I lived in Dharamshala (home to the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government-in-exile) for 3 months a few years ago. My partner at the time went back to the US to visit family, and I didn't want to leave Asia so I went there since I had some interest in Buddhism at the time, too.
In random book stores, I met actual monks who had served time (in China) as political prisoners. One of which had also written a book about it. It was kind of funny to walk in into a book store, see these two guys drinking tea and then get pulled into a conversation out of curiosity. But, as for the stories themselves, probably not that funny. Some of the people (monks, mostly) had physical scars and their stories were anything but fun.
I also went to their offices (a modest distance away from the Dalai Lama temple, but very walkable) and got to speak to senior officials there. I asked them basics questions like, "What do you think is the future for Tibet?" and they were very accommodating.
We had tea, laughed and talked life. At first they thought I was a journalist, which was hilarious since my approach was very blunt but curious at the same time.
I certainly didn't ask that question from a political perspective. I'm not delusional to assume that Tibet and its people stand a chance against China.
And this was also reflected in their answers.
They're mostly concerned with ensuring that people have a safe passage out of there (having the ability to go to India and lead a life without oppression), while trying to negotiate peace deals for sacred locations and the deep Tibet. But I do think that this has been consistently falling on deaf ears. And, of course, they are hoping that the Dalai Lama will choose to reincarnate again to keep the "fight" going.
Getting out of Tibet is not exactly a walk in the park. Though, it is a walk. A long and gloomy walk through treacherous mountains which in 70%+ cases leave people with frostbite and other injuries.
I befriended a yoga teacher who was teaching an authentic Tibetan practice, and he sometimes had people over at his studio who had the day prior arrived to Dharamshala, from Tibet, through the mountain passages. It's unreal.
It's not like they have the luxury of an empire conglomerate like other modern countries, but India has been good to them.
Sorry to ask such a macabre question... but why would China ever release political prisoners? Moreover, why wouldn't they just disappear them?
I'm in no way suggesting they should or asserting China's great because they have standards when it comes to taking political prisoners... Nor am I stating that China is so barbarous that I would expect nothing less of them... I just don't know and wonder about the answers to these questions?
Sounds like the former prisoners you met still hold the beliefs that probably made them prisoners in the first place. They're still monks (practicing I assume). They're now back in their country of origin?
What was accomplished?
Time? The best I can come up with is that it bought China time to begin and continue ethnically cleanse (displacing, not killing) Tibet (as well as other regions), while not breaking any international laws or attracting enough negative attention to jeopardize any foreign trade or financial relationships?
Look at the news about what's supposedly going on in Xinjiang... China is getting nothing but bad publicity, but no international entity is pulling out of those areas or others in China because of what they're supposedly doing to the Uyghur population. If anyone is leaving China, it's been reported that it's for unrelated reasons.
If China just disappeared these people instead of putting them in camps, would the world react any differently? It doesn't seem like anyone has been able to substantiate these claims about the resorts (concentration camps), so how much harder would it be for China create the same level of control around a massive park or recreation area (polyandrion or burial site)?
Same reason Gulag prisoners were released.
It's a bureaucracy.
The law says that this "crime" warrants a 15 year sentence.
So he is sentenced to 15y. He is kept in the same labor camp with thieves &c.
If he survives, he walks, because that's what the bureaucratic protocol says.
Sometimes there is a separate rule that people like him are to be given an extra, say, 5 years for some "regime violation".
However, the point is that if _all_ political crimes warrant a life sentence, then the deterrent value of prison disappears.
They want to keep people afraid enough to comply, but not pissed off enough to rise up.
You can only afford so many Tiananmens before you crush the national morale, and with it, your autocratic pyramid scheme. China doesn't want to become North Korea.
Nit: you were likely in McLeod Ganj, Dharamshala is the city in the valley below (where few foreigners stay), and not terribly convenient to travel to/from if you were living in the city.
That, or you were up in Dharamkat and hiked down into town/temple area where there are needless to say many Tibetan monks from the diaspora -- amazing part of India.
The city (town) below is Lower Dharamshala, and McLeod Ganj is just another name for Upper Dharamshala. The Central Tibetan Administration, physically located in the upper part, consider themselves to be in "Dharamshala", and so does the Indian post office.
I find it interesting how different of an explanation this letter gives for the immolation VS what actually happened:
> Quảng Đức was protesting the persecution of Buddhists by the South Vietnamese government led by Ngô Đình Diệm, a staunch Roman Catholic. Photographs of his self-immolation circulated around the world, drawing attention to the policies of the Diệm government.
The quote you've provided aligns very much with the sentiment of the letter:
> I believe with all my heart that the monks who burned themselves did not aim at the death of the oppressors but only at a change in their policy. Their enemies are not man. They are intolerance, fanaticism, dictatorship, cupidity, hatred and discrimination which lie within the heart of man.
As a zen Buddhist, I've always kinda felt our Tibetan 'dharma brothers' style of buddhism (admittedly, I don't know a lot about) feels much more like a proper religion than the kind of thing I've been into.. Which put me off quite a lot of it, I still hope to someday visit the place.
It’s pretty sad that such an essentially peaceful and introspective group of people are abused thus, even if they believe in some pretty mad shit.
I’ve never worked out what china wants in Tibet tbh though, does anyone have a clue? Chan is bigger in .cn than Tibetan Buddhism (and chan (which became zen) also rejects any kind of eternal self / reincarnation / non-impermanence) and so thus there are no such thing as a lama.
So I guess the restrictions / bad business china got unto in tibet are related to some kind of territorial dispute? But what’s there? What do they gain?
IMHO only, not an expert/informed analysis: Buddhism can be a risk to Chinese harmony if left to a separate authority (the real Dalai Lama). The Chinese grand social experiment of a strong state can only really work if they are relatively culturally homogenous, whether in Tibet or Hong Kong or Xinjiang or Taiwan. Dissent plants the seeds of change, and the CCP's system doesn't work when there is too much diversity of values. It's uber-collectivism in the name of the nation.
China very rarely does anything in the name of short-term profit. Their government doesn't work on 4-year competitive cycles like ours does, they plan and orchestrate in decades, and to them it's safer to conquer and assimilate other territories while they are still underdeveloped than when they become too powerful, either economically (like Taiwan) or culturally (like Tibet) or both (like Hong Kong). Having a puppet religious master under their control, along with all of Tibet's future economic output, is reason enough to seize it, even the real gains won't be realized for another few decades. The artificial legitimacy of Chinese-controlled Buddhism would greatly expand their cultural sphere of influence both inside and outside their immediate borders.
I would hope that China would understand Buddhism enough to know that there is no possible separate authority... I mean, the Heart sutra almost definitely came from China..
Although, I admit that I do have a hard time knitting together Tibetan and Burmese etc forms of Buddhism with what my understanding is (zen). They seem to genuinely worship Gautama Buddha as if he was some kinda god or something.
That's not what we're into at all. He was just a normal dude, in zen... And I mean... Dogen too. Both kinda interesting and insightful ones, ones we probably can learn something from (also learn some negative things from, e.g, O.G buddha walked out on his family (what a cunt!)) but yeah, there's no space laser eyes or anything in my book.
Just some dudes that looked at a wall for some years, and realised they're essentially the same as the local lemon tree. Kinda makes sense to me.
Takes a while though.
Even though I'm a buddhist, I seem to really offend non-zen buddhists in this fashion, which I find kinda hilarious.
It boggles my mind that anyone would consider to be harmonious a society that kills, imprisons, tortures, censors, and brainwashes so many of its own people.
"Their government doesn't work on 4-year competitive cycles like ours does..."
Not that I don't agree with your idea that the CCP work on a longer time horizon than the US govt, but China does run on short-term cycles, namely its 5-year plans:
They were not so peaceful and introspective when they were actually in power. This is basically a CCP talking point at this point, but it is pretty true that the system they governed was essentially a serfdom-powered society.
Just as a side thought... if you look long enough at any country's history, you'll surely find horrors and terrible individuals. But that rarely means that country or its modern descendants would want to be "liberated" by a foreign conquerer, whether that's China or the USA. Forced assimilation is a form of genocide and people would almost always choose to be oppressed by one of their own rather than a foreigner...
There is a lot of history there between China and Tibet reaching all the way to the Yuan dynasty. For example, the Mongolian people have deep ties with the Tibetan Buddhists, such that the Mongolian rulers of the Yuan dynasty gave a lot of leeway to the region. The Manchurian rulers of the Qing dynasty were Buddhists themselves and found a way to politically claim the area while letting Tibet run as a vassal state.
Lastly, there was this prophecy among the Tibetans about the diaspora.
China has historically considered themselves as the axis mundi of the world. The name “中國” when translated to “Middle Kingdom” loses a lot of the flavor. Better translated as “Central Kingdom”, an insular society in which the far-flung frontiers pivot around the Chinese culture.
Both the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion were rude awakenings and humiliating. But I think a lot of people in the West underestimate how much China could have been the superpower at the time, and instead chose not to.
I think China’s political goals in the modern time make more sense when viewed this way. Consolidate the historical territories it once held. Make its influence known so other polities can’t humiliate and rob China again.
Tibet is strategically located and has been part of the Great Game in Asia for a long time.
In fact, the British tried to invade it at the very beginning of the 20th century but hard landscape and the Tibetan and Chinese armies repelled them. Following that the Western powers even signed a treaty recognizing Chinese sovereignty over Tibet...
Hello, all replies at this point I think are ~cultural. Caspianreport (others to probs but that’s where I heard it) iirc says a lot of China water comes from Tibet region. Many big Chinese rivers start there. This is first comment ever, god knows how long I’ve lurked, please take it easy on me.
Confirmation bias link and quote: https://depts.washington.edu/chinaciv/geo/proper.htm
“ Two great rivers run through China Proper: the Yellow River in the north, and the Yangtze (or Yangzi ) River to the south. In fact, most of China Proper belongs to the drainage-basins of these two rivers. Both originate to the far west in the Tibetan Plateau.”
This is factually incorrect: claiming Chan Buddhists do not believe in reincarnation. On the facts, wrong.
The Buddha taught reincarnation and all major schools essentially follow his example. This includes Chan Buddhism. It may not be emphasized or really suggested as a topic for reflection - but if you are asking point blank "Do Chan Buddhists accept the idea of reincarnation after death, as the Buddha taught - or do they teach reincarnation as wrong view", the answer is "they accept reincarnation."
Source: look up Chan Buddhism on Wikipedia, or just Google search it. Not a single result affirming that Chan Buddhists teach the falsity of reincarnation.
You are absolutely wrong. The whole reincarnation thing probably came from Brahmanism, but Buddha tought impermanence which is absolutely the opposite of any form of reincarnation. There is no soul to be reincarnated.
Yes, there are some Koans and such which use stories involving reincarnation, however these are not literal teachings, they are just stories used to make a different point (usually, something about non duality).
Do some buddhists believe in reincarnation? yep. Some are also christians, or Scientologists, or atheists too. We don't know what comes after we die so it's really up to whomever to think whatever they wish.
We do not teach it, however. And the Buddha did not either. Zen teachers would all agree that reincarnation is a wrong view. Back to Dogen, even. It's literally the opposite of what we think about the nature of self.
Chan and zen are the same thing, literally the same word.
> I’ve never worked out what china wants in Tibet tbh though, does anyone have a clue?
I think the failure of China to divest its non-Chinese territories after the downfall of the Qing Empire mostly occurred because no one wanted to take responsibility for losing territory.
For Tibet in particular, though, it seems worth noting that Tibet is the source of both of China's major rivers. The Yellow and Yangtze rivers are not less significant to China than the Nile is to Egypt. Look what's happening between Egypt and Ethiopia.
Minerals, particularly rare earths, that are a huge strategic asset to
China and their desire to dominate the world economy. It's also in a strategic place vis a vis India, and they can't tolerate even a degree of autonomy of such a large area adjacent to their rival in Asia. But the real threat is a national and religious identity separate from China.
It's 1/10 of modern Chinese territory, no one is going to give up that much land. Headwaters to major rivers feeding South Asia. Security, see CIA's Tibet program. Unlimited mineral resources.
>making them a profit
It's mostly not, spending billions on high speed rail and other infra linkage to control restive region and the entire western theater command security network is expensive. But wealth + new military capabilities makes taming this frontier feasible. Military forces in Tibet can reach huge strategic areas of South Asia while Tibet itself is buffer from core PRC territories. The richer PRC is is, the easier exploiting Tibet becomes, and the more there is to be gained. Serious mining started just 10 years ago.
There is an argument that, by controlling the high parts of the Himalayas, China can control the rivers of Asia, in the same way that the United States controls the Colorado River and similar. With their civil engineering prowess, they can dam and divert them when fresh water becomes scarce.
Goodbye to the Indus, the Ganga, the Brahmaputra. China needs its own Cadillac Desert.
I practice anapana and vipassana so can empathise, but it is plain ignorant to think Buddhists are necessarily peaceful. Tibet was a violent warrior kingdom and Buddhists have committed many crimes too. See the ongoing (!!) genocide in Myanmar where Buddhists slaughter Muslims. You could argue those agent real Buddhists, but thats just another Scotsman.
I don't mean to diminish the crimes the Chinese continue to commit against the Tibetans, nor the benefits of Buddhist practice, but seeing Buddhism with rose tinted glasses is just not reflecting reality.
And what, china thinks tibet will somehow find a way to stop rivers running? Or the kind of people who move individual ants while building temples would poison such waters? I still don't get it.
Maybe it's those little blue flowers from Batman Begins they're after? >_<
The real threat is China launching attacks from Tibet, against India.
Why? Because much of Chinese trade goes through the Indian Ocean, where India has negative control.
So, it is easy to see China getting wary of India and launching a territorial war from Tibet, in order to gain dominance over India. And, of course, Pakistan would join in.
I lived very close to there and drove by the location every day. It is on a very busy street where you would never imagine that something like this would have happened. It wasn't until a local pointed it out to me that I realized what it was. The monument is beautiful.
“The self-immolation of young Tibetans like Tsewang Norbu, who seems to have it all, lays bare China’s claim that the spate of self-immolations that have engulfed the Tibetan plateau since 2009 is triggered by psychological and livelihood issues.
China continues to hatch strategies to win the hearts and minds of the new generation of Tibetans in its Sinicization project, but the self-immolation protests by young Tibetans like Yonten and Tsewang Norbu expose how China’s ill-intent strategies in Tibet is deeply hurting young Tibetans.
To prevent self-immolations and save lives, TCHRD calls on China to halt its Sinicization programs and uphold the human rights of Tibetans to protect and promote their culture and language, and freely exercise basic freedoms including freedom of expression and freedom to practice one’s religion or belief.”
I hope the fact this happened is spread far and wide. It's depressing that the Chinese government will try to suppress this, trying to deny any meaning to this man's death.
That's for people everywhere to interpret as they will, without propagandist interference.
To everyone I've ever know it's always been a powerful demonstration of desperation. Every such incident I've seen has been taken abroad that way. Except by CCP shills who prefer to call it... 'extremism'... mmm.
Readit News
In random book stores, I met actual monks who had served time (in China) as political prisoners. One of which had also written a book about it. It was kind of funny to walk in into a book store, see these two guys drinking tea and then get pulled into a conversation out of curiosity. But, as for the stories themselves, probably not that funny. Some of the people (monks, mostly) had physical scars and their stories were anything but fun.
I also went to their offices (a modest distance away from the Dalai Lama temple, but very walkable) and got to speak to senior officials there. I asked them basics questions like, "What do you think is the future for Tibet?" and they were very accommodating.
We had tea, laughed and talked life. At first they thought I was a journalist, which was hilarious since my approach was very blunt but curious at the same time.
And this was also reflected in their answers.
They're mostly concerned with ensuring that people have a safe passage out of there (having the ability to go to India and lead a life without oppression), while trying to negotiate peace deals for sacred locations and the deep Tibet. But I do think that this has been consistently falling on deaf ears. And, of course, they are hoping that the Dalai Lama will choose to reincarnate again to keep the "fight" going.
Getting out of Tibet is not exactly a walk in the park. Though, it is a walk. A long and gloomy walk through treacherous mountains which in 70%+ cases leave people with frostbite and other injuries.
I befriended a yoga teacher who was teaching an authentic Tibetan practice, and he sometimes had people over at his studio who had the day prior arrived to Dharamshala, from Tibet, through the mountain passages. It's unreal.
It's not like they have the luxury of an empire conglomerate like other modern countries, but India has been good to them.
I'm in no way suggesting they should or asserting China's great because they have standards when it comes to taking political prisoners... Nor am I stating that China is so barbarous that I would expect nothing less of them... I just don't know and wonder about the answers to these questions?
Sounds like the former prisoners you met still hold the beliefs that probably made them prisoners in the first place. They're still monks (practicing I assume). They're now back in their country of origin?
What was accomplished?
Time? The best I can come up with is that it bought China time to begin and continue ethnically cleanse (displacing, not killing) Tibet (as well as other regions), while not breaking any international laws or attracting enough negative attention to jeopardize any foreign trade or financial relationships?
Look at the news about what's supposedly going on in Xinjiang... China is getting nothing but bad publicity, but no international entity is pulling out of those areas or others in China because of what they're supposedly doing to the Uyghur population. If anyone is leaving China, it's been reported that it's for unrelated reasons.
If China just disappeared these people instead of putting them in camps, would the world react any differently? It doesn't seem like anyone has been able to substantiate these claims about the resorts (concentration camps), so how much harder would it be for China create the same level of control around a massive park or recreation area (polyandrion or burial site)?
You can only afford so many Tiananmens before you crush the national morale, and with it, your autocratic pyramid scheme. China doesn't want to become North Korea.
You can't mention this and not tell a story or two
[0]: https://www.amazon.com/Hell-Earth-Biography-Political-Prison...
That, or you were up in Dharamkat and hiked down into town/temple area where there are needless to say many Tibetan monks from the diaspora -- amazing part of India.
Free Tibet
https://tibet.net/contact/
Dead Comment
That letter started a correspondence between the two that led to MLK speaking out against the war in Vietnam.
> Quảng Đức was protesting the persecution of Buddhists by the South Vietnamese government led by Ngô Đình Diệm, a staunch Roman Catholic. Photographs of his self-immolation circulated around the world, drawing attention to the policies of the Diệm government.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_%C4%9...
> I believe with all my heart that the monks who burned themselves did not aim at the death of the oppressors but only at a change in their policy. Their enemies are not man. They are intolerance, fanaticism, dictatorship, cupidity, hatred and discrimination which lie within the heart of man.
It’s pretty sad that such an essentially peaceful and introspective group of people are abused thus, even if they believe in some pretty mad shit.
I’ve never worked out what china wants in Tibet tbh though, does anyone have a clue? Chan is bigger in .cn than Tibetan Buddhism (and chan (which became zen) also rejects any kind of eternal self / reincarnation / non-impermanence) and so thus there are no such thing as a lama.
So I guess the restrictions / bad business china got unto in tibet are related to some kind of territorial dispute? But what’s there? What do they gain?
I can’t see how it’s making them a profit..
China very rarely does anything in the name of short-term profit. Their government doesn't work on 4-year competitive cycles like ours does, they plan and orchestrate in decades, and to them it's safer to conquer and assimilate other territories while they are still underdeveloped than when they become too powerful, either economically (like Taiwan) or culturally (like Tibet) or both (like Hong Kong). Having a puppet religious master under their control, along with all of Tibet's future economic output, is reason enough to seize it, even the real gains won't be realized for another few decades. The artificial legitimacy of Chinese-controlled Buddhism would greatly expand their cultural sphere of influence both inside and outside their immediate borders.
Although, I admit that I do have a hard time knitting together Tibetan and Burmese etc forms of Buddhism with what my understanding is (zen). They seem to genuinely worship Gautama Buddha as if he was some kinda god or something.
That's not what we're into at all. He was just a normal dude, in zen... And I mean... Dogen too. Both kinda interesting and insightful ones, ones we probably can learn something from (also learn some negative things from, e.g, O.G buddha walked out on his family (what a cunt!)) but yeah, there's no space laser eyes or anything in my book.
Just some dudes that looked at a wall for some years, and realised they're essentially the same as the local lemon tree. Kinda makes sense to me.
Takes a while though.
Even though I'm a buddhist, I seem to really offend non-zen buddhists in this fashion, which I find kinda hilarious.
It boggles my mind that anyone would consider to be harmonious a society that kills, imprisons, tortures, censors, and brainwashes so many of its own people.
Not that I don't agree with your idea that the CCP work on a longer time horizon than the US govt, but China does run on short-term cycles, namely its 5-year plans:
https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/t0284_14th_Fi...
See the sort of punishments that were common for people who tried to organize the serfs in any way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungshar
Lots of conflicting perspectives on this topic indeed.
Lastly, there was this prophecy among the Tibetans about the diaspora.
China has historically considered themselves as the axis mundi of the world. The name “中國” when translated to “Middle Kingdom” loses a lot of the flavor. Better translated as “Central Kingdom”, an insular society in which the far-flung frontiers pivot around the Chinese culture.
Both the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion were rude awakenings and humiliating. But I think a lot of people in the West underestimate how much China could have been the superpower at the time, and instead chose not to.
I think China’s political goals in the modern time make more sense when viewed this way. Consolidate the historical territories it once held. Make its influence known so other polities can’t humiliate and rob China again.
In fact, the British tried to invade it at the very beginning of the 20th century but hard landscape and the Tibetan and Chinese armies repelled them. Following that the Western powers even signed a treaty recognizing Chinese sovereignty over Tibet...
The Buddha taught reincarnation and all major schools essentially follow his example. This includes Chan Buddhism. It may not be emphasized or really suggested as a topic for reflection - but if you are asking point blank "Do Chan Buddhists accept the idea of reincarnation after death, as the Buddha taught - or do they teach reincarnation as wrong view", the answer is "they accept reincarnation."
Source: look up Chan Buddhism on Wikipedia, or just Google search it. Not a single result affirming that Chan Buddhists teach the falsity of reincarnation.
Yes, there are some Koans and such which use stories involving reincarnation, however these are not literal teachings, they are just stories used to make a different point (usually, something about non duality).
Do some buddhists believe in reincarnation? yep. Some are also christians, or Scientologists, or atheists too. We don't know what comes after we die so it's really up to whomever to think whatever they wish.
We do not teach it, however. And the Buddha did not either. Zen teachers would all agree that reincarnation is a wrong view. Back to Dogen, even. It's literally the opposite of what we think about the nature of self.
Chan and zen are the same thing, literally the same word.
> I’ve never worked out what china wants in Tibet tbh though, does anyone have a clue?
I think the failure of China to divest its non-Chinese territories after the downfall of the Qing Empire mostly occurred because no one wanted to take responsibility for losing territory.
For Tibet in particular, though, it seems worth noting that Tibet is the source of both of China's major rivers. The Yellow and Yangtze rivers are not less significant to China than the Nile is to Egypt. Look what's happening between Egypt and Ethiopia.
>making them a profit
It's mostly not, spending billions on high speed rail and other infra linkage to control restive region and the entire western theater command security network is expensive. But wealth + new military capabilities makes taming this frontier feasible. Military forces in Tibet can reach huge strategic areas of South Asia while Tibet itself is buffer from core PRC territories. The richer PRC is is, the easier exploiting Tibet becomes, and the more there is to be gained. Serious mining started just 10 years ago.
Deleted Comment
Goodbye to the Indus, the Ganga, the Brahmaputra. China needs its own Cadillac Desert.
I don't mean to diminish the crimes the Chinese continue to commit against the Tibetans, nor the benefits of Buddhist practice, but seeing Buddhism with rose tinted glasses is just not reflecting reality.
Maybe it's those little blue flowers from Batman Begins they're after? >_<
India, no.
Most of the water entrapment areas of India are within India's borders.
And, the rest come from the Himalayas, where it isn't easy to divert the flows, and most of those mountains are under Indian control. See: https://www.thetibetpost.com/en/features/44-environment-and-...
The real threat is China launching attacks from Tibet, against India.
Why? Because much of Chinese trade goes through the Indian Ocean, where India has negative control.
So, it is easy to see China getting wary of India and launching a territorial war from Tibet, in order to gain dominance over India. And, of course, Pakistan would join in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_%C4%9...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi
https://goo.gl/maps/k2dsRfHeNXYW2My2A
This young man chose to die for his beliefs.
“The self-immolation of young Tibetans like Tsewang Norbu, who seems to have it all, lays bare China’s claim that the spate of self-immolations that have engulfed the Tibetan plateau since 2009 is triggered by psychological and livelihood issues.
China continues to hatch strategies to win the hearts and minds of the new generation of Tibetans in its Sinicization project, but the self-immolation protests by young Tibetans like Yonten and Tsewang Norbu expose how China’s ill-intent strategies in Tibet is deeply hurting young Tibetans.
To prevent self-immolations and save lives, TCHRD calls on China to halt its Sinicization programs and uphold the human rights of Tibetans to protect and promote their culture and language, and freely exercise basic freedoms including freedom of expression and freedom to practice one’s religion or belief.”
Free Tibet
The ethnic cleansing they pioneered there was perfected in East Turkistan.
Dead Comment
By most standards the only person that would set themselves on fire is a religious fanatic or someone suffering from mental illness.
To everyone I've ever know it's always been a powerful demonstration of desperation. Every such incident I've seen has been taken abroad that way. Except by CCP shills who prefer to call it... 'extremism'... mmm.