analogy would give some people an impression that I considered Tibetans savages. But no, that's not how I saw it. The way I saw them is not unlike the way Jon Snow saw the free folks. Tibetan and Han actually share the same ancestry. We happened to be separated by a natural barrier (unlike the wall in GOT that is man made) only a couple thousands years ago. We are basically the same people.


> It should be obvious that I am Han

Doesn't hurt to check!


If I were a Tibetan and had earned a Ph.D. in US. I probably would have been a member of the Tibetan elite, I would not be writing in the HN comments section here, but in the NYT opinion section to condemn the Chinese government by now. Wouldn't that be more realistic?

I am sure my cousin in law would not agree with whatever I could have written in NYT as a member of the Tibetan elite though.

What I am saying is that the elite may not represents the best interests of the people they claim to represent.


That statement applies to you being Han too - your level of education puts you into an elite category I'd have thought?


This is the thing. With the same background and education, I am a nobody when I am Han, and I am speaking for myself, not representing anyone. That would not be the case when I am Tibetan. I would be given a platform to broadcast my dissatisfaction with Chinese government, so on and so forth.

What does this tell you?


> With the same background and education, I am a nobody when I am Han, and I am speaking for myself, not representing anyone.

Why is this? Because of the government structure?


I had a Tibetan drinking buddy once also, not too long - someone who until shortly before was at the (lower rungs) of the 'theocracy' you're talking about - and have heard stories that are probably similar to what you've heard.

However, none of this seems to bring any "perspective" to what seems to be in store for the community and Larung Gar. It's really, really hard not to see this program as anything other than blatant cultural genocide - and a huge step backward for both China, and human civilization generally.


Nah, if Tibetan Buddhism is willing to reform itself, or reforms under pressure (like Catholics did in the face of Protestant), it will still be there for thousands of years. In that land, it is just hard not to believe in something supernatural.

On the other hand, theocracy is never a good thing. Separation of state and religion is.


Tibetan Buddhism is not what it seems and is actually very far from true Buddhism. Their culture, rituals/ceremonies are full of black magic and many call upon spirits. Many tourists unknowingly attend such rituals (where milk and other offerings are made) without knowing what's really happening. One should read up more on the history of Tibetan Buddhism, particularly the colored sects.

Tibetan monks are not as innocent, naive or pure as the world think.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: