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)