2008年是中國的盛世。我們全家真誠地祝願世界更加了解中國，支持北京奧運。中國，加油啊！！
思慧
四月八日寫於美國矽穀
譯文如下：
R(發信者，我將其名隱去)，今天早上我收聽了NPR(National Public Radio, 美國國家公共電台)有關西藏的節目，那個訪談的內容讓我非常吃驚。
首先，是有平常的對達賴喇嘛持有同情心的美國人，在承認了普通的漢族中國人在暴亂中被當作武裝藏人的襲擊目標後，卻說“這種襲擊是對中國政府政策的合理和可以理解的反應”。如果那些平民是猶太人而武裝分子是巴勒斯坦人，或者那些平民是世界其他國家人民的話，還會有任何美國人站在那些別的時候被稱作是恐怖分子的人一邊嗎？
中國政府一直下很大的力氣來發展西藏的經濟，可能是希望富了以後的藏人會更快樂而不會成為宗教分子或分裂分子。最輝煌的成就是修了到西藏的鐵路，考慮到所經過的巨大山川這是一項非常昂貴的工程，一些人甚至希望在將來的一天此鐵路會修到印度。(印度人也對此非常感興趣)。鐵路創造了更多的經濟發展的新機會，也從藏外帶來了更多的移民。NPR的一位欄目主持將這條鐵路引用成中國的一個新防禦攻勢並宣稱由此造成了西藏內部的抵抗運動。這是讓我吃驚的第二件事。通常，當我聆聽別的偏遠不發達地區人民發泄憤怒的話，他們通常會這樣抱怨：“本地的經濟是一潭死水毫無起色，我們的孩子沒有未來，我們需要政府做點什麽來幫助發展本地的經濟。”這次倒真奇了，首次有人表態不想要一個更好的經濟環境。
過去，當我想到西藏，我會立刻條件反射地反對共產主義，希望被“壓迫”的西藏人得到解放。我也曾希望過台灣獨立因為中華人民共和國是共產主義和不自由的。可我現在已經不這樣看中華人民共和國了。中國是一個在發生著巨大變化的國家並且有一個強權的政府。這種狀況可能會隨時間逐漸改變，但是現在看來中國需要這樣一個能做正事的政府，專心搞建設，而不是一味擔心民意測驗結果以尋求聯任。我曾經和許多印度人交談過，他們都希望有一個像中國一樣的印度政府。如果您將中國想象成美國而西藏和台灣要造反從我們這裏分裂出去，您可能就會對分裂分子沒有那麽同情了。至少林肯總統就是這樣。
我現在將西藏問題看成是一個落後腐朽的生產力無法生存而被更先進的生產力所代替，看起來是無管治的或至少是沒有被充分利用的疆域被占領。西藏問題沒有這樣極端，但同樣的替代程序曾令北美印第安人的文化消失。曆史上中國從十二世紀起就開始控製西藏。蒙古人在1271年占領中國，中國的元朝，在1244年占領西藏。從此中國在西藏都有不同程度的主權實施，所以中國宣稱擁有西藏主權的曆史比歐洲所有的疆界都要長。中間隻有一次在1913到1951年由於英國的殖民幹涉和中國國內的內戰和動蕩，(以及第二次世界大戰和日本入侵)，西藏有過實際的自治。當中國在1951年恢複主權時，它給予了西藏正確的特殊自治權力但在東麵的一些邊區，更靠近人口聚居的中國內地，藏人和其他中國人一樣經曆了熟稱的“全麵土地改革”的共產主義改造。這引起了舊的土地所有者(貴族和佛教僧侶)的強烈反對和武裝造反。造反傳播到拉薩而在1959年被徹底擊潰。這就是達賴喇嘛離開西藏的時刻。
從我所知道的情況來看，西藏在一九五一年以前不是一個好的棲身之地。絕大多數人民是農奴或是奴隸，一種非常窮困和落後的國家的標誌。對在西藏地區的普通藏人來說，達賴喇嘛離開後情況隻會變得越來越好而且完全的土地改革也在西藏地區普遍實施了。所以無論是從經濟還是人權的角度，中國占領西藏之後普通藏人都獲得了好處。(是的，盡管想象中華人民共和國會給人們帶來人權好像很不可思議，但這就是事實！)盡管如此，找出藏人對漢人不滿的機會還是太多了！對我而言，這是我轉變對西藏和中國的看法的主要原因。我認為，西藏現在保持是中國的一部分非常有意義，並且隨著時世的變遷它隻會越來越成功地整合入中國。唯一和這個不可逆轉的潮流對抗的是那些舊貴族。這些舊貴族強行推行一種為自我服務的與世界其他地區完全脫節的落後的生活方式。也許改造西藏的最好方式應該讓那些受壓迫的勞苦大眾自己起來反對他們的舊主人，這就會包括一些可預見的無政府混亂和經濟的困境。(這種事件可能會在西藏的鄰居尼泊爾發生，雖然尼泊爾顯然比西藏要先進的多。)中國的占領避免了動亂的必要。可是由於我們西方人對舊藏政權的支持，一直以來當地藏人的不滿都被高音廣播，甚至被慫恿。現任達賴喇嘛吸引人的個性以及藏傳佛教是非暴力和吸引人的哲學更助長了這種情況。而鐵的事實卻是人們仍然把宗教當成來進行分裂(區分我們和他們)和拒絕進步的政治力量。如果把藏人換成是伊斯蘭人，我們還會這樣同情他們嗎？
我確信即將來到的奧運會是這場騷亂的一部分。中國把奧運當成是一次顯示的機會，把可能的抵製當作一場災難。我們每個人都知道與和奧運會之後相比，奧運會前中國政府對任何挑釁的反應都會是微弱的。我甚至聽到傳言說達賴喇嘛本人曾對本周最初的示威大加鼓勵說“這是我們推動獨立的最好機會”。
在欣賞達賴喇嘛本人的同時，我不能支持他作為一個政治領袖。原因在於：
1)我不希望把宗教信仰和政治混淆，2)不管達賴喇嘛得到了多少西方傳媒的支持，我不可能支持他的政治觀點。
很遺憾我對您未加思考的所謂支持“受壓迫人民”的倡議寫下這麽一大篇的說教。如果您認為我的論點有價值，請讓我知道。
請向J(發信者的妻子)問候並向其他所有朋友們致敬！
Y(我的德裔老公)
附原文：
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 8:58 PM
To: 'Rxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: Tibet
Rxxx, I listened to an NPR program about the situation in Tibet this morning and the dialog was fascinating.
The first thing that surprised me was that we had normal Americans (however sympathetic to the Dalai Lama ) acknowledging that normal Han Chinese were targets of violence from the militant Tibetans but this “was a reasonable and understandable reaction to the Chinese government’s policies”. If the civilians had been Israelis and the militants were Palestinian, or civilians anywhere else for that matter, would any Americans sided with those who at other times would be called the terrorists?
The Chinese government has tried to develop the Tibetan economy, maybe with the thought that wealthier Tibetans would be happier and less religious and separatist. The crowning achievement of this was the railroad to Tibet (a very expensive engineering feat given the mountains to scale) that some people hope to extend to India one day. (The Indians are very interested too.) This railroad is creating much new economic opportunity as well as more immigrants from outside Tibet . This railroad was cited by the one of the NPR panelists as one of the new Chinese offenses that forced the civil unrest. This was the second thing that surprised me. When I hear the complaints from other remote low economic activity areas, the complaints are usually the opposite: “The local economy is stagnant, there is no future here for our kids, we need the government to do something to help the local economy.” This is the one time when the locals apparently don’t want a better economy.
In the past, when I thought about Tibet , I used to have an anti communist knee jerk, wishing freedom for the "oppressed" Tibetans. I also wished independence for Taiwan because the PRC was communist and anti freedom. I don’t think of the PRC like that any more. China is a country going through tremendous changes and with a government that is firmly in charge. This will probably change over time, but for now it is good to have a government that can do what is right, to build infrastructure, and not always have to worry about opinion polls and getting re-elected. I have talked to many Indians who wished they had a government like the Chinese. If you imagine that China was the US and Tibet and Taiwan wanted to secede, you probably would be less sympathetic to the secessionists. At least Lincoln was.
I now view the Tibet issues as an inferior economic system being unable to defend itself against a stronger economy that is taking over what looks like unclaimed or at least under exploited territory. It is less extreme, but it is the same process that wiped to the Native American culture. Historically China started controlling Tibet in the 1200s. (The Mongols who conquered China in 1271, the Yuan dynasty, took Tibet in 1244. China has exercised some control over Tibet ever since, so the Chinese claim to rule Tibet is more ancient than any border in Europe . The only time Tibet had real self determination was between 1913 and 1951 because British interventions and China ’s internal turbulence and civil wars (and WW2 and Japanese invasion). When China reasserted itself in 1951, it gave Tibet Proper special autonomy but some outlying areas in the east, closer to populated China , were treated as China Proper which meant “full land redistribution” communist style. This was opposed by the old local land owners (aristocrats and monasteries) who rebelled. The rebellion spread to Lhasa but was crushed in 1959. This is when the Dalai Lama left.
From what I can tell, Tibet was not a good place to be in 1951. Most people were serfs and there were even slaves, signs of a very poor and backwards country. For the average Tibetan in Tibet Proper, things only got better when the Dalai Lama left and full land distribution was implemented in Tibet Proper too. It is always possible to play an “us versus them” game, just look at the “ethnic cleansing” in old Yugoslavia , and the same happened in Tibet . While the average Tibetan benefited from the Chinese takeover, both economically and from a human rights perspective (imagine how strange it is to think of the PRC as the bringer of human rights, but it is true!), it was always easy to find Tibetans resenting the Chinese. To me, this is the main reason I have changed my view on Tibet and China . It seems to me that it makes perfect sense that Tibet stay part of China and as time goes on becomes more and more integrated. The main opposition to this inevitable trend is the old elite. This elite pushed a self serving and backwards way of life that was completely non competitive with the rest of the world. The normal way of fixing Tibet would have the oppressed majority kick out the old oppressors on their own, including predictable problems such as some level of anarchy and economic hardship. (This may happen in neighboring Nepal , even though Nepal is much more advanced than Tibet was.) China ’s takeover avoided that necessity, but because of our support for the old regime there is always a ready loudspeaker for, and instigator of, any local discontent. It helps that the current Dalai Lama is very charismatic and that Tibetan Buddhism is non violent and attractively philosophical. The crass truth is still that people want to use religion as a divisive (us versus them) and non progressive political force. Would we be as sympathetic if the Tibetans were Islamic?
I’m certain that the upcoming Olympics are part of the reason for the current unrest. China views the Olympics as a coming out event, and views a possible boycott as a disaster. Everybody knows that the Chinese response to any challenge will probably be more muted than it will be after the Olympics . I have even heard rumors that the Dalai Lama himself encouraged the initial demonstrations this week as “our last chance for independence”.
While I like the Dalai Lama as a person, I can’t support him as a political leader because a) I prefer not to mix religion and politics, and 2) I can’t support the politics of the Dalai Lama regardless of how good PR he gets.
Sorry for writing such a long and preaching response to something that probably seemed like a no-brainer gesture in support of an "oppressed" people. Please let me know if you think my arguments have any merit.
Please say hi to Jxxx and everybody else!
Yxxxxxxx
From: Rxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 10:08 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: Fwd: Tibet
Hi
I just signed an urgent petition calling on the Chinese government to respect human rights in Tibet and engage in meaningful dialogue with the Dalai Lama . This is really important, and I think you might want to take action:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/tibet_end_the_violence/98.php/?cl_tf_sign=1
After nearly 50 years of Chinese rule, the Tibetans are sending out a global cry for change. But violence is spreading across Tibet and neighbouring regions, and the Chinese regime is right now considering a choice between increasing brutality or dialogue, that could determine the future of Tibet and China .
We can affect this historic choice. China does care about its international reputation. Its economy is totally dependent on "Made in China " exports that we all buy, and it is keen to make the Olympics in Beijing this summer a celebration of a new China that is a respected world power.
President Hu needs to hear that 'Brand China ' and the Olympics can succeed only if he makes the right choice. But it will take an avalanche of global people power to get his attention. Click below to join me and sign a petition to President Hu calling for restraint in Tibet and dialogue with the Dalai Lama -- and tell absolutely everyone you can right away. The petition is organized by Avaaz, and they are urgently aiming to reach 1 million signatures to deliver directly to Chinese officials:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/tibet_end_the_violence/98.php/?cl_tf_sign=1
