Secret files on the Rape of Peking in 1989

Dear viewers,

While writing the script for this short video below I made commemorating the 30th anniversary of the Peking (Tiananmen) Massacre I was frustrated by a detail that I came across, which I’ll document here.

(Video with full English subtitles)

The matter is, during the months seeing the largest pro-freedom protests since the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime’s establishment that lead up to the Peking Massacre in June 1989, did top rulers within the CCP regime approached the Swiss ambassador in Peking asking him about transferring large sums of money to banks in Switzerland?

Canadian journalist Tom Korski was the first to report on this detail in 2015. Mr Korski cited confidential messages from Canadian diplomats in Peking back to Ottawa in 1989, declassified recently by Library & Archives Canada under the Access to Information Act. One message read: “The Swiss Ambassador, himself an ‘Old China Hand’, told us that over the past few months every member of the Politburo Standing Committee has approached him about transferring very significant amounts of money to Swiss bank accounts. For obvious reasons, he has urged us to guard this information with the utmost care”.

Gruesome details of the 1989 Peking Massacre were also revealed in the same collection of Canadian cables:

• An old woman knelt in front of soldiers pleading for students; soldiers killed her.
• A boy was seen trying to escape holding a woman with a 2-year old child in a stroller, and was run over by a tank. The tank turned around and mashed them up.

The true face of the CCP, which horrified humanity in 1989 but is today buried under layers of cosmetics and photoshopped, was also kept in fading snapshots such as the Sir Alan Ewen Donald cables of 1989, released by The National Archives of Britain in 2017. The late Sir Donald, then British ambassador to Peking, included these grisly details in his secret cables to London in June 1989:

• Students linked arms but were mown down, including soldiers.
• APCs (Armed Personnel Carriers) then ran over bodies time and time again to make quote pie unquote, and remains collected by bulldozer. 
• Remains incinerated and then hosed down drains.
• 27 army ordered to spare no one and shot wounded SMR (Shen-yang Military Region) soldiers. 
• 4 wounded girl students begged for their lives but were bayoneted.
• A 3 year old girl was injured, but her mother was shot as she went to her aid, as were six others who tried.
• 1000 survivors were told they could escape via Zheng-yi-lu but were then mown down by specially prepared M/G (Machine Gun) positions. 
• Army ambulances who attempted to give aid were shot up, as was a Sino-Japanese Hospital ambulance. (Note: Sino-Japanese Friendship Hospital being a hospital in Peking funded by Japan back in the 1980s when the “People Republic of China – PRC” was in its honeymoon with Japan.)
• With medical crew dead, wounded driver attempted to ram attackers, but was blown to pieces by anti-tank weapon. 
• In further attack APCs caught up with SMR straggler trucks, rammed and overturned them, and ran over troops.
• During attack 27 army officer shot dead by own troops, apparently because he faltered.
• Troops explained they would be shot if they hadn't shot officer.
• 27 army were using dum-dum bullets.
• 27 army snipers shot many civilians on balconies, streetsweepers etc. for target practice.
• Minimum estimate of civilian dead 10,000.

When the Sir Alan Ewen Donald cables were declassified in October 2017, they were widely reported. Agence France-Presse (AFP) independently verified these documents at The National Archives in Kew in Richmond shortly after the initial reporting on a Chinese language website. Other reports included those from the The Times, the BBC, The Independent and the RFA.

In comparison, the Canadian cables released in 2015 were largely overlooked by the media. After Mr Korski’s initial report, only the Daily Telegraph and the RFA followed the story, and the reason of other media’s lack of enthusiasm, might have to do with an article that appeared on the ‘Sinosphere blogs’ on the New York Times’ website three days after Korski’s report. The ‘Sinosphere blogs’ article was penned by Austin Ramzy. It claimed “the Swiss ambassador to China from April 1988 to April 1995, said that stringent political controls meant that he and other foreign envoys never had such access to high-level figures before or during the 1989 crisis. In an email interview he wrote that the assertion that he was approached to discuss transferring funds abroad ‘sounds absurd.’”

A powerful exoneration for the “innocent” CCP rulers, straight from the horse’s mouth – except that it might not be. To any honest observer of the CCP regime, this denial after twenty six years sounded almost as dubious as any utterance made by the CCP itself. Driven by curiosity I made the simplest research by entering Ambassador Erwin Schurtenberger’s name to Google, and here is what Google told me. Since his previous life as a diplomat for Switzerland, Ambassador Schurtenberger had been:

• Honorary Member of the Swiss Chinese Chamber of Commerce
• Independent director on the board of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation – CNOOC Group
• Independent Business Advisor to Credit Suisse Financial Services
• Independent Business Advisor to Novartis and Bunge
• Senior Advisor of the China Training Center for Senior Personnel Management Officials

Weighing the two contradicting statements, one sent by Canadian diplomats discreetly back to Ottawa from Peking during that fateful summer of 1989, the other made in a ‘Sinosphere blogs’ article twenty six years later, by the former ambassador who could no longer disentangle himself from the money web weaved by the CCP within democracies all over the world in the past three decades, I chose to believe the former over the latter, and cited it in my video above.

lmlmlmlm666
June – July 2019
https://www.youtube.com/user/lmlmlmlm666



(All the information sources mentioned hitherto are listed below as appendix.)

Appendix

Media reports related to the Sir Alan Ewen Donald cables of 1989, released by The National Archives of Britain in 2017

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/secret-british-cable-put-tiananmen-death-toll-at-10-000-mxjxggrqt
Secret British cable put Tiananmen death toll at 10,000
David Rankin
December 23 2017

https://www.dw.com/en/secret-cable-10000-killed-in-chinas-1989-tiananmen-crackdown/a-41918713
Secret cable: 10,000 killed in China's 1989 Tiananmen crackdown
Shamil Shams (with Agence France Presse AFP)
Date 23.12.2017

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-42465516
Tiananmen Square protest death toll 'was 10,000'
December 23 2017

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/tiananmen-square-massacre-death-toll-secret-cable-british-ambassador-1989-alan-donald-a8126461.html
At least 10,000 people died in Tiananmen Square massacre, secret British cable from the time alleged
Adam Lusher
Saturday 23 December 2017

https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/tianmen-revelations-12212017131357.html
Chinese Army 'Spared No-one' in 1989 Mass Killings in Beijing: UK cables
Reported by Lin Ping for RFA's Mandarin Service. Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.
2017-12-21

Media reports related to the Canadian diplomatic cables from Peking to Ottawa in 1989, released by Library & Archives Canada in 2015

https://www.blacklocks.ca/embassy-feared-1989-chinese-raid-say-confidential-memos/
Embassy Feared 1989 Chinese Raid Say Confidential Memos
Blacklock's Reporter – Minding Ottawa's Business
Tom Korski
Monday, January 26, 2015

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/11372052/Fresh-details-of-savage-Tiananmen-massacre-emerge-in-embassy-cables.html
Fresh details of 'savage' Tiananmen massacre emerge in embassy cables
By Tom Phillips, Shanghai
1:54PM GMT 27 Jan 2015

https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/secrets-01292015144655.html
Victim's Mother Hits Out at Foreign Governments Over Tiananmen Secrets
Reported by Hai Nan for RFA's Cantonese Service, and by Xin Lin for the Mandarin Service. Translated and written in English by Luisetta Mudie.
2015-01-29

https://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/29/canadian-diplomatic-cables-from-1989-offer-new-detail-and-questions-on-tiananmen/
1989 Cables Offer New Detail, and Questions, on Tiananmen
BY AUSTIN RAMZY
JANUARY 29, 2015

Former Swiss ambassador’s life in the commercial world

https://www.sccc.ch/chapters/zurich-headquarter/leadership
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/03/business/worldbusiness/chinese-company-drops-bid-to-buy-us-oil-concern.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=3671087&privcapId=278275935

(END)

Evidence of Tibet’s Independence in Chinese Historical Texts

Dear Tibetan Friends,

I’m sorry to confess that it has been long since I could pull myself together to make any tiny contribution to the Tibetan freedom struggle. In the past two years, like some of you, I’ve been overcome by depression, confusion and apprehension due to the setbacks suffered by our liberal democratic ideals in so many countries, not only in Tibet and China. But even on occasions I doubted my intellectual ability to make any difference to our search for the path out of our plight, my faith in the goal of reducing individual sentient beings’ suffering, increasing falsifiable knowledge and defending individual liberty has never wavered.

As the anniversary of March 10 Tibetan uprising day is coming, I’ve set myself an achievable short-term goal of translating some Chinese historical texts showing Tibet’s irrefutable independence in the past millennium and beyond. I use this tiny effort to pay my respect to the Tibetan people’s sixty years of heroic struggle for freedom – a struggle against Chinese supremacism, cruelty and ignorance with Tibetan wisdom, compassion and determination.

Thank you  ^-^
lmlmlmlm666
1 March 2019

https://www.youtube.com/user/lmlmlmlm666

(Due to my illiteracy in the Tibetan language I translated the texts into English)

Original Text (I)

《舊唐書》列傳146 卷196

十月十日，與吐蕃使盟，宰臣及右僕射、六曹尚書、中執法、太常、司農卿、京兆尹、金吾大將軍皆預焉。其詞曰：
「...... 」
「原夫昊穹上臨，黃祗下載，茫茫蠢蠢之類，必資官司，為厥宰臣，茍無統紀，則相滅絕。中夏見管，維唐是君；西裔一方，大蕃為主。自今而後，屏去兵革，宿忿舊惡，廓焉消除，追崇舅甥，曩昔結援。邊堠撤警，戍烽韜煙，患難相恤，暴掠不作，亭障甌脫，絕其交侵。襟帶要害，謹守如故，彼無此詐，此無彼虞。嗚呼！愛人為仁，保境為信，畏天為智，是神為禮，有一不至，抅災於躬。塞山崇崇，河水湯湯，日吉辰良，奠其兩疆，西為大蕃，東實巨唐。大臣執簡，播告秋方。」

大蕃贊普及宰相缽闡布、尚綺心兒等，先寄盟文要節云：
「蕃、漢兩邦，各守見管本界，彼此不得征，不得討，不得相為寇讎，不得侵謀境上。若有所疑，或要捉生問事，便給衣糧放還。」
今並依從，更無添改。

English Translation (I)

《Old Book of Tang》 Volume 196 Biographies 146

On the tenth of October, first year of Emperor Mu-zong (821AD), a treaty was entered with the minister from Tibet. Our prime minister, ministers of the imperial secretariat, the imperial ombudsman, the minister of rites, the minister of granaries, the minister of the imperial capital, general of the imperial capital’s guard all attended the ceremony. The treaty read:
......
On this earth and under the heaven, folks are in want of governance. When governance is lacking, folks engage in mutual destruction. In the central domain, Tang is the sole realm. In the west terrain, great Tibet is the sovereign. From this day forward, arms shall be laid down, old feud shall be let rest, division shall be let go. The uncle nephew’s bond shall be renewed, the alliance shall be revived. Fortification at the border shall be relaxed, smoke signals shall be extinguished. Help shall be extended in calamities, raids and pillage shall cease. Watchtowers and barricades shall be disentangled, cross border intrusions shall end. Vital routes and main passages, shall be guarded as in the past. One side shall not commit treachery, nor shall it need to worry about the other’s betrayal. Oh! Loving the folks is called mercy, respecting the border is called honor, fearing the heaven is called wisdom, revering the deities is called humility. When one of these is lacking, calamity may strike. Where the mountain is imposing, where the river is majestic, on this auspicious day, at this opportune time, offerings are made, to these two lands. In the west is the great Tibet, in the east is the vast Tang. We the ministers having been given the decree, make this proclamation to the sunset direction.

Earlier, Tsenpo of the great Tibet and his prime minister Zhang-Bro-sTag sent main clauses of the treaty, which stated:

The two countries of Tibet and Han, each is to safeguard its own territory. There shall be no aggression or invasion, no animosity or hostility, no incursion or intrusion. If some person is suspected, or arrested and interrogated, such person shall be then let return (to his own country) and given necessary clothes and food.

These were all accepted, without addition or alteration.

Stone lion on burial mound of King Ralpachan in Chyongye valley

Original Text (II)

《新唐書》列傳141卷216

吐蕃又請交馬於赤嶺，互市於甘松嶺。宰相裴光庭曰：「甘松中國阻，不如許赤嶺。」乃聽以赤嶺為界，表以大碑，刻約其上。又請《五經》，敕秘書寫賜，並遣工部尚書李暠往聘，賜物萬計。吐蕃遣使謝，且言：「唐、吐蕃皆大國，今約和為久長計，恐邊吏有妄意者，請以使人對相曉敕，令昭然具知。」帝又令金吾將軍李佺監赤嶺樹碑，詔張守珪與將軍李行祎、吐蕃使者莽布支分諭劍南、河西州縣曰：「自今二國和好，無相侵暴。」

English Translation (II)

《New Book of Tang》 Volume 216 Biographies 141

(In the seventeenth year of Emperor Xuan-zong or 729AD)
Tibet then requested opening of horse market in Chi-ling, and trading post in Gan-song-ling. Prime minister Pei Guang-ting advised:

Gan-song-ling is China’s defense line. It’s better to concede Chi-ling.

Chi-ling was thus conceded to be the border. To mark the border a great stela was erected, onto which the treaty was carved. Tibet then requested the Five Classics. An emperor’s edict was given instructing the secretariat to copy these. Li Hao, the minister of works, was sent (to Tibet), bringing tens of thousands of gifts bestowed. Tibet also sent back a commissioner expressing its thankfulness. The commissioner relayed:

Tang and Tibet are both great powers. The current treaty is for the sake of enduring peace. To avoid hostility being reignited by unsanctioned deeds of minor border officials, (we) request that emperor’s messengers be sent to make the peace treaty known to all.

The emperor thus instructed Li Quan-jian, general of the imperial capital’s guard, and Zhang Shou-gui together with general Li Xing-wei, also the commissioner from Tibet, to inform prefectures and counties to the south of Jian-men pass and to the west of the Yellow river, saying:

From now on the two countries are in peace and amity. No more incursions or violence shall be allowed.



Original Text (III)

《宋史》卷492 列傳251 外國8 – 吐蕃唃廝囉 董氊 阿里骨 瞎征 趙思忠

English Translation (III)

《Book of Song》 Volume 492 Biographies 251 Foreign countries 8 – Tibet; Tsongkha

Sonam Gyatso, the third Dalai Lama

Original Text (IV)

《明史》卷331 列傳219

時有僧鎖南堅錯者，能知已往未來事，稱活佛，順義王俺答亦崇信之。萬曆七年，以迎活佛為名，西侵瓦剌，為所敗。此僧戒以好殺，勸之東還。俺答亦勸此僧通中國，乃自甘州遺書張居正，自稱釋迦摩尼比丘，求通貢，饋以儀物。居正不敢受，聞之於帝。帝命受之，而許其貢。由是，中國亦知有活佛。此僧有異術能服人，諸番莫不從其教，即大寶法王及闡化諸王，亦皆俯首稱弟子。自是西方止知奉此僧，諸番王徒擁虛位，不復能施其號令矣。

English Translation (IV)

《Book of Ming》 Volume 331 Biographies 219

A monk named Sonam Gyatso, who knew the past and future, was called a living Buddha. Altan Khan also paid homage to him. In the seventh year of Emperor Shen-zong (1579AD), Altan Khan invaded the Oirats to the west, in the name of a pilgrimage to the living Buddha. He suffered a military defeat and the monk counselled him against committing further killing and entreated him to return to the east. Altan Khan also persuaded this monk to contact China. Thus the monk wrote from Gan-zhou (i.e. Amdo) to (prime minister) Zhang Ju-zheng, self-proclaimed as Śākyamuni Bhikkhu, requested to become a tributary state, and sent gifts. (Prime minister) Zhang Ju-zheng dared not to accept the request, and relayed it to the emperor. The emperor decreed it to be accepted and gave it the status of the tributary state. From then on, China also learnt the existence of the living Buddha. This monk had special abilities that earned him veneration. All the outlying regions followed his teachings. Even the Karmapa and kings of the Phagmodrupa all devoted themselves to him as his disciples. From that point on, all the west became devotees to this monk, thus the many princes held their titles only in name, but could no longer give orders.



Original Text (V)

《清史稿》卷525列傳312

四年，遣使貽土伯特汗及達賴書，謂「自古所制經典，不欲其泯滅不傳，故遣使敦請」云。嗣以喀爾喀有違言，不果。顧實汗復致書達賴、班禪、藏巴汗，約共遣使朝貢。達賴、班禪及藏巴汗、顧實汗遣伊喇固散胡圖克圖等貢方物，獻丹書，先稱太宗為曼殊師利大皇帝。曼殊者，華言「妙吉祥」也。使至盛京，太宗躬率王大臣迓於懷遠門。御座為起，迎於門閾，立受書，握手相見，升榻，設座於榻右，命坐，賜茶，大宴於崇政殿。間五日一宴，命王、貝勒以次宴。留八閱月乃還。八年，報幣於達賴曰：「大清國寬溫仁聖皇帝致書於金剛大士達賴喇嘛。今承喇嘛有拯濟眾生之志，欲興扶佛法，遣使通書，朕心甚悅，茲恭候安吉。凡所欲言，令察罕格龍等口授。」復貽書於班禪及紅帽喇嘛濟東胡圖古圖等，亦如之。是為西藏通好之始。

English Translation (V)

《Draft History of Qing》 Volume 525  Biographies 312

In the fourth year of Emperor Tai-zong (1640AD), the emperor sent his ambassador to carry a letter to the khan of Tibet and the Dalai Lama. The letter read:

The classics bequeathed by the ancients, I wish not for their lost or discontinuation. Therefore I sent my ambassador to extend my invitation.

The invitation did not come to fruition due to the Gorkha rescinding their words. Güshi Khan then wrote to the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama, and the Khan of Tsangpa once again, proposing all sides to send their ambassadors and tributes. The Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama, the Khan of Tsangpa and Güshi Khan thus sent (?) Khutuktu carrying gifts and a letter, addressing Emperor Tai-zong as Emperor Manjushri. Manjushri’s meaning in Chinese was auspice. When the ambassador arrived at Mukden, Emperor Tai-zong, leading the prince-ministers, humbly greeted the ambassador at the Huai-yuan Gate. His majesty raised from the throne, waited the ambassador at the gate, and received the letter from the ambassador while standing, then greeted the ambassador by holding his hands. Then his majesty took the throne, arranged a seat to the right side of the throne for the ambassador, asked him to sit down, bequeathed him tea, and held a magnificent feast at the Chong-zheng palace, which was followed by a banquet once every five days. Princes were instructed by the emperor to attend these banquets to honour the guest. The ambassador remained for more than eight months before returning. In the eighth year of Emperor Tai-zong (1644AD), the emperor wrote to the Dalai Lama, saying:

The benevolent merciful holy emperor of the great Qing empire wrote to Vajradhara the diamond Buddha Dalai Lama. Basking in your Lama’s vow to save and benefit all sentient beings, your desire to invigorate and spread the Buddhist dharma, and your commissioning of an ambassador carrying your letter, my heart is full of joy. I humbly wish your good health and auspice. I’ve instructed (?) to convey the rest of my words.

The emperor also sent letters to the Panchen Lama and Red Hat Lama Tatsag Khutuktu, following the same formalities. This is the beginning of the friendly relationship with Tibet.

Original Text (VI)

《民國公報》武漢1912年

查鐘穎乃滿清定斬監候貽谷之胞侄，不學無術，手段卑污。前在四川協統任事，浮躁跋扈。因虧空公款，大受輿論攻擊，不得已乃招募蜀中流民無賴千余人，組成陸軍一協，率之進藏。該軍抵拉薩後，因素未受軍事教育，放蕩無羈，在外奸淫擄掠，無所不為，藏人莫不切齒痛恨。

English Translation (VI)

《Republic Gazette》1912 Wu-han

It’s revealed that Zhong Ying was the nephew of Yi Gu, who was on the death row during the Manchurian Qing era. Zhong Ying was unlettered and unqualified, unscrupulous and unbecoming. When previously acting as a lieutenant in Si-chuan, he was known for being an impatient tyrant. Due to stealing public money, he was assailed relentlessly in the public opinion. Running out of means, he recruited a few thousand unemployed and thugs from Si-chuan, organised them into an army unit, and led it into Tibet. After this unit arrived in Tibet, due to its lack of military education, it acted in rogue and undisciplined ways. Committing rapes and robberies at will, it stopped at no moral boundaries. There was not one Tibetan who did not loathe them with a passion.



Original Text (VII)

《中華民國解》章炳麟1907年

西藏回部，明時徒有冊封，其在先漢，三十六國，雖隸都護，比於附庸，而非屬土。今之回部又與三十六國有殊。蒙古則自古未嘗賓服...故以中華民國之經界言之，越南、朝鮮二郡必當恢復者也；緬甸一司則稍次也；西藏、回部、蒙古三荒服則任其去來也。

English Translation (VII)

《On the Republic of China》(published in 1907) by Zhang Bing-lin

Tibet and Altishahr, were subjected to empty claims of suzerainty in the Ming era. In the old Han era, while the thirty six countries were subjected to the Protectorate of the western regions, they were client states, not Chinese territory. In addition, there are differences between today’s Altishahr and the thirty six countries. As for Mongolia, it has never acknowledged Chinese superiority throughout history.
......
Therefore, considering the border of the Republic of China, the two prefectures of Vietnam and Korea should certainly return. The protected state of Burma is of secondary importance. As for the barren countries of Tibet, Altishahr and Mongolia, it should be up to them to make decisions on joining or leaving.

17 March 1959 Thousands of Tibetan women surround the Potala Palace, the main residence of the Dalai Lama, to protest against Chinese rule and repression in Lhasa, Tibet. Hours later, fighting broke out and the Dalai Lama was forced to flee to safety in India

Original Text (VIII)

《完成民族主義維護國際和平》《總統蔣公思想言論總集》卷21中華民國34年8月24日主持中央常會、國防最高委員會聯席會議講演

西藏民族的政治地位，也是久懸未決的問題。我可以負責聲明，如果西藏民族此時提出自治的願望，我們政府亦必將遵循傳統，賦予其高度的自治。如果他們將來在經濟條件上能夠達到獨立自主的時候，我們政府亦將如對外蒙古一樣的精神扶助他們的獨立。但必須其能鞏固其本身永久獨立的地位，不可蹈襲高麗過去的覆轍。

English Translation (VIII)

《Attaining Nationalist Goals and Defending International Peace》– speech made while presiding over the joint session of the Kuomintang central standing committee and the national defense headquarters. August 24, 1945 – 《Complete Collection of President Chiang Kai-shek’s Views and Words》Volume 21

As regards the political status of Tibet, it’s also a long-lasting question. I solemnly declare that if the Tibetans should at this time express a wish of self-government, our government would, in conformity with our sincere tradition, accord it a very high degree of autonomy. If in the future they fulfil the economic requirement for Independence, the national government will, as in the case of outer-Mongolia, help them to attain that status. But Tibet must be able to consolidate its independence and protect its continuity so as not to become another Korea.



Original Text (IX)

《告西藏同胞書》《總統蔣公思想言論總集》 卷33中華民國48年3月26日

我現在更鄭重聲明：西藏未來的政治制度與政治地位，一俟摧毀匪偽政權之後，西藏人民能自由表示其意志之時，我政府當本民族自決的原則，達成你們的願望。

English Translation (IX)

《Statement to Tibetan Brethren》March 26, 1959 – 《Complete Collection of President Chiang Kai-shek’s Views and Words》Volume 33

I now make this further declaration solemnly, as to the future political system and political status of Tibet, once the rogue pretender (CCP) regime is overthrown, so that the Tibetan people are able to express their wills freely, my government shall realize your wishes, based on the principle of self-determination.

(END)

Gyallu (Tibetan national anthem) Chinese translation

Dear Tibetan friends ^o^

I'm a Chinese reader and supporter of the Tibetan freedom struggle. I wrote this open letter after watching a video on YouTube in which Mr Tashi Tsering, a Tibetan activist living in Taiwan, (he is the current Tibetans in Taiwan Welfare Association chairperson and former Tibetan Youth Congress Taiwan chapter chair), encouraged Chinese-speaking supporters of Tibet learn to sing Gyallu, the Tibetan national anthem.

I'm convinced that to have many many Chinese-speaking supporters of Tibet singing out loud Gyallu in rallies, marches, protests, demonstrations… we need a version of Chinese translation that’s not only faithful to the original Tibetan text, but also memorable good Chinese lyrics.

With reverence and devotion in my heart, I've made some humble efforts to revise slightly the current Chinese translation provided on the Central Tibetan Administration website. The whole purpose of this exercise is to make it easier for a Chinese supporter to “sing along" in Chinese to the tune of the Tibetan national anthem.

If you have any suggestion about the translation, please let me know. Thank you so much!!!

༄༄། བོད་རྒྱལ་ཁབ་ཀྱི་རྒྱལ་གླུ།

སྲིད་ཞིའི་ཕན་བདེའི་འདོད་རྒུ་འབྱུང་བའི་གཏེར།
ཐུབ་བསྟན་བསམ་འཕེལ་ནོར་བུའི་འོད་སྣང་འབར།
བསྟན་འགྲོའི་ནོར་འཛིན་རྒྱ་ཆེར་སྐྱོང་བའི་མགོན།
འཕྲིན་ལས་ཀྱི་རོལ་མཚོ་རྒྱས།
རྡོ་རྗེའི་ཁམས་སུ་བརྟན་པས་ཕྱོགས་ཀུན་བྱམས་བརྩེས་སྐྱོང།
གནམ་བསྐོས་དགའ་བ་བརྒྱ་ལྡན་དབུ་འཕང་དགུང་ལ་རེག
ཕུན་ཚོགས་སྡེ་བཞིའི་མངའ་ཐང་རྒྱས།
བོད་ལྗོངས་ཆོལ་ཁ་གསུམ་གྱི་ཁྱོན་ལ་བདེ་སྐྱིད་རྫོགས་ལྡན་གསར་པས་ཁྱབ།
ཆོས་སྲིད་ཀྱི་དཔལ་ཡོན་དར།
ཐུབ་བསྟན་ཕྱོགས་བཅུར་རྒྱས་པས་འཛམ་གླིང་ཡངས་པའི་སྐྱེ་རྒུ་ཞི་བདེའི་དཔལ་ལ་སྦྱོར།
བོད་ལྗོངས་བསྟན་འགྲོའི་དགེ་མཚན་ཉི་འོད་ཀྱིས།
བཀྲ་ཤིས་འོད་སྣང་འབུམ་དུ་འཕྲོ་བའི་གཟིས།
ནག་ཕྱོགས་མུན་པའི་གཡུལ་ལས་རྒྱལ་གྱུར་ཅིག།

西藏國歌《佛陀光輝》跟唱版
源泉寶藏政教得安康。
佛陀三寶永放祥瑞光。
大地怙主普渡眾生往。
教化施。事業興。浩浩渺渺如海洋。
永住金剛界。慈愛治四方。天賜噶登頗章。
四部圓滿威力強。新元肇始喜悅平安如意快樂遍三疆。
佛法盛。傳十方。普世眾生和平護佑離苦得樂趨善良。
吐蕃眾生佛法耀如芒。
慈悲智慧鋒銳不可擋。
邪惡愚昧黑暗盡照亮。



Faithfully yours,
lmlmlmlm666 ^-^
20 May 2018

(END)

The Clarity of Commitment

Dear Tibetan friends ^o^

I’m a Chinese reader and while reading the Phayul website I learnt that following Jamyang Norbu la’s recent article The Clarity of Commitment (part one), some disagreements and discussions ensued. (THE CLARITY OF COMMITTMENT PART 1 By Jamyang Norbu; A Response to Jamyang Norbu By Tenzin Dolma)

Not a messiah, nor perfect, but as always Jamyang la’s lone voice woke up us from any kind of daydream we might be in and impelled us to abandon any wishful thinking that Tibet will regain any degree of freedom before His Holiness pass away, or that His Holiness will be with us forever, or that the Chinese people will all repent and become supporters of Tibet very soon. Jamyang la constantly reminded the Tibetan people the stark reality that they cannot lean on His Holiness, or any third party and wait passively for freedom to come, that they must fight every minute to wrestle back their freedom.

Whenever I read Rangzen and Middle-way supporters in exile debating each other about Tibet’s future, I could not help but feel a great sense of guilt and impotence. What I, as a Chinese individual, could do to help ease your agony, when many of my fellow Chinese are still blindly following the Chinese communist party (CCP) in loathing the Tibetans, the Taiwanese, the Uyghur, and the Hong Kong citizens as “separatists” even though they themselves are treated by the CCP as mere stooges, expendable, and preys.

As an individual, I have little to offer to you other than my letters and videos. All I could hope for is that my devotion and nonstop communication could bring a tiny bit of relief to your burning indignation. I share your disappointment that some Tibetans in exile seem content with clicking Tibetan singing and dancing videos and attending His Holiness’s birthday celebrations as if these actions alone are sufficient to bring freedom to Tibet. (No one can deny the value of these beautiful music videos and celebrations.) I share your frustration that self-immolators’ painful and lonely journeys, their words advocating Tibet’s complete independence, are not put adequately at the front and centre of every Tibetan’s consciousness. I share your feeling of humiliation when seeing some Tibetans might be all too willing to give up the goal of Tibet’s complete independence at the first sign of some Chinese showing some “goodwill”, either sincerely or condescendingly.

When thinking about these, I also start to ask myself: “Have your videos and writings given your viewers/readers a false impression that the 1.3 billion Chinese people will all soon become Tibet supporters – thus helped pushing the Middle-way supporters further away from the Rangzen advocates? Have you, although not on purpose, contributed to driving a wedge between the Rangzen and Middle-way camps? Have your efforts inadvertently helped cloud the goal of the Tibetan struggle and added to Tibetan disunity?” In case my worries are true (I hope not), may I use the present controversy surrounding Jamyang la’s article as an opportunity to plead with you, my Tibetan friends:

Please do not push away Rangzen supporters – your fellow Tibetans – fearing that their stance will hinder Chinese’s “goodwill” in giving Tibetans “qualified freedom”. Please face the fact that proposals such as “except independence, all issues can be discussed” (put forward by Deng Xiao-ping to Gyalo Thondup la on 12 March 1979) cannot be taken seriously. The reason for us dismissing such proposals is not about the trustworthiness of the Chinese people, it is not even about the trustworthiness (or lack thereof) of the CCP regime, it is about the proposer’s lack of very basic understanding of democracy and of an open society.

How can a “qualified free” society function? Will everyone be allowed to express any idea except the idea of Tibetan independence? It is true that in a functioning free society we have accepted one or two compromises to free speech – only in exceptional circumstances, for example, “verbal intimidation or threat of violence (including state violence) toward an individual, a gender, a race, or a language” is to be excluded from free speech. Once we agree to exclude “open intimidation” from the “right of free speech”, experience shows that we must also exclude the “veiled intimidation” otherwise the exclusion would be meaningless – this we have also accepted. But when it comes to other topics, such as the topic of Tibetan independence, the situation is different, because the authority can make the “veil” so big that it can cover every topic and any topic. For example, it may be used to forbid discussion of the Tibetan language as an unique ancient language, because this may be “veiled advocacy of Tibetan independence”; it may be used to forbid the study of Tibet’s history as an independent country, as it may be “veiled advocacy of Tibetan independence”; it may be used to supress protests demanding more funding for Tibetan language schools, as these may be “veiled advocacy of Tibetan independence”. If we accept all these, then what is the difference between this “qualified freedom” and the unbearable situation in Tibet we are having today? Then again, suppose the law “protecting free speech except on the topic of pursuing Tibetan independence” is followed to the letter. For example, the writer of a book on Tibetan history concluding her/his book with the following words: “The facts presented so far show that independence has always been the Tibetan people’s inspiration throughout their history” is not charged for breaching any law; but if she/he add one more sentence: “…so it may continue to be so for the future generations”, she/he is then prosecuted by the police. Will this legalist approach then settle the matter? No. Over time, Rangzen supporters, youth, students, activists who read that book (even without the last “incriminating” sentence), and many other similar books, will walk to the streets to demand independence anyway. Because a society accustomed to freedom can no longer accept any undebated, unscrutinised, unreasonable yoke on their liberty – all you need to see is how fiercely the people of Hong Kong have fought against the restrictions put on their freedom by the CCP regime. At this junction, cracking down one or two street protests by the authority cannot prevent more frequent, larger scale protests. The authority faces the choice of either banning all free expressions (including “veiled advocacy of Tibetan independence”) and go all the way back to the CCP style tyranny, or bowing to people’s demand and allowing them to peacefully pursue Tibetan independence.

Openness is a defining character of a free society, so having a “free” society with a taboo topic, a “red line”, is a self-defeating proposition. The limitation put on advocacy of violence discussed earlier is about the manner in which diverse goals should be pursued by their respective supporters in an open society, it is not about what goal is allowed and what goal is not allowed – it is about “how” and not about “what”. (Although the violent state apparatus – police, military, intelligence – is accepted as a “necessary evil”, they must be subjected to carefully designed and reviewed checks and balances to prevent abuse.) The lowest expectation for a free Tibet should include Rangzen political parties participating in free elections like the Scottish National Party in Scotland or the Bloc Québécois and Parti Québécois in Canada. Recognising that the Chinese people need time to learn democratic mechanisms and to be accustomed to an open society, Tibetans might offer to delay the referendums on Tibetan independence by several decades as a part of a Tibetan-Chinese deal. But referendums on regional independence cannot be denied to the people indefinitely because it is a natural part of the democratic process, a legitimate cause in an open society, and a people denying this reality is denying their own status as a free people.

After suffering 60 years of servitude under the Chinese rule, most of you, my Tibetan friends, have a fair dose of suspicion toward any Chinese. You may rightly hold such suspicion toward me: Why do you try to play nice to us Tibetans? What will you gain from the complete independence of Tibet? I will bypass the moral reasons (not because they are unimportant), nor will I indulge in explaining my belief that language diversity is vital for individuals’ liberty in general (in our case, fighting for the Tibetan language’s survival), please allow me to discuss practicalities only. The goal that I commit myself to fight for is not the specific outcome of Tibet becoming a sovereign state, but the Tibetan people’s inalienable right to decide on this issue of total independence through peaceful referendums if they wish to. It is the free, peaceful and repeatable public decision-making process, rather than its outcome one way or another, that I commit myself to fight for.

As a Chinese I want China to be free, I dream a day when I set foot on my hometown I could read, study and speak without fear, I desire this no less than I desire breathing. But the obstacles on the road toward freedom are more than just the CCP regime – the obstacles are more complex and more fluid than the CCP regime. Experience shows us that the individual liberty that we hold so dear, relies on the small voids among a delicate balance between many larger forces to survive, and attaining those delicate balances is an even more formidable task than toppling the old tyranny. (By saying “larger forces” I mean geopolitical settings, internal struggle and/or collusion between the commercial elite and the military elite, demographic composition, cultural identities and identity politics etc. – even luck plays a role.) Therefore the end of the old tyranny is only a necessary condition, but not the sufficient condition for freedom to come. On the corpse of the Soviet Union and the ruins of the Chechen war Putin’s KGB regime grew out, after a fleeting period of Russian renaissance. On the debris left by the Ba'athist tyrants the Daesh protruded its head from the Sunni-Shia rift, after a short-lived Arab Spring. I worry and I care because I see this ominous vision on the corpse of the CCP regime in the future. I see that the lack of cooperation and coordination between the peoples – Tibetan, Chinese, Taiwanese, Uyghur, Hong Kong citizens… – on a commonly accepted political framework, will feed the demagogues, racists and lunatics from the Chinese side, or from all sides. They will devour our freedom struggle’s fruits soon after we win the fruits.

This is why I am convinced that we must cooperate. If we could gradually build consensus on a future framework in which peoples (of any region) could decide on voluntary union or voluntary independence by free, peaceful and repeatable referendums, then we may have a chance to contain the tidal waves of bigotry, hatred, misunderstanding, and war mongering fostered by the CCP over decades and unleashed by its collapse. I strongly believe that a “nation-building first, decision on sovereignty later” approach can be a good base for that consensus. This approach means enshrined rights of self-determination by any region and all regions, through free, peaceful and repeatable referendums; together with a cooling-off period (of several decades) within which nations undertake not to hold referendums on independence, rather focus on self-governance (like that of Scotland or Quebec), building open societies, broadening skills, promoting language diversity. As the saying goes “the devil is in the detail”. If we can design a framework where each nation’s interest is best served in keeping its side of the bargain, hopefully by the end of the moratorium on independence referendums, the peoples living on the lands currently occupied by the “people’s republic of China (PRC)” are much more mature modern citizens, who have cooler heads, broader minds, and tenderer hearts than an average PRC citizen of today, and capable of making wise decisions. This is my personal thoughts, my humble personal contribution to the public debate about our future.

Even from the Tibetans’ prospective/interests alone, talking to the ordinary Uyghur, Taiwanese, Chinese, Hong Kong citizens, and cooperating with the fair-minded portion of them in our common freedom struggle is better than going it alone. The nations are more likely to succeed and to secure more desirable terms if all standing together in negotiating an omnibus agreement with the Chinese nation, than going alone in dealing with any future Chinese regime, democratic or otherwise. (Taiwan is a special case as it is already an independent country on all aspects.) It is true that in Iraq and Syria the Kurdish people have, through military means, gained a degree of de facto independence after Saddam Hussein’s demise (though constantly under military threats from all sides, which jeopardised the Kurdish society’s internal liberalisation). But it is questionable, to say the least, whether a chain of complex geopolitical and military developments in their part of the world could be “clinically transplanted” to our part of the world. More importantly, we have a better alternative through communication and cooperation. Many Chinese people are pragmatic in nature, we have had a failed fanatic experiment (with communism) quite recently and many of Chinese do not have appetite for another fanatic experiment (with nationalist militarism or whatnot). The reason that many Chinese appear aloof to badly needed political reform is because all CCP propaganda machines have been hammering into them a lie that “change = chaos”. When there were failed political transitions such as those in the Arab world, the CCP maximised Chinese people’s exposure to the bad news. When there were successful transitions like many cases in Eastern Europe, the CCP kept it very quiet. When the successful transition in Taiwan was so close to home that the CCP could not block all information, it twisted it and made Taiwan’s democratic reforms sound like a part of a bigger Western/Japanese conspiracy to “break up” and subdue the Chinese nation. If we could show the Chinese people there can be peaceful and orderly reforms, there can be sensible political compromises, that political reform is not about subjugating the Chinese nation but about the freedom of all nations and individuals, we may ease their paranoia about political change, even hasten the CCP regime’s voluntary reform or involuntary downfall.

Dorje Tsering, Kalsang Wangdu, Sonam Tso, and other self-immolators’ sacrifices for Tibet’s independence must not, and will not be in vain. It’s my conviction that their noble suffering is not only meaningful to all Tibetans, but also immensely meaningful to the Chinese. Their chosen path to make their unbearable torturous living conditions known, without inflicting physical harm to their tormentors, is unfamiliar to most Chinese individuals. (Any finger-pointing at self-immolation instances recorded in historical Buddhist texts, without focusing on the current Chinese-imposed torturous living condition in Tibet, which makes death seem sweeter than living, is a form of whitewash.) These Tibetan individuals’ chosen path of protest, as a statement of their noble values, has constantly haunted me since 2012, forced me to rethink who I am. Have we Chinese in recent time always been victims of European imperialism and never evil perpetrators, or at least, arrogant fools? In the past 150 years, under the European hegemony, the magnitude of changes bewildered the Chinese, with the mountain of shame of being deemed “inferior race” on the back, we were suffocated by its weight, and with our heads hung low in shame, we viewed recent histories from a very narrow perspective: the Chinese nationalist perspective. In the past 60 years, under the Maoist cult plus tyranny, you Tibetans lost your land (while remained proud Tibetans), whereas we Chinese lost our mind.

To all Tibetan readers and viewers who have come across my channel, I have said SORRY in the past, as an ordinary Chinese individual. I do not hesitate to say it again, my Tibetan friends, I’m SORRY, I am sorry for the deaths and sorrow we brought to you because of the Chinese greed, the Chinese ignorance, and the Chinese paranoia. We have wronged you, we have injured you, we have stolen from you, and now, we need you. We need your help in our common struggle. Don’t abandon us, please, don’t be dragged by us down to the filthy gutter of nationalism and collectivism. Elevate us to your altitude with the faith that have always been glowing deeply inside your heart, the manifold truths of insights and compassion. We can triumph over our enemy, while remain being ourselves. I may not see that triumphant day before I die, but I will not stop so long as I live. This is the clarity of my commitment, an ordinary Chinese individual’s commitment to you.

Thank you  ^-^
lmlmlmlm666
20-30 June 2016


Below is a video that i made in 2013, which was dedicated to all Tibetans who sacrificed their lives for freedom...

(END)

Tibetan Nationalism Cannot Defeat Chinese Nationalism, Individualism CAN

Dear Tibetan friends  ^-^

I am a Chinese reader feeling very depressed after reading about alleged unfair treatment to pro-independence political parties in the recent Tibetan election.

To pro-middle-way friends: please treat pro-independence Tibetans fairly, because any liberal democracy says that “let’s debate now, but after this debate, the minority should shut their mouth in the future, for the sake of social unity” will cease to be a liberal democracy and become a totalitarian state. A free Tibet, indeed a free China, must allow peaceful advocacy of any views including peaceful pursuit of independence by any region inside Tibet or inside China.

To pro-independence friends: please continue to stand firmly for Tibet’s right to have independence, but please separate “Tibet’s right to have independence” from “premature declaration of Tibetan independence” as two very different subjects. I personally believe that a promise to delay Tibetan referendum on independence by several decades, in exchange for the Chinese people’s (painfully slow, but genuine) recognition of Tibet’s inalienable right to vote on the subject of independence, will work better for the two nations in the long term.

Rangzen friends, please reject the cynical view that Chinese people living inside Tibet will always vote against Tibetan independence – in fact how do they vote will really depend on how successful Tibet will become as a tolerant, multi-lingual, multi-cultural open society that gives everyone a sense of “belonging/at home”. You can see the Chinese-speaking people of Taiwan choosing a new self-identity as “Taiwanese” rather than “Chinese”. You can see French-speaking people of Quebec identifying with Canada rather than with France. But you can also see examples of failures, such as what happened in eastern Ukraine and what happened under the partisan Shia government in Iraq and the nationalist government in Zimbabwe. China has utterly failed in making Tibetan inhabitants feel they “belong” to China, can Tibet succeed in making Chinese inhabitants feel they “belong” to Tibet?

The first few years after the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) downfall will be a very dangerous period, we must not allow nationalists on any side (Chinese, Tibetan, etc) to stir up racial hatred and kidnap all the nations into war and ethnic cleansing (committed by any side)! To avoid this, you – the Tibetan resistant movement, please refuse to be a mere “Mirror Image” of us – the Chinese oppressors. Fighting Chinese nationalism with Tibetan nationalism, fighting one version of “filtered” history with another version of “filtered” history, fighting “their intolerance” with “our intolerance”, replacing “their assimilation policy” with “our assimilation policy” may sound logical, even practical, but it is detrimental to the Tibetan nation and Tibetan culture in the long term. A new independent Tibet should not be built on the Tibetan blood bond (or in another word, race), but built on an idea, an idea that is an individualistic “multination-state” – different from the 19th century European “single-nation-state” model. The Tibetan struggle has been so far so successful – compared to, for example, the Uyghur struggle – is because you have fought Chinese nationalism with Tibetan individualism, fought idiocy and bigotry with an open mind and intelligence, fought intolerance with tolerance. As long as both the Tibetan and the Chinese sides use the “patriotism/nationalism” narrative, the Chinese chauvinists have an advantage in mobilising a population base that’s much larger than that of Tibetan’s (Chinese population size being 200 times of the Tibetan population). But by refusing to play the Chinese chauvinists’ nationalism game, Tibetans will deny the Chinese chauvinists a rallying point in manipulating the wider Chinese society, you will negate their advantage. Instead, you draw the Chinese people – not as an indistinguishable mass, but as unique, independent individuals – into supporting the Tibetan cause and isolate the Chinese chauvinists over time.

Please allow me to quote some words from the early 20th century Chinese independence advocates:

Quote (1)
Sigh! My Han (Chinese) nation!
Isn’t it the Han nation who (should) soar over the ancestral realm!
Isn’t it the Han nation who (should) stand independently on the land of Asians!
Isn’t it the Han nation who (should) become great modern citizens!
Sigh! My Han nation!
May you repel the foreign evil who denied you sovereignty!
May you redeem your blemished history!
May your nation’s name be gazed in awe by humanity!
Your independence flag is now fluttering in the air!
Your liberty bell is now ringing on Yu’s earth!
Your independence hall is now dominating at the centre!
Oh!
May the heaven clear!
May the earth clear!
May the thunder roar!
May the lion be awakened!
- from a millennium of slumber!
Let the revolution come!
Let the independence come!
Long live the revolutionary independence of the imperial Han nation!
------ The Revolutionary Army (1903) by Zou Rong who died in a Manchurian prison

Quote (2)
Revise the (unequal) treaties! Restore the sovereignty! And regain complete independence!
Revenge the degradation! Resist the aggression! And rescue the civilisation!
------ A Sudden Look Back (1905) by Chen Tian-hua who deliberately drown himself at sea to “wake up” the Chinese to fight for independence

Quote (3)
All Asian nations who believe in the spirit of independence, who would like to follow our steps, may we unite under this same pledge.
------ Constitution of The Asian Friendship Society (1907) by Zhang Bing-lin who invented the name The Republic of China

Quote (4)
To progress through this path, we are sure that China can be delivered from its semi-colony status and become an independent country, standing proudly in the world.
------ Communique for The First National Congress of the Kuo-min-tang (1924)

Quote (5)
The Chinese history in the past century was a history of China gradually losing its independence, and becoming a colony. Yet it’s also a history of the Chinese people struggling for independence and liberty for the nation…… China must become an independent country, a country that enjoys equal status with other major world powers.
------ Statement regarding the abolishment of unequal treaties between China, the USA and  the Great Britain (1943) by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)

(Note: quotes are translated from Chinese texts by the author of this essay; original Chinese texts are available at the end of this essay)

The important task for us today, is not to be carried away by the passionate words and selfless sacrifices by the early Chinese independence advocates, but to reflect on the tragic and ironic fruit of their sacrifices, a fruit called the People’s Republic of China (PRC): a cruel, despotic, stifling, evil imperialist power that is in every bit contrary to the earlier revolutionaries’ dream. (Most ironically, within the borders of the contemporary PRC, “independence (獨立)” has become a dirty word of sorts that inspires fear and hatred, and is often deliberately miswritten in a pun form as “poison (毒立)”.) A key cause of this tragedy, I believe, is that the Chinese fought European imperialism with Chinese nationalism. Yet imperialism and nationalism are but two sides of the same coin, two edges of the same sword, two different manifestation of the same “collectivism”. Collectivism, no matter in its manifestation as imperialism, nationalism, or economic, gender, or religious classism, always treats individuals as nothing more than vessels and containers of a “collective identity”, and denies individuals as autonomous sentient beings who each has unique feelings, memories, experiences, and abilities to explore, to reason, and to learn from their unique memories and experiences. In the above quotes, we can observe a transition of tone from the earlier individualistic rebellion against European imperialism to a later signal of wanting to become a copycat of the imperialist powers (as shown in the last quote from the CCP’s statement in 1943).

I think the prevalent “Identity Crisis” in our time is a by-product of today’s world economic integration and increasingly larger scale of mass-production of goods and services, and the rocketing demand on natural resources (land and ocean). The pressure put by this process on marginalised nations, languages and cultures are huge. Their very (cultural and linguistic) survival (survival of their memories) are threatened.

I personally believe we must reform the 19th century European “single-nation-state” model to accommodate this new reality.  To put my belief in a new “multi-nations-state” model very briefly:

(1) A free Tibet (and a free China) should have designated administrative regions for all languages, big or small – it means that the designated language must be used as the sole language for administrative, legislative, legal and commercial purpose in that administrative region. A free Tibet (and a free China) is not an “USA melting pot” where most minority languages eventually die, it’s a painter’s palette where all languages live separately, harmoniously, permanently.

(2) A free Tibet (and a free China) must avoid the situation “everyone learning the language of her/his blood-ties”, i.e. “Tibetan-blood individuals speak the Tibetan language only, Chinese-blood individuals speak the Chinese language only”, etc. Instead, it should promote “Tibetan blood individuals learn Hindi, Hindu blood individuals learn Chinese, Chinese blood individuals learn Uyghur, Uyghur blood individuals learn Tibetan”, etc. – this is not to be achieved by force, but by financial incentives to parents sending their children to schools teaching in another language, or similar incentives.

(3) Government officials must be multilingual. Highly paid professions – lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc – must pass multilingual tests. Multilingual tests scores must be considered in University-entry selection process.

(4) Free movement of individuals between language-designated-administrative-regions are highly encouraged, to facilitate females and males to travel to another language environment, to learn that language, to work there, and to find interracial marriage mates there, and to produce multiracial, multilingual, multi-self-identity children.

This is a model based on individualism, on the belief that an individual is not a chip or a cog on a machine called “the nation”, “the national language/ culture”, “the national history”.  On the contrary, languages, cultures, histories, and memories are chips and cogs that make up an unique individual. Each individual owns a different combination of languages, cultures, histories, and memories. This, and especially how this individual uses her/his unique combination to discover and innovate, is what make an individual truly irreplaceable. The evil of oppressing a language, as China is now doing to the Tibetan language, is the oppressing of an individual’s right to observe the world through this unique language – an unique perspective, and her/his right to enjoy that unique view. Therefore individualism alone, is the most powerful propeller in fighting the evil of language oppression, and individualism alone, is the only boundless source of energy in preserving the Tibetan language and continuously creating Tibetan culture.

If we can successfully build an open society, rather than a “single-nation-state” in Tibet, then depending on what China were to do, there can be two outcomes: first is that China were to successfully do the same, to build a tolerant, multi-lingual, multi-cultural society, then the future referendum on Tibet independence (only people living inside Tibet vote) may fail to gain majority support. But that is okay. Because there can be a second, a third… referendum on independence in the future. The second possible outcome is that while Tibet successfully build a plural society, China were to fail to do the same, then the future referendum on Tibetan independence will probably win majority support and Tibet will become an independent country.

As the saying goes “the devil is in the detail”. If you, a Tibetan, and I, a Chinese, both love to live in a free open society, then we must build a well-thought-through political framework to nurture that freedom and openness, because no one else (CCP or the West) will do it for us. We must let Tibetan and Chinese people see a different vision, a vision of individualism, diversity, and infinite possibilities. Thank you  ^-^

lmlmlmlm666
https://www.youtube.com/user/lmlmlmlm666
3 December 2015

Note: below are the original Chinese texts of the quotes

嗚呼!我漢種。是豈飛揚祖國之漢種。是豈獨立亞細亞大陸上之漢種，是豈為偉大國民之漢種。嗚呼漢種！
掃蕩於涉爾主權之外來惡魔，爾國歷史之污點可洗，爾祖國之名譽飛揚，爾之獨立旗已高標於雲霄，爾之自由鐘已哄哄於禹城，爾之獨立廳已雄鎮於中央。嗟夫！天清地白，霹靂一聲，驚數千年之睡獅而起舞，是在革命，是在獨立。皇漢人種革命獨立萬歲！
---鄒容《革命軍》1903年

改條約，復政權，完全獨立；雪仇恥，驅外族，復我冠裳。
---陳天華《猛回頭》1905年

一切亞洲民族，有抱獨立主義者，願步玉趾，共結盟誓。
---章太炎《亞洲和親會約章》1907年

循是以進，必能使半殖民地的中國，變而為獨立的中國，以屹然於世界。
---《中國國民黨第一次全國代表大會宣言》民國十三年(1924)1月30日

中國近百年的歷史是中國逐步喪失獨立淪為半殖民地殖民地的歷史，同時，又是中國人民為民族獨立解放而英勇鬥爭的歷史......
中國要變成獨立的國家，要變成與世界列強列於平等地位與平等關系的國家。
---《中共中央關於慶祝中美中英間廢除不平等條約的決定》(1943年1月25日)

(END)