[Previous entry: "Say no to "narco-terrorism and treating drug offenders like terrorists."] [Main Index] [Next entry: "The devil's dictionary on copyright."]

09/17/2003 Entry: "The secret history of Tibet and the Dalai Lama"

The secret history of Tibet and the Dalai Lama

Lately, I've seen a lot of press on the Dalai Lama's recent world tour promoting Buddhism and am taken aback by the fawning and lack of criticism. Hell, if Christopher Hitchens can criticize Mother Theresa then I can put some food for tought on the table for the Dalai Lama.

Tibet prior to the Maoist People's invasion was a full-blown no-holds-barred theocracy with this Lama as its literal God-King. [more] Rival monstaries fought over economic matters and controlled commerce. Some fights were deadly and this was the Lama who imported British arms to create Tibet's first modern army. Tibet's society was a feudal theocracy with all non-monks living a life of serfdom approaching slavery. There was no mention of democracy (something this Lama will not stop talking about to gain international support) or reform. These were the fruits of the "compassionate" religion of Buddhism.

Of course the above sounds a little harsh, but mixing ANY religion (or any very strong ideology) with government/politics has always turned out badly with the little guy recieving the worst of the damage. This is why modern governments try very hard to seperate church and state. This is also where Mao and the Dalai Lama clash and how they have more in common than one might suppose. Both were strong ideologues, one a powerful wielder of "the People's" rhetoric and another and unquestionable and powerful God-King. The Maoists saw Tibet as a feudal/slave state in need of liberation, the central powers didn't like its autonomy, and they needed a corridor to the West-friendly India. The Lama on the other hand wanted to keep his theocracy, gold, power, and his newly formed but highly untrained army. The two forces collided and this Lama ordered his men to fight the vastly superior People's army and the rest, as they say, is history.

Fifty odd years later this twenty-something Lama is old and battered and wanders the world somehow connecting democracy and Western Enlightenment values with his old religion and people and journalists are just eating it up. Kudos to the Free Tibet PR machine, but the facts remain: Buddhism led to a harmful theocracy, democracy is a Western ideal, and the Lama is a man with a very sad and scary past. Meanwhile, China is pushing money and immigrants into Tibet to make it more of a Chinese province than an old state with old wounds. Soon enough there will be no Tibet to free, it would be like freeing Chicago for the Indians. The arable land, culture, etc are simply all gone.

Replies: 3 comments

While I appriciate seeing a different viewpoint, I'd have to question the validity of your historical sources. Where have you done your research? It sounds quite distorted from what I have read on Tibet.
I also think you make some rash judgements. His Holiness is not on a "world tour promoting Buddhism." This door-to-door, preachy attitude is actually quite contradictory to many Buddhist teachings. I believe what he is doing is trying to gain support for Tibet in their situation with China, as well as trying to spread kindness and compassion throughout the world. He does teach Buddhism, but I think it is only when prompted to.
His Holiness is not viewed as a god-king, nor did Buddhism lead to a "harmful theocracy." Even if one could call it a "harmful theocracy" it was not Buddhism that made it so, it was human beings. Making blanket statements like this is like saying "Christianity was the fault of the Spanish inquisitions," which of course is wrong. People USING Christianity were responsible, not the religion itself.

Posted by a buddhist @ 09/17/2003 01:03 PM CST

Do a simple google search for 'tibet serf' or 'dalai lama theocracy' or other searches in that vein. You'll find a glut of information, mostly the Free Tibet types vs. the Chinese POV.

"His Holiness is not viewed as a god-king"

You are just ignorant of Buddhism to say this. No wonder you didn't sign your real name.

"even if one could call it a "harmful theocracy" it was not Buddhism that made it so, it was human beings."

That sounds a lot like Eichmann saying he was just following orders. Tibet was a theocracy thus it followed the teachings and values of its religion to produce, not surprisingly, an oppressive theocracy. When it comes to the religion that controls the power of a corrupt and harmful state then it is appropriate to criticise the religion. Just like one can criticize Islam and Sharia law in the middle east theocracies.

Lastly, how far do you want to take the "just human beings" argument. Its logical extreme suggests that there is nothing to religion at all but humans making myths, thus no reincarnation, etc.

Of course, the Dalai Lama is all about democracy and human rights now probably because he got a taste of his own medicine. The Maoists treated him the way he treated his own serfs. The man learns fast.

Posted by skallas @ 09/17/2003 04:31 PM CST

Thought about you when I saw this one...

Posted by Marc @ 09/22/2003 10:08 AM CST

Powered By Greymatter