Background: Chinese People's Liberation army invaded Tibet in 1949. 10 March 1959, the Chinese govt invited HHDL to a performance without bodyguards. Tibetan laypeople surrounded his palace to make sure he didn't go, which turned into protests against chinese occupation. HHDL fled to india soon after.
Tibetans now celebrate uprising day on March 10, although the chinese don't recognize this day. In India, HHDL gives a political speech, then there's a freedom demonstration. Yesterday Liz and I went to the temple with Dawa but then left him outside to get a radio. This was a mistake, given that we didn't even try to tune in to the english translation. We ended up going in around 8 am, and got seats with a partially blocked view with pretty much everyone else in the program.
Everyone marched in to tibetan music (i bet you didnt know tibetans played bagpipes!) There was the Tibetan national anthem, and a prayer, and then a representative from the Tibetan govt spoke. A senator and his wife were there (help on the name? Robert someone, I think. He has a Himalayan foundation, apparently). HHDL eventually spoke, and it was cool to be able to see him in person and hear his voice (surprisingly strong and clear), but of course he spoke in Tibetan. I followed along in the English packet given out.
His speech touched on a lot of things, but perhaps the most important and interesting was HHDL's announcement that he will devolve all political power with the coming elections. That part of the speech made the BBC world news later that evening, which i didn't expect.
Afterwards, I did Kora around the temple, and saw Lopsang Sengey also doing Kora. I nodded to him and he returned the nod-it is awesome to have a political candidate return your gesture, no matter where you are. He was there by himself and didn't seem to be campaigning or anything, which seems strange given that it's ten days before the election. Different than american politics.
Then everyone gets together to scream slogans, wave flags, and march down to the courthouse in lower Dharamsala. There were cameras and film crews everywhere, and if you are a Tibetan who wants to return to Tibet it is not in your best interest to show your face at the rally.
Even though we started late, we found a shortcut and ended up in the middle of a group of Young Tibetans chanting in Tibetan, english, and Hindi. Walking with them through day to day Indian life made me really uncomfortable, especially because some of the slogans called on the US and UN to step in and help Tibet.
Standing in the middle of all those people screaming forced me to think about difficult things. Partially I don't feel that I know enough about the Tibet issue to really have an opinion on whether or not Tibet should be its own country, although if they want to be free and china agrees, that would be great. More than that, though, I felt personally attacked from the chants and I realize that there are many more implications than just Tibetan freedom if the US or UN get involved. It's the same question the EU and NATO face in Lydia, or did two days ago (I haven't kept up).
Global politics is really hard, and there's a difference between what I think all people deserve (i.e. Basic human rights) and how I think people should go about getting them. I wish I could say that in all situations you should always work towards getting people basic human rights as soon as possible, but unfortunately to live in the world the game doesn't always work like that. Pissing off China might help Tibetans, but would necessarily further US goals generally. One could argue that people and countries should revise their goals, and that's a fair point, but right now the best way to work towards change is from within the system, not by destroying the system.
In other words, I kind of missed the boat by being a philosophy major and should have been an ir dual, because I think it's interesting to figure out what the best system is and what people deserve (philosophy), I think it's important to make sure people actually get as much of what they deserve as possible (politics).
So the march kind of stressed me out, but Cynthia-la bought me, Nellie, Craig, and Liz lunch at India Coffee Shop, which is a chain from the 40s that rocks and if you are in india you should go to as many as possible. The food was great.
Afterwards I finished the movie water (thanks for the rec, Grandma! ) which is informative on widows in India but also really sad, so it goes along with the theme of the day. Then Dawa and I and a family friend participated in a candlelight vigil, which was my favorite part of the day. We walked through the streets with candles, singing a prayer that helps all people cultivate compassionate and loving minds. The candles also help departed minds find their way to their next bodies, even though I felt like I was carrying a candle in remembrance of Tibetans tortured and killed by Chinese. It ended at the temple with another prayer, and then calls for a free Tibet.
Amala made tomato soup, which is my favorite kind, and I learned there is no word in Tibetan for tomato, both of which cheered me up, but overall march 10 was one of the most difficult days I've had here.
It really forced me to think about things that affect the people around me on a day to day basis (Dawa wants to go to Tibet) but also about what I value more: freedom of speech? Feeling comfortable? My own interests? Is it reasonable to hang back from working towards a free Tibet because it might hurt US economic interests in China? Is it even ethical to produce things in China given the working conditions? On some level I'm appalled by my own answers, and feel really uneducated about basic issues. On another level, I feel like I'm letting myself off the hook if I say that, and that feels terrible. And if no one really knows what's going on in Tibet, can we afford to err on the side of caution as opposed to the side of doing too much and getting into trouble politically, economically, generally? Is that reason enough to ignore human problems?
It made me think of the piece "always go to the funeral" (http://www.npr.org/templates/text/s.php?sId=4785079&m=1). I believe you should always go to the funeral, or do what you can, but what counts as what you can here? What you can do, or what you're willing to do? It's unclear to me which is better.
(I Can't believe I wrote this whole thing on my phone.)
Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.7
No comments:
Post a Comment