Give me a rundown on Tibet

>cool empire
>marked by China
>becomes effectively independent during the fall of Qing
>Mao reasserts the dominance of Beijing, outlaws slavery, abolishes monastic rule

Shitty mountains uses as a buffer between China and India, now China owns it and India is pissed.

stateless virgins

>made the Taliban look progressive

Examples?

>0.3 Yuan have been placed in your account

t. chink

So why akira draw a pig with communist uniform?

Why do Chinese bitch about muh hundred years of humiliation and then use colonialist arguments to justify the PRC annexing Tibet? I could cite foot binding, slow slicing, and Hong Kong's success to justify European colonialism in China if I wanted to.

They didn't worship Mao. Also they don't proclaim themselves Chinese.

Absolutely barbarian.

None of those changes happened directly by the Europeans and I hardly count a small outpost success as the whole of China suffers under the Europeans' interference in their affairs

>Up until the Yuan Dynasty, Tibet and China were two different countries
>The Tibetan Empire was a huge threat to China during its existence, including occupying Chang'an at one point
>After the Tibetan Empire collapsed, Tibetans were of little threat to China
>Buddhism changes Tibetans from being warriors to mostly passive
>The Mongols were the first to unite China and Tibet into one state. A Mongol ruler also created the Dalai Lama lineage
>Whether Tibet was a part of China during the Ming is debated, with Chinese claiming it was, while Tibetans and non-Chinese scholars claim it was just another tributary state like Korea
>During the Qing Dynasty, Tibet comes under attack from Nepal and beg the Qing to help them
>Qing drive back the Nepalese and annex Tibet
>China begins to have a more direct hand in Tibetan affairs, including appointing the Dalai Lama
>At the height of the Great Game, British invade Tibet in 1903 in response to Russian expansion in Central Asia
>British considered turning Tibet into a protectorate, but decided not to for whatever reason
>After the British invasion, the 13th Dalai Lama start getting fed up with the Qing's shit
>After the Qing Dynasty collapses and China turns into a giant Somalia, the 13th Dalai Lama declares Tibet's independence
>And like Somaliland, not a single state recognizes their independence (except Mongolia, which at the time was also an independent state

Read The Struggle for Modern Tibet. It's the autobiography of a guy who grew up in pre-PRC Tibet. He dislikes the PRC but still describes them as godsend compared to the pre PRC order where upwards of 90% of the population were serfs, modern cities were non existent, and religious landowners could torture/rape or kill any peasant at will with literally no repercussions (which wasn't the case even in the Taliban's Emirate of Afghanistan). Even after becoming a victim of Communist oppression and being locked in a labor camp during the Cultural Revolution, he still maintains that the PRC saved his people.

1.This is Tibet
2.Has Dalai-lama
3.Lots of mountains
4.Never to be free again
5.Tibet!

>even after being brainwashed he pledges allegiance to his captors and denies his thought crimes

ftfy

t. Faithful servant of Allah

cont.
>After Tibet declares independence, the ROC continues to insist it's a part of China despite not actually controlling it, and the whole world accepts their claim
>PRC annexes Tibet after it takes control of the rest of China
>Nobody stops them since no one gives a fuck about Tibet
>Meanwhile, Mongolia goes from being an unrecognized state like Tibet to being a de jure independent state since the Soviets want it as buffer state between them and China
>Mao accepts Mongolia's independence but not Tibet's because he wants Soviet gibs
>The Tibetan government accepts incorporation into the PRC, and Mao promises the Dalai Lama that Tibetan's society will remain unchanged for at least 10 years
>For a time things are good, with the Dalai Lama later saying that he viewed Mao as a father and wanted to join the Communist Party
>However, the Communists began enacting land reforms and suppressing monasteries in Tibetan areas outside the control of Lhasa (referred to as Kham and Amdo by Tibetans, and spread across the Chinese provinces of Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, and Yunnan)
>The land reform is disastrous and results in Tibetans starving to death
>Tibetans in these areas began rebelling in response
>PLA tries to crush the rebellion and commits war crimes such as bombing monasteries
>The CIA, seeing an opportunity, begins arming the Tibetan rebels
>Relations between the Dalai Lama and the Communist Party begin to break down as the Communists begin to fear the rebellion will spread to Tibet
>One day, the PLA garrison in Lhasa invites the Dalai Lama to a "performance", but insist he brings no guards
>Tibetans begin to fear the PLA is planning to kidnap the Dalai Lama, and chimp out in response
>In the chaos, the Dalai Lama escapes to India, where he is alter joined by thousands of exiles
>PLA crushes the rebellion in Lhasa and other Tibetan areas

>Important buffer state of China
>naturally pro-India
>had an empire or something
>people who dislike China support them

cont.
>Afterwards, the Communist Party abolishes Tibet's theocratic and feudal-like social structure in the area that was formerly under the control of the Dalai Lama
>PRC maintains that it basically abolished slavery and raised the standard of living for Tibetans
>Thousands of Tibetans still die during the Great Leap Forward
>Tibetan relics, books, and buildings are also greatly damaged during the Cultural Revolution
>Many Tibetans also died in subsequent rebellions/protests/riots
>Tibetans continue to go into exile to this day

And the following topics continue to be debated between Chinese, Tibetans, and other scholars
>When exactly Tibet became a part of China, and what its relationship with different Chinese dynasties was
>Whether or not Tibet's social system prior to 1949 should be considered "feudalism", and how cruel it was exactly
>Whether or not the state of Tibetan society justified the annexation of Tibet by the PRC

"Tibet is..."
>Chinese soldier pushes gun harder into back
"better now!"

Also the most important deabte.

>Should a modernized Tibet be independent or not/ OR are they spoils of war?

To be "saved" from serfdom to be put into communist slavery all so China can have a strategic mountain over India. Lol wow fucking Chinese why do they even bother? Get back to making Nikes for capitalists you stupid slaves.

My point was more that just like the Chinese cite particularly cruel aspects of Tibet society (such as torture of Tibetan peasants by the aristocracy) to justify Han Chinese governing Tibet, I could cite particularly cruel aspects of Chinese culture such as slow-slicing and foot-binding to justify European colonialism in China. Hell, the CCP has even described both pre-1949 Han Chinese culture and pre-1959 Tibet as "feudal", so how much difference was there between the "Old China" and the "Old Tibet"?

And just like you have a point how Hong Kong doesn't outweigh the damage European colonialism brought to China, I could cite the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, the numerous riots, the self-immolations, etc. as proof that the economic development the PRC has brought to Tibet doesn't outweigh what Tibetans have suffered under Han Chinese interference in their affairs.

So again, what's the difference between Chinese arguments justifying their control of Tibet and arguments Westerners use to justify colonialism?

>communist slavery

What do you think living in China is actually like?

>Should a modernized Tibet be independent or not/ OR are they spoils of war?
Really, only Westerners and really radical Tibetans claim that Tibet should be independent. For decades, the Dalai Lama has been pushing his "Middle Way" idea, which basically says that Tibet should be largely autonomous like Hong Kong. But the Chinese have always rejected this idea by claiming the "Middle Way" is just a plot by the Dalai Lama to eventually separate Tibet from China

>To be "saved" from serfdom to be put into communist slavery all so China can have a strategic mountain over India. Lol wow fucking Chinese why do they even bother? Get back to making Nikes for capitalists you stupid slaves.
To be fair, it's not uncommon for successor states to claim territory their predecessor state once controlled. Both the ROC and the PRC base their claim on Tibet on being the successor state to the Qing Empire,and neither the ROC or the PRC ever recognized Tibetan independence. And as I said above no other country gave enough of a shit about Tibet to recognize their independence. So Mao probably thought "If no one is going to stop us or offer us gibs, why shouldn't we liberate Tibet?"

And Tibet is actually very strategically significant since it's the source of most of Asia's rivers. Controlling Tibet allows China to guarantee their water security and fuck with the water of downstream nations such as India in order to get what they want.
project-syndicate.org/commentary/china-no-hydrological-data-for-india-by-brahma-chellaney-2017-10

Being a serf and being sent to a laogai camp are just different forms of slavery

Your first point is irrelevant since the Chinese was the one to abolish its own cruel aspects of its culture

>Hong Kong doesn't outweigh the damage European colonialism brought to China,
I never said that, I said HK is irrelevant to the discussion at all since it was solely created for the Europeans and governed by the Europeans. Its success and failure has no weight on China's development and progress.

China is a bit different these days.

>Your first point is irrelevant since the Chinese was the one to abolish its own cruel aspects of its culture
Okay, so what if after the Second Opium War, Europeans ended up governing China like British India and abolished all those cruel aspects of Chinese culture a hundred years early? Similarly, what if Tibet was never annexed by China and ended up reforming their own culture and society?

Chinese talk about Tibet like it was impossible for Tibetans to modernize on their own, while ignoring evidence to the contrary such as how the 13th Dalai Lama enacted reforms and how Bhutan was another feudalistic Himalayan kingdom which managed to modernize on its own.

True, but there were still hundred, if not thousands of Tibetans who were sent to laogai camps following the "liberation" of Tibet. Hell to this day, Tibetans are disproportionately represented among political prisoners in China. A Tibetan alive during the Mao era wouldn't have seen much difference between the serfdom prior to "liberation" and the laogai camps run by the Communists. He also would have noticed the decrease in food.

Tibet certainly has a lot of economic development today, but that means jack shit to the Tibetans who died during the Mao era. Not to mention the fact that said economic development mostly benefits Han Chinese migrants.

Education in Tibet is entirely centred around Chinese history and languages. There is no education in the Tibetan language, culture or history. Unemployment and poverty is also rife among the ethnic Tibetan people there as they are discriminated against from gaining employment something that is exacerbated by the large increase in Han migration.

So what's the reason for China wanting to control Tibet and not giving them their freedom?

It should be obvious to anyone who doesn't have a CCP cock or CCP semen down their throat. They want to get extract all the natural resources from Tibet and get all that free natural border.

With Tibet's population only being 3 million. Its like taking candy from a child, who wouldn't take all that landmass, natural water, minerals, border security, oil, etc.

Its pure colonialism exploitation.

People literally only care about it because it was annexed. If it was completely free it would be a pariah state.

So the Dalai Lama, who has dedicated his life to the abolition of all desire, deeply desires to have a free Tibet.

Ponderous.

It'd be like Bhutan or Mongolia, somewhere in between. Maybe richer due to the water resources and mining rights. Certainly India/Mongolia/Bhutan would try to curry favors. China might if they didn't have the disastrous relations.

michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

Half of the stuff he said in that book would've gotten him executed in Maoist China, so no.

Correction, he deeply desires them to be HIS slaves again.

...

There wouldn't be any conflict between China and India today if Tibet was an independent buffer state. There was no conflict between China and India for thousands of years, it's an entirely modern conflict as a result of poorly-mapped borders.

-t chang

Actually, you're both wrong. He's admitted Tibet's old society was backward and instead wants Tibet to be autonomous under Chinese rule like Hong Kong
dalailama.com/messages/tibet/middle-way-approach

Correction, as a result of Indian autism. In 1962 they tried to invade and take land that they fully acknowledged as China's. China kept pulling back their forces to prevent conflict (because they didn't care that much about the borderlands and were in no way prepared for a full war), and the Indians kept pushing for more. They were high off their aggressive seizure of Goa (done without the will of the inhabitants) and thought they were invincible. Eventually the Chinese got sick of it and shoved a boot up their ass, because it turns out that an army with assault rifles, T-55s, MiGs, and winter gear trumps an army still using WW2 surplus. They even managed to occupy the Indian state of Arunachal because the Indian Army totally broke down and fled.

Despite that, and the fact that the Great Indian Plains were now wide open to the Chinese, they chose to just tell the Indians they could have their land back if they stopped trying to start wars over the border. India agreed. IMO they should have kept Arunachal. Any sane country would've done so. In doing so they'd ensure their water security and make their border with India totally defensible. But they really wanted to end the war as soon as possible in their short sightedness.

Why does this Communist apologist's bullshit get linked in any discussion about Tibet?

>even the guy who ran the theocracy is now admitting that the theocracy was shit and the Chinese were good for the country
Wow, it turns out that literally everyone from Tibet including the Dalai Lama is an agent of Communist propaganda!

>guy who ran the theocracy
>15 year old child ruler
>running theocracy
kek

>Chinese were good for the country
>country where you can't speak your own language, learn your own language, can't travel in and out of the country, can't do anything, have to pray to Mao or else get sent to re-education camp to be tortured
Wew, what a load of bullocks

You're not wrong about how the 1962 war was a result of Indian autism, and I actually agree that China has a stronger claim to the clay than India, but that doesn't change my point how there was no tension between China and India prior to this 20th century border conflict. So I think my point of Tibet having a value as a buffer state stands since China and India wouldn't have had a border conflict if they had no border to begin with.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but when did India acknowledge Arunchal as China's? My understanding was that India's claim to Arunchal began when Tibet ceded it to British India in the Simla Accord, but China never recognized the treaty as valid since they never recognized Tibetan independence, and therefore never recognized the authority of the Tibetan government to cede the clay.

>> country where you can't speak your own language, learn your own language
Where you get the most generous affirmative action program in the world, yeah. Also where life expectancy, literacy, and standards of living skyrocketed shortly after the Chinese takeover.
>> can't travel in and out of the country, can't do anything,
Bullshit. No one could travel in those days. Today any Tibetan can.
>> have to pray to Mao or else get sent to re-education camp to be tortured
As opposed to getting your eyes and ears chopped off for not worshipping the Dalai Lama. I'd rather get sent to a reeducation camp.

Also it's not 1960 anymore, you can totally criticize Mao.

It wasn't about short sightedness. China was much too poor too defend the border across the Himalayas in the long run. Also I think either the GLF or Cultural Revolution was happening around the same time so a lot of internal instability exacerbated those factors

>generous affirmative action
>takeover the entire country and its entire resources
>suppress any sort of freedom of thought/navigation/work

>this is good for you goy, accept it
kek

You chinks are hilarious if you think anyone outside your bubble will buy your talking point.

>Where you get the most generous affirmative action program in the world, yeah. Also where life expectancy, literacy, and standards of living skyrocketed shortly after the Chinese takeover.

So you would accept Europeans colonizing China and suppressing your culture if you got gibs in exchange?

>Bullshit. No one could travel in those days. Today any Tibetan can.

I'm assuming you're Chinese, so if you ever run into a Tibetan, ask him or her how easy it is for them to apply for a passport.

>As opposed to getting your eyes and ears chopped off for not worshiping the Dalai Lama. I'd rather get sent to a reeducation camp.
>Implying Chinese police never torture anyone in prison to get confessions
Do you also seriously believe that no one died of overwork or starvation in laogai camps during that time?

>Also it's not 1960 anymore, you can totally criticize Mao.
So why did these guys lose their jobs?
reuters.com/article/us-china-mao/chinese-professor-sacked-after-criticizing-mao-online-idUSKBN14U0EG
cbc.ca/news/world/bi-fujian-chinese-tv-anchor-caught-on-video-criticizing-mao-1.3025968

Why do you always react to Anti-chink talking points? Are you a pajeet or something? Not even the guy you're talking to but Tibet was Chinese under the Qing dynasty. So when PRC or ROC wanted to reunify China they incorporated Tibet in their claims. There's nothing wrong with this and it's completely logical. Hell even the PRC have been more diplomatic with their claims, the RoC still see's Mongolia as a wayward province. People who are reflexively Anti-Chinese are just as bad as Maoist propagandists, there's no difference between both of your retarded beliefs. Sage for non/his/

China was under Mongol rule. Qing collapsed. Mongols collapsed. ROC fled. And PRC tookover.

The idea that something is logical therefore right is weird.

It is logical for China to claim all of the world as their own and rule it once they have the power and the US collapses. Its logical for China to claim Japan as theirs. Korea as their. Taiwan as theirs. Yet not right.

>Maoist killed nearly 45 million in 4 years
>people criticizing Maoist are just as bad as Maoist

>Not even the guy
Nice try chink

The GLF had already happened, but the Cultural Revolution didn't began until several years later. China was mainly pissed at India for sheltering the Dalai Lama. Also, it's actually much more difficult for India to supply and defend the border since they have to go up the Himalayas while the Chinese don't.

>So you would accept Europeans colonizing China and suppressing your culture if you got gibs in exchange?
I'm European-American. And yeah, fuck the culture meme, thousands of people who were dying of easily preventable causes are not now. Some cultures are just shitty. I thought Veeky Forums of all places would know this.

I have no personal stake here, I'm just sick of people (usually far leftists, but horseshoe theory means the far right gets in on it as well) portraying objectively shit governments in a positive light because they're "underdogs." The same reason I go on similar rants when people glorify the governments of Palestine or North Vietnam.
>Do you also seriously believe that no one died of overwork or starvation in laogai camps during that time?
Sure they did. Still better than being a serf in Tibet, where camp-like conditions were the rule rather than the exception. Reminds me of a book I read where statistics revealed that the gulags in 1930s Russia had a higher survival rate than large swaths of the country under the Tsar a couple decades earlier. Wouldn't be surprised if the same applied to pre and post takeover Tibet.
>So why did these guys lose their jobs?
Weird how they're not in gulags, huh? It's also happening all the time on Zhihu or any other Chinese websites, still no one's getting thrown in gulags. Even the official CCP policy is that Mao was 40% shit and 60% good, rather than a 100% good god as he used to be. China is autocratic, but they're far ahead of where they were in the 1960s.

>I'm European-American. And yeah, fuck the culture meme, thousands of people who were dying of easily preventable causes are not now. Some cultures are just shitty. I thought Veeky Forums of all places would know this

Fair enough, we just have a difference in thinking then. I personally think no nation has a right to colonize another nation, even if the nation being colonized has an objectively shitty culture. I also believe that it's usually more trouble than it's worth for the colonizer. I also apologize for assuming you're Chinese.

>where camp-like conditions were the rule rather than the exception.
While it's possible to claim the area under control by the Dalai Lama and the Lhasa government was "camp-like", I don't think that can be applied to the entire Tibetan Plateau. Large swaths of the Tibetan Plateau were never under the control of the Dalai Lama, and thus never had serfdom. And many Tibetans then and now were nomadic herders, so their lives were hardly worse than those in a labor camp.

>Tibet serfdom meme
Chinese propaganda played to death. But lets say this is true. So if China's cause for invasion of Tibet was to free Tibetans from serfdom, then why were Tibetans still under the Chinese occupation? If they had already deposed the former "serfdom" government, why are the Tibetans still living under a martial law to this date with no government of their own and no voice of their own? All the CCP did was replace one master with another. Replace a Tibetan master with a Chinese master.

At the very least, before the Chinese invasion, they could call themselves Tibetans and practice their own culture without restrictions. Now they are forced to subject to another's culture, another's will.

The Tibetans/western critics of China calling out this unequal relationship between the two country is not same as China actually doing the oppression.

Finally, the idea of invading another country because it was fuedalistic is hilarious when China itself was a horrible mess.

Are the only options premodern feudalism and chinese domination

>At the very least, before the Chinese invasion, they could call themselves Tibetans and practice their own culture without restrictions
As serfs.

>if a country has serfs it's entirely justified to invade
This just in, the entirety of Russia has been annexed by Germany, "They're just filthy savages, we're never going to free these barbarians" entire world agrees, and supports the move.

Lack of moderisation doesn't give a country the right to subjagate another country forever, that's colonial as fuck.

>that's colonial as fuck
"The whites did it. Now its our turn." -t Chang Ming Mao

It's the pressure of the coloniser that accelerates the progress of the colonised.
Colonialism had its place, to be sure, to be superseded by a new form of development.
Perhaps the tibetans will get rid of the Chinese, it's possible, but they will do so as a fundamentally different nation than what came before.