It’s been a while since Obama did anything I could applaud. it’s just too bad this is so inconsequential:
The Obama Administration may think its decision to cold shoulder the Dalai Lama on the Tibetan leader’s upcoming trip to Washington is smart politics. But if the leader of the free world doesn’t stand up for religious freedom, who will?
I fail to see how meeting with the deposed theocrat of a conquered nation is standing up for anything. The same people who think the Ayatollah of Iran is evil and the likes of Pat Robertson are backwards, dirty cocksuckers, give the Dalai Lama a pass, just because he’s a Buddhist. As if that somehow excuses the fact that, for the last 1500 years, he and his predecessors* have been the autocratic rulers of an absolute theocracy, using the local superstition to keep themselves in power.
And yes, yes, I know, the Chinese are evil bastards, invading sweet old Tibet, etc. Whatever. Being ruled by a nominally Communist dictatorship rather than a religious dictatorship is more of a lateral move. And it’s galling to listen to the Dalai Lama wander around aimlessly blathering about human rights when, if he had his way, he’d be back in Tibet, working to keep women as second class citizens and overlooking the abuse of children by monks. Lhasa never was the bastion of enlightenment the aging hippies made it out to be. It’s just the Vatican of the Himalayas. For all his talk of peace and human rights, The Dalai Lama hasn’t really done anything but ask people to be nice, so that maybe, one day in a thousand generations, we’ll be better people. he could do more, but as a Buddhist, it’s against his religion to actually do anything that might be helpful.
While I’d like to see the people of Tibet become free, it won’t be because of the Free Tibet Movement, who seek to reinstall the Dalai Lama of Tibet become free, they need to do so by winning their independence (by force if necessary) and establishing a democracy. If they want to keep the Dalai Lama and his cadre of incestuous priests on hand as ceremonial fiure heads, that’s their business.
And sure, China has been mistreating Tibetans for quite some time, torturing monks and squashing demonstrations. They don’t get a pass either, and if it turns out that Obama is snubbing the Dalai Lama just to win brownie points with Beijing, I’ll be just as disappointed. I’d prefer to think Obama just has more important things to occupy his time than entertaining mystics.
_________
*Or, if you believe in reincarnation, the same man. What is worse, being ruled over by an endless parade of deluded self righteous men, or the same one repeatedly? Kind of a wash.
I suspect you don’t know a great deal about the Tibet situation from your posting. Fair enough you have looked beyond the usual black and white outlook of many a free tibeter (and certainly more than your average anti-cnn er) but your commentary on the background to this situation points to a failure to grasp an over reaching significance to the Obama administration’s decision: the clout of those ‘evil bastards’ you are describing has increased to a point where the so-called leader of the free world is unwilling to meet with a nobel peace laureate, widely recognised (whatever your opinion of him may be) as an icon of hope and freedom. This is deeply worrying. Happy to talk about this further if you like- just shoot me an email.
I stopped taking the Nobel Peace award serious when one was handed to Henry Kissinger.
And while the DL has worked towards Peace and Hope, neither are going to free the Tibetan people. Fuzzy platitudes have proven to be useless against tyranny. And while peaceful revolutions have been known to happen (see: the Czech Velvet Revolution as an example) the Chinese are not known for giving up without a fight.
As I said, if it turns out Obama is snubbing the DL just to placate the Chinese, I’ll be pissed. I’m hoping that this is just a case of Obama being preoccupied with more important things, like health care reform and an army of belligerent racists demanding to see his birth certificate before they agree to undermine his presidency in a more civil fashion.
The Uyghar are a more interesting test case than the Dalai whatsit. The Chinese are busy chasing Rebiya Kadeer whereever they can get at her – pressuring the New Zealand government because a Maori television channel running a criitical documentary called Ten Conditions of Love is just one bit of overreaction. But she continues to function from Washington with her organisation, while the Chinese keep accusing her of fomenting terrorism.
I don’t have the same queasy-making sense of a demented medieval theocracy about the Uyghar culture, and they are campaigning really for the more sensible objective of being allowed to live in their own country and live in their own houses and work at their own jobs while the Chinese pipe the oil and gas away.
Exactly. Rebiya Kadeer is a democratically elected leader, putting pressure on Beijing to reform and speaking out for her people. The Dalai Lama, meanwhile, is hanging out with celebrities and occasionally speaks about how bad the Chinese treat his people, but it’s not like he has any plans for improving their lives. His main gripe is that he isn’t the one ruling them. If the DL were to regain power in Tibet tomorrow, he wouldn’t start building bridges and raising money to help orphans and widows. He’d just tell them to suck it up, because this world is suffering and maybe their next life will be better. One wants change and improvement. They other wants the old status quo.
Hallelujah!
I’ve been waiting thirty years to hear someone beside myself say this. The Chinese may be bad guys in Tibet, but that does not make the Tibetans’ centuries long exploitation by an avaricious theocratic dictatorship some sort of golden age.