FTonsilStonesPanchen Lama says reincarnation must follow Chinese laws, be endorsed by Beijing
Brainwashed Panchen Lama vs CIA operative Dali Lama, who will win?
DiplomjodlerObviously, anyone who doesn’t like they’re people being genocided by the CCP must be a CIA operative.
The CIA was highly active in Tibet from the 1950s through the 70s. The current Dalai Lama absolutely worked with the CIA at one point. Whether that relationship is ongoing is unclear, but he is closer to the US and her allies than he is to China.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_Tibetan_program?wprov=s…
Interesting Wikipedia article about the whole affair
dohpaz42
AmnesigenicLol what genocide
UnderpantsWeevilYou’re not allowed to talk about this. This is Far-Left Tankie Bullshit Lies and also it doesn’t matter and also nothing the Dali Lama or his brother said in hindsight matters.
In 1999, the Dalai Lama suggested that the CIA Tibetan program had been harmful to Tibet because it primarily served American interests, claiming “once the American policy toward China changed, they stopped their help … The Americans had a different agenda from the Tibetans.”
Gyalo Thondup, the Dalai Lama’s elder brother, also expressed frustration with the role of the CIA in Tibetan affairs. In a 2009 interview, he stated “I never asked for CIA military assistance. I asked for political help. I wanted to publicize the Tibet situation, to make a little noise. The Americans promised to help make Tibet an independent country. All those promises were broken.” He continues, claiming that America “didn’t want to help Tibet. It just wanted to make trouble for China. It had no far-sighted policy for Tibet. I wasn’t trained for this (clandestine operations). We didn’t know about power politics.”
The important thing to remember is that Tibet is a free country being villainously occupied and oppressed by the Evil Chinese Invaders. Everyone in Tibet hates everyone in China. They yearn for freedom. And if we can just put enough heavy weapons into the hands of Tibetian dissidents the country will explode into a liberal democracy of freedom and liberty and Buddhism which is the one good religion that everyone on Lemmy loves.
WesDym@UnderpantsWeevil I get that you're trying to be cynically satirical and Extremely Clever or whatever, but this just comes off as severely cringe-worthy. I think I wrote some shit like this when I was about 14, maybe. I grew out of it, and I hope you will, too.
Funny how Lemmy.ml doesn’t post anything which could reasonably be recognised as leftism, and instead just posts “western countries bad” garbage over and over and over again.
They’re right, cry about it
Downvotes=crying? Lol cope
Cope yourself. Lemmy.ml does not appear to represent leftism, but instead appears to represent imperialism done by countries who aren’t western.
Really putting the fed in feddit here lol
Correct, you can also be a useful idiot
Just for you, positives of leftist governance without bringing up the west :)
If the PRC was leftist they probably wouldn’t lock up Uyghurs in camps, or threaten to invade Taiwan with military force.
Ah, the no true leftist argument, I have never seen this before. Leftist doesnt mean perfect, yeah they have issues. They also happen to be the left leaning powerhouse, and that’s one step closer to international communism that is powerful enough to properly address these issues, not capitalists that are playing the oppressed classes.
I wouldn’t call an imperialist nation “left leaning”. To me it’s like when the Nazis called themselves socialists. But anyway I guess we will have different perspectives on this.
Can you give examples of their imperialism? I dont remember them invading anywhere in my memory, but maybe I am forgetting?
Wanting to invade Taiwan, claiming all of the Spratly and Paracel islands. And as I said there is other behaviour which I don’t think is “left leaning”, such as locking up Uyghurs in camps.
How does not invading on of your closest neighbors make you an empire? How does claiming the islands very close to you while not invading them make you an empire? If you can make this make sense I’m listening. Also, Isreal isnt an empire just because it’s genociding people, so even if they were genociding, that wouldnt make one an empire. Show me the empirical evidence (lol)
Yeah I dunno, how does planning an invasion to expand your land make you imperial. I’m stumped. As for locking up Uyghurs, I didn’t say that’s imperialist behaviour, I said it’s behaviour that I don’t think is “left leaning”. I guess you could call it tyrannical behaviour.
How long have they been planning it? Can you send a relevant source I could see? Maybe they are, I just haven’t seen your source yet
I don’t know for how long they may have planned it. But I think it’s likely that they would have created some sort of plans for an invasion of Taiwan, based on their statements where they say they don’t rule out force to take over Taiwan. From this article:
Peng Qing’en, a spokesperson for China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, told a regular news conference in Beijing that peaceful “reunification” under the “one country, two systems” model is the fundamental approach to “resolving the Taiwan issue”.
“We are willing to create ample space for peaceful reunification and will spare no effort to pursue this prospect with the utmost sincerity,” he said.
“However, we absolutely will not renounce the use of force and reserve the option to take all necessary measures.”
Not renouncing the use of force is entirely different than exercising it, which they haven’t. This would be like calling the US imperialist because it wouldn’t accept the south from succeeding pre-civil war. How
China’s top official in charge of Taiwan policy, the ruling Communist Party’s fourth-ranked leader Wang Huning, did not mention force in a key policy speech on Saturday, which instead focused on how both sides would benefit from “reunification”.
So they aren’t even threatening it, just not ruling it out. Again, not very imperialistic.
I didn’t say they had exercised force, I said they’re likely planning the use of force to take over Taiwan, whether the people of Taiwan want that or not. I would regard that as imperialistic. I think it would be more humane to respect the wishes of Taiwan - if they want to join the PRC then okay, but if they don’t then perhaps that should be respected.
How likely? Do you know what “we haven’t ruled out x” means? How daft are you?
Look no matter how you feel about the China and i dislike their government as well the “kidnapped” person was according to them relocated and allowed to live a regular life and there is something to be said to not allow a six year old to be forced to a religious figure forced to abide by among other things vows of celibacy.
Why do you keep putting kidnapped in quotes? Do you believe the forced removal of a whole family is not considered kidnapping? Or are you just being pedantic: “It’s not a kidnapping if they took more than just the kid. It’s an abduction.”
aarch0x40
DevolutionThis is incredibly stupid.
This apparently isn’t even the “real” Panchen Lama, but is the one chosen by China to replace the one that was kidnapped and was chosen by the Dalai Lama.
This apparently isn’t even the “real” Panchen Lama
Sort of the joke of religious doctrine. These people aren’t actually reincarnated Buddhist Wizards who can magically divine the destiny of their successors.
This Panchen Lama is as much “real” as the current Dalai Lama is “real”.
These are humans, they can be educated and influenced as easily as anyone, and their politics/religion is a consequence of their upbringing rather than some magical pre-birth spiritual intuition. And they can also grow up, realize their position in the world, and regret their decisions in hindsight.
In 1999, the Dalai Lama suggested that the CIA Tibetan program had been harmful to Tibet because it primarily served American interests, claiming “once the American policy toward China changed, they stopped their help … The Americans had a different agenda from the Tibetans.”
Gyalo Thondup, the Dalai Lama’s elder brother, also expressed frustration with the role of the CIA in Tibetan affairs. In a 2009 interview, he stated “I never asked for CIA military assistance. I asked for political help. I wanted to publicize the Tibet situation, to make a little noise. The Americans promised to help make Tibet an independent country. All those promises were broken.” He continues, claiming that America “didn’t want to help Tibet. It just wanted to make trouble for China. It had no far-sighted policy for Tibet. I wasn’t trained for this (clandestine operations). We didn’t know about power politics.”
During the Tibetan program’s period of activity, some of its largest contributions to the CIA’s interests in the region came in the form of keeping the Chinese occupied with resistance, never actually producing a mass uprising establishing independence for Tibet from Beijing. The program also produced a trove of army documents that Tibetan insurgents seized from the Chinese and turned over to the CIA in 1961 in what has been referred to as “one of the greatest intelligence successes of the Cold War”.
I don’t follow religious doctrine either, but as long as the adherents aren’t acting in ways that are harmful to others, I personally try not to insult or belittle them or their beliefs.
The information regarding the CIA is interesting though. The fact that the US reneged on their promises and only used Tibet to extract information about China is depressing, but not surprising.
as the adherents aren’t acting in ways that are harmful to others
The Buddhist successors to the Mongolian/Qing Dynasty were plenty harmful to others. That’s what sparked the student revolts responsible for their leadership’s removal.
You can blame the icky yicky communists for polarizing and galvanizing upwardly mobile tibetan youth into an insurgency. But falling back on CIA agitprop to justify what was effectively a US military operation intended to destabilize a border region isn’t proof of your humanitarianism. Even the Dalai Lama himself regrets letting the CIA militarize Tibet.
The fact that the US reneged on their promises and only used Tibet to extract information about China is depressing, but not surprising.
It’s the story of the Cold War told over and over again. The goal of these operations is to spark civil war, not to liberate or liberalize any population.
The Buddhist successors to the Mongolian/Qing Dynasty were plenty harmful to others. That’s what sparked the student revolts responsible for their leadership’s removal.
It’s my understanding that those harms were political and not religious in nature.
You can blame the icky yicky communists
Why the disparaging adjectives? I feel like I’m missing the point.
falling back on CIA agitprop to justify what was effectively a US military operation intended to destabilize a border region isn’t proof of your humanitarianism. Even the Dalai Lama himself regrets letting the CIA militarize Tibet.
I don’t think there is any justification. It was selfish and self serving from the beginning. If the CIA had followed through on their promises, that would be a different story. But they clearly never intended to do so.
It’s the story of the Cold War told over and over again. The goal of these operations is to spark civil war, not to liberate or liberalize any population.
Amen.
adherents aren’t acting in ways that are harmful to others
Genocide is never justified.
It’s also wrong to act like the actions of Myanmar or any perpetrator of genocide are representative of a religious monolith. Do you think it would be beneficial to insult and vilify Buddhists, and normalize that behavior because of the actions of Myanmar?
Insulting and vilifying adherents of a religion, and treating them like a monolith are exactly what leads to religious persecution, and in some cases genocide.
On a more basic level, it’s just needlessly hostile. Life is difficult enough on its own, why spend time and energy insulting others based on something that overwhelmingly does not affect you or your community?
Exactly, genocides happen and no religion is good at preventing them. All religions are equally useless as sources of truth and morality. We should neither vilify or praise anyone for being religious or adhere to one religion of the other.
Exactly, genocides happen and no religion is good at preventing them. All religions are equally useless as sources of truth and morality.
Religion also isn’t a prerequisite for genocide. Whether or not all religions are equally useless for truth and morality is a big and absolute statement. I can’t say that I agree or disagree because I’m not familiar with every religion.
We should neither vilify or praise anyone for being religious
This I agree with 100%.
Whether or not all religions are equally useless for truth and morality is a big and absolute statement. I can’t say that I agree or disagree because I’m not familiar with every religion.
I don’t think you have to know all religions to be able to say that. You just need to know what religion is and how it works. Religion can’t be the source of truth because it’s based on faith, not truth. If you look for truth without any dogma restricting your research you’re a scientists, not a theologian. Religion can’t be the source or morality because it’s goal is to enrich and empower the people that control it, not to teach anything useful. If you teach about morality without demanding obedience and money from your followers you’re a philosopher, not a religious leader.
I don’t recall Tibetan Buddhists being involved in that.
Look no matter how you feel about the China and i dislike their government as well the “kidnapped” person was according to them relocated and allowed to live a regular life and there is something to be said to not allow a six year old to be forced to a religious figure forced to abide by among other things vows of celibacy.
No matter how silly you think someone else’s religion is, you don’t get to dictate what others believe or how they get to believe. China has effectively made a religion functionally extinct with their actions. No matter how you slice it, it’s a loss for humanity.
Did i say any of that I’m far from a china fan but respecting someone’s religion is different than supporting a six year old being turned into a religious figure disallowed a childhood and forced to take lifelong vows of poverty and chastity which is what the Pachen Lama is forced to do.
Dunno dude. Six year olds should be chaste. When he’s older he can go and have sex if he doesn’t believe in his religion. Or at least he could have if he wasn’t disappeared as part of a genocide land grab
Forcibly relocating a child away from their parents is the literal definition of kidnapping. Whether or not he ended up having a good life afterwards does not change that fact.
His parents were relocated with him.
Thank you for the clarification, I see that now. What I also see from further research is that he and his family were taken by force and have not been seen publicly since. Whether or not that would be technically considered kidnapping or abduction feels like splitting hairs.
I never said it wasn’t kidnapping or wasn’t wrong i just think there is nuance if he is really living as an ordinary citizen because i don’t support forcing a six year old to become a religious figure, disallowed friends or any semblance of a normal childhood and forced to take lifelong vows of poverty and chastity which is what the Pachen Lama would do even if they gain political and religious power by doing so despite supporting religious freedom i don’t think allowing that is part of it when it involves a child.