Use the link below for the BBC website on Tension in Tibet to find out more about the current conflict. Based upon your knowledge of the situation in Tibet, please respond to the following prompts:
1. What do you think might account for the different opinions held by the Dalai Lama and the younger generation of Tibetans regarding the relationship between China and Tibet and the future of Tibet?
2. How might the situation in Tibet be a model for understanding larger global issues in the early 21st century?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/asia_pacific/2008/tibet_tensions/default.stm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
47 comments:
1. I think that younger generations of Tibetans have grown up in an age of technology and therefore crave to become technologically advanced and modernize Tibet. However, the Dalai Lama being more religious and old fashioned isn't quite as eager to accept these changes. The younger generations agree with China and approve of its movement to modernize Tibet, while the older generations are satisfied with they way Tibet is now and are hesitant to change their ways.
2. I belive that this conflict is an example of a number of issues going on in our world today. Not only is there the conflict between tradition and modernization, but also the issue of whether or not to invade a country (even with good intentions) if it does not wish to change. I think that this conflict an be compared to the US invasion of Afghanistan in an attempt to throw out a dictator and install Democracy. Our intentions may be good, but if our help is not wanted do we have the right to invade?
I think that there are many reasons for the different opinions held by the Dalai Lama and the younger generation of Tibetans regarding the relationship between China and Tibet. I do think that age, and experience is a factor. The Dalai Lama is part of the older generation of Tibet, and he has seen it be peaceful. I think that the Dalai Lama is still focused on how great Tibet could be, so he is reluctant to Chinese authority. The younger generation, however, is less resistant to the Chinese because they are willing to accept change. They don't know how Tibet was, they just wish it to be peaceful in the future.
The situation in Tibet might be a model for understanding larger global issues today because it shows persistence. It also can be seen as a great example of a compromise in a tough conflict.
1. I think that younger Tibetans want complete independence because they are less experienced than the Dalai Lama. With youth comes idealism, and these people might think that they have a chance at achieving independence from the second most powerful nation in the world, and at being a successful country after that. The Dalai Lama is much more realistic and wise, and knows that independence is not a viable option, especially with the lack of international support. He is merely trying to guarantee Tibetans a measure of self-government so their culture and religion will be protected.
2. This situation simply illustrates the amount of injustice that still remains in this world. From Tibet to Kashmir to Kosovo to Kurdistan, there are many groups of people that are still being unwantedly subjected to the not-so-benevolent rule of a foreign power.
1. i feel the younger generation of Tibetans are fighting for their right from their perspective. Being that Tibet is its own nation and should be able to govern itself rather than follow in line with China. The younger generation also has lived within control by China for their entire lives, so any thoughts of independence has been created by stories or exaggerated tales from parents/grandparents. Making the freedom more of a desire than benefit. The Dalai Lama talked with Chinese officials and lived, though young, in the time that China took power. He's able to have a more kinda heart to China and understand what they're trying to do and his faith helps, i'd say, hold him back from being too aggressive towards gaining complete independence.
2. Tibet can easily be compared to other Chinese disputes such as the Xinjiang province or Taiwan, being that they are territories standing for independence. Other rising issues such as the U.S.A's involvement in Afghanistan, can be seen as America pushing its view of how a gov't should work and trying to "help" with force of arms. Nations can't be forced easily into change, one needs to understand customs, environment, history, and social viewpoint of a nation in order to communicate clearly.
I think that the Dalai Lama is trying to protect soley the peace throughout his home country of Tibet. A certain degree of autonomy for Tibet would allow the restoration of safety in the country, as Tibetan leaders could choose what they felt was best for their country and their decisions would probaby be more respected than those of the Chinese. This would also appease the Chinese to some degree, as Tibet would still be their territory. I would imagine that the Dalai Lama would see the end of violent uprisings in the thought of a satisifed Chinese nation in regards to its relations with Tibet. Therefore,the Dalai Lama is showing that the Tibetans have no need to call themselves independent as long as peace and safety can be restored to the country.
It is easy to see, however, why younger generations may not agree with this. More idealistic and free-thinking, the declaration of Tibetan independence may seem the most important thing to them, and from that they may expect that all would fall into place as it was before the Chinese invasion. They may also see the Dalai Lama's decisions as detached, as he has been out of his country for so long. However, I would personally side with the Dalai Lama as I think he is disregarding what may seem as socially important (declaring independence) to go with what will bring peace to the greatest amount of people.
With so many similar conflicts going on in the world, where countries invade others in acts of war in order to assert their own 'improvements' on the society, the Dalai Lama can be seen as an idol for how to handle these issues as he strives for the most peaceful outcome.
1. I feel like the age difference can account for the different opinions held by the Dalai Lama and the younger generation of Tibetans regarding the relationship between China and Tibet. The Dalai Lama only has Tibet’s best interest at heart, where as the younger generation is open to change. Many people are afraid of change because they encounter things that they are not use to and I think that the Dalai Lama may happen to fall in this category. The younger generation is more ambitious and outgoing and this is like a foreign object to the Dalai Lama because of his age.
2. The situation in Tibet just shows that there is a large issue over traditional things and modernized things in the world that we live in. Older people feel like things should be done the way they always have been done and the younger generation feels otherwise.
I think the age of the Dalai Lama and the age of the young people would account for the difference of opinions. They are going about solving their problems in two different ways. The younger people are not as peaceful as the Dalai Lama and are willing to use violence if necessary to get their point across. The Dalai Lama is a peaceful man who disagrees with the Chinese takeover but does not want to use violence.
The situation in Tibet is all about unnecessary invasion of a country. The US is doing similar things to China by going and imposing their will on other countries, but it is not the same in the fact that the Chinese government sent Chinese people to go live in Tibet while America has not sent its citizens to go live in Iraq or Afghanistan.
The difference in opinions held by the Dalai Lama and younger generations of Tibetans seems to be driven by age and experience. The Dalai Lama held religious power at the time of the Chinese invasion of Tibet just as China began to rise to the rank of a serious world power; since then, His Holiness has witnessed the consequential violence committed for decades against Tibetans (and, it ought to be noted, sometimes against China's own citizens). Younger generations of Tibetans have had the opportunity to be introduced to the new face of China, a country that has grown to be one of the most powerful in the world and appeals to young Tibetans through its offer to help Tibet grow with it. China's seemingly benevolent behavior is not new, however; when Mao first appealed to the Dalai Lama for control over Tibet he offered a similar friendly face. When this benign behavior was met with resistance to Chinese rule it quickly turned violent, the memory of which probably stays with the Dalai Lama today and drives his commitment to autonomy.
As for Tibet serving as a model, I think many observations can be drawn from this situation pertaining to sovereignty, interfaith dialogue, and nonviolence- it also raises an important question (that the US often faces) about what role the West should play when these crisis arise. The Dalai Lama asked Western nations for their support early on but to little avail. What responsibility do powerful nations have to intervene and assist when distant countries impede upon one another's sovereignty?
1. Like the rest of my classmates, I also believe that the difference of the opinions held by the Dalai Lama and the younger generation of Tibetans regarding the relationship between Tibet and China is accounted by age and experience. Since the Dalai Lama has seen Tibet through its rough times and its better times, he just is doing whats best for Tibet- and using his religious power to hold peace at the same time. Also age is major factor of the difference of opinions. Idealism is common in the time of youth, and the younger people are open to whatever it takes to achieve that idealism.
2. I Think the conflict in Tibet is a model of the numerous issues occurring in today's world. I think a major conflict is between modernization and old traditions. Also, whether or not to invade a country. Sometimes a country may not want help even if its in their best interest. This conflict shows that even the modern world still has issues.
I agree that the youth is drawn to the idea of a Chinese control interference because they see China for what it is- a very powerful, very wealthy country. They haven't seen Tibet in peace like the Dalai Lama has, so it seems reasonable that they would let China interfere. The Dalai Lama, however, was around the first time China tried to persuade Tibet. The Dalai Lama declined peacefully which made the Chinese react with violence. Maybe the Dalai Lama doesn't trust the Chinese.
This issue is an example of many of the same problems seen world-wide. Bigger, stronger countries have tried to interfere with smaller, weaker ones for centuries. The Dalai Lamas seemed pretty happy with Tibet before, what gave China the right to try to interfere?
1. I think that the younger generation of both Chinese and Tibetans are different because of the old fashion and religious influence of the Tibetans and the modern new age influence that the Chinese must keep up with. Because Tibetans are surrounded by the ruling leader, Dalia Lama their views are not so advanced due to the religious structure of life they must portray. I think it will take a lot more time for the Tibetans to be as advanced as the Chinese due to their fast pace style of living and technological advances.
2. I think that the situation in Tibet is a model for many aspects of our lives and the world around us. In our everyday lives we face criticism, and advice and change of ways or customs. Sometimes we won't appreciate the attempt of help or change and even our elders don't appreciate the change we advise as well. China tried to help Tibet but they did not appreciate the attempt at help and change and they wanted to continue their traditions without any change.
. I definitely agree that the differences between the Dalai Lama and the younger Tibetans mainly come from the different perspectives and experiences. The younger generation probably sees China as pretty modern and an important part of the global community. They haven't dealt with China in the ways the Dalai Lama has and they haven't experienced a China-free Tibet. The younger generation would be drawn to Chinese control because they're more concerned with progression and modernization than with protecting traditional Tibetan culture.
2. The situation in Tibet is a good model for understanding other 21st century global issues because a lot of the issues of the 21st century have been about levels of interference from larger countries with smaller countries. The 21st century has dealt less with small countries declaring their independence (like the 20th century), but more with how small countries go about being independent nations. The best level of control by larger, more powerful countries is a really big issue in the world right now in a lot of places.
The situation in Tibet is a model for understanding that change does still take patience and peaceful resolutions in the world today. It also shows the injustices that people around the globe deal with everyday. I think it is important to look at how the Dalai Lama is trying to deal with a very difficult situation and trying to resolve conflicts peacefully and not rashly. This is a good model for conflict resolution that can be used globally.
It is not new that younger and older generations disagree on how to deal with conflict resolutions. The younger generation, especially in modern times, is radical and impatient, but also motivated and energetic. The older generation is patient and wise and understands realistic goals and how to go about achieving them. This conflict is no different in it's division between generations.
1. i belive the contrast in beliefs has solely to do with the time the 2 groups were born. the dalai lama was born and raised when things went from good to bad. he understands much of chinas need to expand and the reasons why china desires tibet, even though he doesnt agree with their solution. i belive his push for autonomy, not isolation, would ensure china and tibet will keep talking and trading and eventually to become friends. if china and tibet were to separate entirely, it would only be a matter of time before one counrty decided the time was ripe for a reckoning.
the youth, however, was born in a time when things went from bad to worse. they have witnessed firsthand the atrocities the chinese have commited against them, and feel much less forgiving towards the chinese than the dalai lama. they see the chinese as scum, as evil, and as people they should have nothing to do with at all, thus the push for complete independance and separation from china.
2. this could be a prime example of how religous societies and political societies do not mix well because they go by different rules and customs, also how NOT to go about "bringing peace and order" other countries.
1. I believe that the younger generations have become accustomed to Chinese rule are a slightly more complacent with the occupation. The older generations including that of the Dalai Lama want the old ways back of having a religious and traditional state of Tibet, which is why we see in the news monks constantly protesting against unjustified reason for the occupation of their country.The young haven't been around to witness the invasion and murders in the street, but the old have. The younger want modernization but the old want to keep things old and traditional.
2) Tibet is a model that shows a forgein government taking control of a resistant people. The Chinese can justify their cause all they want but it is hard to change and consume something or someone that doesn't. Causes on both sides are strong and may only result in a compromise, and to see how they reach that goal would be something to watch out for.
The younger generation of Tibetans didn't have to endure the pain and hardships that the Dalai Lama and his generation had to experience. They didn't recieve the full effects of chinese invasion and the destruction and pain it caused at the time. I think the younger generation will eventually realize they need to break from china as the dalai lama believed was the best ideal, but they will need to realize the full severity of the problem before they take action.
A global issue is the large overpowering countries of the world. They in many ways bully smaller countries and try to inflict their views and opinions. The chinese invading tibet is a perfect example of this, the chinese claim to be helping, but in truth they are trying to impose their ideals causing a large unnessicary conflict.
With the younger generation, I believe that they are going to be confused about the conflicts between Tibet and China. I think that the younger generation will want to be like the Chinese because this would be something that is modern. I think it would be difficult for the older generation because I think they would want to keep the old tradition and continue on with their beliefs when it comes to their children.
I think they would understand what's going on the most, because they've experienced through the most tragic times. This includes Chairman Mao trying to take over Tibet. The Chinese convince the Tibetans that they are helping and trying to make the country better. However, they are just making it worse.
1) I think that the contrast between the Dali Lama's beliefs and those of the yunger generation of Tibetans is a result of the level of experience the Dali Lama has. He's seen the Chinese do terrible things, and ruled his people durring those times. He knows what the Chinese are capable of, and he seems to have come to the conclusion that a compromise is the only decision that will truly benefit Tibet to the fullest. On the other hand, younger Tibetans have the type of passion that could really drive a revolution. They see that their people are oppressed and they want to be free, as soon as possible. Both sides have arguements that could work out. But the Dali Lama seems to want to avoid any violence, which would likely occur if a rebelion arose.
2) The situation itself is a result of human nature and need to dominate more and more territory. This is a classic trend for violence in history. We saw it with Hitler taking over smaller nations surrounding Germany, and even with the US stealing land from Native americans. But the way to learn from the Tibetan situation is hard to decide. Without a conclusion, a solution or answer is hard to consider. When Mr. Zhu talks about violence that Tibetans have allegedly caused, he asks sacrascically if that could be called repression...but I think it is. People acting out desperately is a sure sign of a repressed people. I believe that the UK made the wrong decision in agreeing that Tibet was under Chinese rule, and I think that a leson countries could learn is that taking over land is never a good idea
1. While age is certainly a factor that plays into the ideas and beliefs of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan youth, I think the enviroments in which they were raised is a more influential one. The Dalai Lama was raised to believe in peaceful conflict resolution and the sumpremacy of religion. These ideals are what he bases his decisions on. The Tibetan youth, on the other hand, has been raised in a world of turmoil and conflicting rule. It is only natural that their approach to solving the promblems is through action.
2.This is a model for the rest of the world for two reasons. The power conflict between nations occurs all over the world, with domineering nations trying to absorb smaller ones. The generation gap between the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan youth is also present throughout the world. Nations stirve to be new and modern, so as to not be left behind in a seemingly endless global race.
The question posed as to the cause of the difference between the views of Tibet held by the Dalai Lama would seem to offer its own answer; if we are to identify one group soley on the basis of age then one can likely infer that the difference between the groups will be caused as a result of experiences allowed by said age, and the ideologies resulting from such experiences.
The issue of Tibet in regards to a world perspective may infact be a large one; what sets it apart from many issues that we as a nation find to be large however, is the Tibetan media coverage. It is inadequate for lack of a better word; or being censored in a way that sheilds the vast majority of the world from insight about the subject. This lack of insight into the Tibetan affair seldom prompts the action or intervention of foreign world influences. And thus we see the issue as being small compared to those that we see as large. The lesson to be learned from all of this follows the old maxim "knowledge is power". to provoke action we must raise awareness.
1. First of all, the Dalai Lama is a world religious leader. Obviously, he would take the stance that is less violent. However, he also was born while Tibet was still an independent nation. He remembers what it was like before China, whereas the younger generation has grown up as a Chinese annexation. The difference in opinion is founded mostly on age.
2. The situation in Tibet is just one of many like situations in the world today. Perhaps if we can understand how better to liberate Tibet, this microcosm may highlight techniques invaluable to world application. Also, this points out an interesting dichotomy in the philosophies of world super powers. The principle of freedom and justice is being overlooked in favour of gaining influence with China.
1. I believe that the difference in experience between generations accounts for the difference in opinions regarding the conflict with China. Having lived before China invaded Tibet, the Dalai Lama remembers the peaceful, independent Tibet. He seems to be holding to the old, ideal Tibet, which means resisting the changes and modernization China will impose. The older generation generally holds these same principles, whereas younger people tend feel differently. Typically, older people strive to maintain a rich culture and history, while younger people accept and desire modern technology and accommodations, even at the expense of "giving in" to China's invasion.
2. The tension between Tibet and China is among countless examples of a larger country overpowering a weaker one. Large countries do this with the intentions of "modernizing" of "fixing" the small nations they perceive as helpless. This brings up the issue of whether good intentions mitigate the effects of one forcefully "helping" those who do not wish to be helped. Of course there is no correct response, but one should consider whether intervention is actually beneficial if the other party sees nothing wrong.
There are many causes for the differing opinions held by the Dalai Lama and the younger generation. However, I believe the most significant cause is that the Dalai Lama was the leader of Tibet when it was strictly governed by religion. Therefore, he believes in strict nonviolence and after seeing the violence that has occurred in the past when Tibet has incurred China's wrath, the Dalai Lama would prefer to remain under Chinese control with limited autonomy than to begin a rebellion against Chinese rule that would ultimately result in violence and death. The younger generation of Tibet, however, has not experienced this religious rule and therefore does not view the Buddhism decree of nonviolence as a significant enough reason to remain under Chinese rule. They have not had the strong religious influence in their lives that the Dalai Lama has had. They are also very idealistic and full of nationalism and the drive for an independent Tibet.
The situation in Tibet could be a model for understanding larger global issues because it shows the controversy created when the modern world encroaches upon the ancient world and how it may begins to undermine age old religious practices, forcing the country's very definition and way of life and governing to change. It also depicts just how necessary it is in today's world to have allies. Tibet was not really aligned with any other country and therefore, it had little protection against Chinese invasion. It also brings up the question of the responsibility world powers have in protecting the rights of other countries. Is it their responsibility to aid or is it the weaker country's soul responsibility to protect its welfare?
1)I believe the difference in opinion between the younger Tibetans and the Dalai Lama concerning the relationship of Tibet and China coincides with experience and age of each person. The Dalai Lama has seen Tibet at its best and worst. He has also seen what China has done of the years, and is trying to resolve this issue in a peaceful manner. However, he is reluctant to the chinese authority. On the other hand, the younger Tibetans are more anxious and willing to fight for their rights.
2)This issue in Tibet suggests that our world still has many issues to alleviate. It suggests the differences in opinions from older generations verse the more modern view.
I believe that one of the causes of disagreement between the Dalai Lama and the younger Tibetan generation has to do with the modernization of the world and less emphasis on religion. Though religion is still a major part of modern Tibetan life, science and technology have created a distraction or even an alternative for religion. Therefore, some may not find the Dalai Lama to be as much of an influence to them as he once was on previous generations.
The story of a larger nation taking over a smaller or weaker nation has been occuring in history since the beginning of time. Though larger nations sometimes annex a nation for the actual purpose of helping them, it has been historically more common for a more powerful nation take over another to gain power or money. The issue in Tibet will hopefully set an example of what can happen for future conflicts with other countries.
I believe that the youth want complete control and independence by attempting to modernize Tibet today. The hardships are over; no need to follow the Dalai Lama's footsteps or philosophy; it didn't get us anywhere! Out with the old and in with the new. This however causes conflict! The younger generation is willing to go about this situation using violence in order to get what they want. However the Dalai Lama would proceed this situation in a peaceful manner. I also believe that this situation is a prime example of what proceeds our world today! Particularly in the United States. The issue of youth wanting to modernize their country instead of going about the "old fashion way."
I believe that the youth want complete control and independence by attempting to modernize Tibet today. The hardships are over; no need to follow the Dalai Lama's footsteps or philosophy; it didn't get us anywhere! Out with the old and in with the new. This however causes conflict! The younger generation is willing to go about this situation using violence in order to get what they want. However the Dalai Lama would proceed this situation in a peaceful manner. I also believe that this situation is a prime example of what proceeds our world today! Particularly in the United States. The issue of youth wanting to modernize their country instead of going about the "old fashion way."
I think the main reason for the difference between the views of the Dalai Lama and the younger generation is that they were raised in different times. The Dalai Lama and his followers are used to how things are and have pretty much gotten comfortable with it. They aren't ready, or really enjoy change and just want to keep their old ways. The younger generation, well they're living in a new era that wasn't around when the Dalai Lama was younger, and I think that makes them not really accustomed to how things have been and they are much more optimistic about change and in favor of it. They want their independence, they're ready to fight.
I think this is definitely something that can be applied to other places currently. There are constantly disagreements between people and different views due to the difference in raising from the different eras we are born in.
I agree with Ashley, the differences of opinions between the Dalai Lama's and the younger generation is reflected upon how much each person has experienced in their lifetime. The Dalai Lama became a governmental leader of Tibet since he was just fifteen years old. He himself has fought (peacefully) with the Chinese government long before the younger Tibetan generation was around for. The Dalai Lama has been a political leader for Tibet for years and chooses to stand by his religious values by practicing the act of nonviolence. The younger generation of people in the world as a whole, has become to expect their wishes to occur faster, and easier. Like the younger people in Tibet, they want to become a independent state faster by breaking out into a violent fight against China.
This situation in Tibet is a model for understanding global issues by showing other nations in the world about the importance of the older generation and the younger generation. It's important for citizens to realize that change is good in some ways but opinions of the older generation have more experience in the world and their opinions might be able to intertwine with change and tradition when it comes to solving national government issues.
I think that while the Dalai Lama wants to ensure that he continues to embody the spiritual center of Tibetan and therefore resist influence from China, the younger generation might want the technological and social advances which they feel China can provide. The Dalai Lama as the spirtual leader of Tibet is obligated to resist the Chinese because their presence could threaten the religious makeup of his country.
The situation in Tibet is a model for larger global issues because it highlights all of the issues that go into solving disputes between countries, and the role that other nations can take. While it might seem obvious that another country could step in to help Tibet, falling out of favor with, and having to confront, a power like China is to much of a risk even for the most powerful of countries to feel comfortable taking.
1. Along with many other people, I believe that the Dalai Lama has a lot more experience and has seen the conflict from its beginnings. So I think many of the modern Tibetans feel that with all the new technology, they should be able to get full independence and fast. But the Dalai Lama is going for a more nonviolent safe approach.
2. I think it shows the modern day version of the big country taking over a small nation. It shows that this conflict still occurs, and also shows the conflict in the ways to resolve the issue.
I think that the Dalai Lama has much more traditional/religous and a wiser way of thinking. While it is good in the sense that he has more experience and knowledge and wants to stick with his beliefs, it can also be beneficial to listen to the younger generation and understand how and why they're thinking the way they are. I think this has a lot to do with the difference in the Dalai Lama's generation and today's generation. Today's generation has seen the power of violence and how it can achieve independence fast. Because they have lived with oppression all their life they are anxious and want to do whatever they have to do gain independence. While the Dalai Lama wants to stay true to his Buddhist beliefs and practice non violence.
I think it shows that people are still oppressed today. While many people assume these types of conflicts haven't happened since WWII it is made very clear in Tibet that oppression is still very real.
The Dalai Lama and his supporters want what is best for Tibet, which involves a limited Chinese rule. Although total independence might have been considered practical early on in China's rule, Tibet has become dependent on China. The Chinese invasion of Tibet was never black and white, and the Dalai Lama knows that China's withdrawal can't be either. Younger Tibetans, who have never experienced anything except total Chinese rule, would rather believe in the ideal of total independence, which they themselves have never experienced, than a compromise that would be better for Tibet.
I see a lot of parallels with the younger generation of Iranians. Older Iranians have seen an idealistic revolution produce a government perhaps as corrupt as the one that it replaced and thousands of needless deaths. Younger Iranians believe that a revolution is the righteous path towards a better government, but it is not the best for the well-being of the country.
I believe that the Dalai Lama has his opinions on independence due to his strict religious belief. Obviously, his Buddhist ways of living prohibit any use of violence, even if it is for a good cause such as gaining independence. Young people perhaps are more inclined to use violence to gain independence. They have witnessed that violence, in most cases, will work when trying to achieve a specific goal. They think that due to the new advancements made since the Dalai Lama's rule should make is possible for them to gain independence. The Dalai Lama is sticking to his old ways of nonviolence.
I think this is an important issue that not many people know about. It is very important for people to understand that situations like this still occur, and that these issues are very real. Many think that situations like this are long gone, but they are still relevant to today's society.
I believe that the Dalai Lama and older generations have more of a traditional way of thinking. They were in Tibet before the chinese and all the change. Older generations tend to hold on to what they know despite of the changes around them.
I do believe that the younger generations may have a different view of things. They may be more accepting to change
I think the younger generation of Tibetans feels they want instant freedom, which is understandable. But the Dalai Lama has been involved in the struggle for freedom for decades now and has probably come to the conclusion that instantaneous freedom is not very plausible. I think he is most likely trying his best to determine the best way to retain some independence under the control of China, due to the fact that Tibet is not in a position to challenge the authority of China
Hopefully people will look back on the situation in Tibet and realize their fault in not doing more to try to help these people. This will hopefully be an example for generations to come of what not to do when another peaceful and harmless country is in dire need of help and assistance.
1) I believe, like most of my classmates, that the difference in opinions between the Dalai Lama and Tibet's younger generation directly correlates with the situation concerning China. As the Dalai Lama has such a strong connection to Tibet and has experienced the negative influence China has put on his country, it is only natural he should want to resist. However, the younger generation of Tibet most likely wants to enjoy the technological and also only really knows what their country is like with China's influence.
2)The situation in Tibet it not new to the 21 century. History has shown many more powerful countries take over smaller countries. It is not necessarily the "right" thing, but it happens and will continue to as long as people are absorbed with global consumerism.
1) The age differences between the Dalai Lama and younger generation of Tibetans probably account a lot for the different views and opinions on the topic of China's relationship with Tibet. The Dalai Lama had to go through the chinese invasion as part of his life and truly understands the situation due to being part of it and probably figures that it just might be impossible for the Tibetans to claim independence from China at this point but it might be a good idea to start out with autonomy.
Whereas the younger generations are educated with the ways of civil/human right leaders and believe that it is possible for them to retrieve their independence.
2) In my opinion, the Tibetan situation cannot be used as a model to understand global issues because it can only serve as one of the many examples of oppression and repression. There has not been a fix to this problem and the country has been under the power of a foreign country for a long period of time. In order for this to be used as a model for understanding global issues, it has to be solved and fixed first.
I believe that many people have different oppionions concerning the Dalai Lama because of there age and also form influences from their family.
Older people may go towards more of a traditional, they want things to be how use to be because of the way that the were brought up.
Younger people probally are used to the Chinese being in Tibet and having some control of things.
Many younger Tibetians did not witness China taking over Tibet and grew up with Chinese information telling them that Tibet has always been a part of China. They might percieve China as more modern and a part of the global community, qualities that could attract a younger generation more than the religious history of Tibet. In addition, China has a great deal of control over the flow of information to Tibetian youths, and it is possible that China has influenced their opinion in that manner. The situation in Tibet is an example of control of information being used to impact a nation's course as well as an example of tradition clashing with modernization from outside influences, two themes that have occured often in the 21st century.
1. I believe age acounts for a lot of the differences in opinion. The older generation saw at first hand what happened to Tibet when the Chinese took over. They know live both before and after the invasion. The younger generation, on the other hand, only knows what it is like now. They have grown up with the Chinese in Tibet.
2. Tibet is a model of opression. There are many global issues today dealing with simailar subject matter.
1. I agree with many of my classmates that experience is a large factor in accounting for the differences in opinion held by the Dalai Lama and Tibetan youth regarding Chinese interference in Tibet. The younger generation is more accustomed to the Chinese presence, and has had their lives influenced heavily by the Chinese. This resulted in their perceptions of the Chinese being very positive overall, and they side with the Chinese in the dispute between Tibet's existence as an independent republic.
2. I believe the conflict in Tibet can be used as a model of how the use of financial and military power can result in civil liberties being taken, and in the domination of a peaceful people. I personally think there are some serious issues with China's methods of controlling the people of Tibet, and that this situation should be used as an example of how religious freedom can be violated.
1. I think that age and lack of the Dalai Lama's presence have influenced the younger generation. They were not alive in the 1950s when the Dalai Lama was forced into exile and the Tibetan people were being bombed and what not. The Chinese have been in control of their country for their whole lives so they don't know anything else. I also believe if the Dalai Lama was in Tibet and could speak to the younger generation then perhaps their opinions would change.
2. Tibet is a model for imperialism and oppression everywhere. Tibet is just one of the many overlooked issues with the world. Americans have done the same thing that China has done to Tibet. We go into other countries (like Iraq) who don't want our help and try to take over the place. We believe we are trying to do the right thing and the rest of the world just lets us get away with it.
P.S. I'm sorry this is so late, it's been a rough week
Kai
1)I think that since the dalai lama knows what he is doing he should do it even if the the younger generation of tibetan people and chinese told him not to do something. But i am afraid if he does that they might exile more people
2)it shows how other countrys go into others just to "help" but we are hurting that place .
1. The younger generation of Tibetans might not have the same experiences that the older generation has, since they weren't around before the takeover of Tibet. They might not feel the same way that the older generation feels for this reason.
2. You have to take into account other peoples opinions before you make a decision, especially one with such far reaching consequences.
Post a Comment