Democrats versus the Dalai Lama?*
Post updated at 11:41 a.m.
Well, this proves once and for all that China's got us by the, uh, short sales.
California's Legislature has devoted loads of elaborate calligraphy, high-quality paper stock and legislative floor time to praising everyone from the former head of the prison guards union (the group that keeps on giving -- to politicians), to Japanese Americans interned during World War II, to the Girl Scouts and to the Rose Bowl-winning USC Trojans.
But when it came to a resolution honoring the Dalai Lama, who's usually a slam-dunk for winning hearts and minds in the free world, the Democrats flinched.
I don't think it was because a Republican sponsored the resolution honoring Tibetans' spiritual and temporal leader, on the 50th anniversary of his escape during the Chinese crackdown on Tibet. My excellent colleague Eric Bailey, in his story about this, quoted the resolution's sponsor, San Luis Obispo Republican Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee, as saying that people from the Chinese consulate in San Francisco had worked the halls lobbying against the measure.
Blakeslee had a copy of the letter from the consul general warning that the resolution could damage U.S.-Chinese relations, that Tibet never had been an independent country anyway, and that China had in fact liberated Tibet from "feudal serfdom and theocratic rule."
The Dalai Lama is a figure who has something for both sides: He's a man of peace and he opposes Communist China in Tibet, for starters. President George W. Bush, Sen. (now Secretary of State) Hillary Clinton and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have all praised him.
So what's the Democrats' problem? Why did they cry "uncle" and knuckle under? They did, you know -- they said the matter needed further study, and sent the resolution off to the graveyard of the Rules Committee. How much further study, one wonders -- another 50 years?
Over the last decade or two, the U.S. has mired itself deeper into debt. This is partly because of the laissez-faire regulatory approach that's now got us foundering on the financial rocks, and partly because, as liberal writer Barbara Ehrenreich observed, credit cards (also financed to a big extent by China) are what working Americans were given instead of pay raises. A Harvard economist calculated that between the 1970s and 2004, the average American worker's income fell by 16%. To keep paying the bills, Americans resorted to plastic.
Along with all the other financial follies of the moment, we now see another consequence to being beholden to China: California Democrats in days of yore would have fallen all over themselves to honor so powerful a figure. Now, the richest state in supposedly the most powerful nation in the world is too afraid of the consequences of a piece of paper that could rile a rising superpower. And it punted.
What a sad state.
*Update: Here's the Democrats' explanation for what happened: Bay Area Assemblywoman Fiona Ma said the new administration should be left alone to set its course on international relations with China. A sensible point, and yet the Legislature has, in years past, had no problem passing symbolic legislation about other nations' human rights issues, countries like Ethiopia, Turkey, Laos and Thailand. And last year, the Legislature passed a resolution very similar to the one it "disappeared" into the Rules Committee now.
Credit: AP / Ashwini Bhatia
This is another example of USA selling out its morals because there is economic stake in the situation. The ideals the Founding Fathers had instilled in the nation seem only applicable when it lands more money in its pockets.
A mentality of "Lets liberate Iraq because they have oil, but turn a blind eye to the cultural and religious genocide occuring in Tibet because China will stop exporting cheap goods" is one of the greatest tragedies of present day. It is no different than turning a blind eye to the Jewish Holocaust. Tibetans are about as Chinese as Canadians and Mexicans are USA or Poland is Russian.
Posted by: Mike | August 13, 2009 at 10:07 AM
It is sad that China is bold enough to silence Americans on their own soil. However, Tibet was never a part of China. Let's not delve too deep into the history of two countries. Let's study the period from 1911 to 1959 where she has her own currency, postal system,Lhasa issued passport, treaty with neighboring states, centralized military and distinct ethnic population. Visit http://www.rangzen.net/2009/02/25/independent-tibet-some-facts/ for more. Much against the wishes of younger generation tibetans, Dalai Lama is not seeking independence for Tibet. I think it is high time that China should take advantage of the man as long as he is on this planet. Once he is gone, there will be terrorism all over China and Tibet.
Posted by: Tashi Nyima | March 19, 2009 at 07:50 AM
Why not say we are afraid of China?
Posted by: John Quincy Adam | March 18, 2009 at 09:57 AM
That the Dalai Lama is a man of peace is nice. That he opposes Communist China in Tibet is either nonsense or the reason he fails at peace. Next to this there is no inevitable relationship between opposing communism and being a man of peace. I met someone with a Tibetan Mastiff who had been there to investigate the dog's background although who said the people there are too afraid and damaged.
Posted by: Jaap den Haan | March 18, 2009 at 07:35 AM
Poor guy, this Dalai Lama. He has been used by those anti-China and anti-Chinese freaks to vent their cultural and racial hatred towards the Chinese nation and people. These people are so arrogantly ignoring what the Chinese feel about their action. The Chinese people, whether whinin China or without, resolutely regard Tibet as a province of China. To argue otherwise only exposes the "Divide and conquer" logic so fondly cherished by the West, and despicably peddled by those freaks.
Posted by: hhz | March 18, 2009 at 04:18 AM
Please "cite" wikipedia to support your point. For me, "Free Tibet" has turned into as much of a propaganda train as the communist party's "Dalai separatist" line. I would love to see something sources other than the "tibet govt in exile" and the something communist mouthpiece. Traveling to Tibet is hard, but certainly not impossible. Would love for a real media outlet to do some investigative reporting instead of citing the free tibet campaign for everything. And no, wikipedia is not a real source.
Posted by: Jerry | March 17, 2009 at 07:06 PM
It's the Chinese who won't let independent Western reporters or indeed, any Westerners into Tibet lately. For the Chinese Communists to whine that someone somewhere is allegedly exaggerating their brutality in Tibet lacks all credibility-they are the ones who make it impossible to verify the truth. These are the same brutal tyrants who launched the Tienanmen massacre. Free Tibet, and Free China!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_(1950%E2%80%931951)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_08
Posted by: BenjaminF | March 17, 2009 at 05:10 PM
The Dalai Lama is much more than a politician. He is known to have realized a very high degree of direct knowledge of reality. The Tibetan culture has been the purest expression of Buddhadharma in the world for a thousand years -- it is this heritage that the Chinese have destroyed and would replace with their own religion of the State. That the Dalai Lama is willing to address what has happened to Tibet -- that the Chinese have rendered his land a "hell on earth" -- demonstrates his own courage and compassion.
Posted by: steven stovall | March 17, 2009 at 04:37 PM
Hmmm, even before I got the end I was thinking, yeah sure, China's economic and financial power are important, but another big factor, immigration. Immigrants can be surprisingly nationalistic. For example, during the Olympic Torch's passing through London in 2008, Tibetans turned out to protest, and larger groups of Chinese turned out to counter-protest (i.e. support China). Its not surprising that Fiona Ma, who represents a heavily Chinese district, should be up there defending Democrats' inaction on this resolution. The Chinese in California may have come for the opportunities of the Great Gold Mountain, but many still have a strong sense of national (not simply cultural) pride.
(Wouldn't be surprised if commenter Michael is of Chinese descent. )
Posted by: Mitchell Young | March 17, 2009 at 02:41 PM
Why has there been no pictures of the so called 200 Tibetan demonstrators purportedly killed in 2008 been shown?. Maybe there were 5000 to 10000 deaths - who knows? We may as well tell the world it was more like 20000, after all nobody seems to have bothered to verify if the figure of 200 was just made up by the Free Tibet movement based in India.
Posted by: yo | March 17, 2009 at 01:56 PM
While I wont argue with those who wishes to see the head lama as some sort of messiah of "peace", I do have to insist that he is also a political leader. As such, it is his agenda and goal to accomplish his political objectives. That objective is to seek the so called Tibetan independence that, in China's eyes, is completely unacceptable. You can be a granola head, or a realists...it doesn't really matter. The final arbiter of the issue is whether China is strong enough to hold its own territorial integrity. On this point, I am on China's side. Tibet, or Xizhang, has been a part of the Chinese state since at the very least the Yuan dynasty. It will be part of China so long as China remains strong. No amount of whinning from left wing granola fring groups, or right wing cold war freaks will change that fact.
Posted by: Michael | March 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM
The Dalai Lama is a rare symbol of peace in this world. I feel he is a person to be revered and imitated. However, I don't think it is a good idea to bite the hand the feeds you so to speak. China is a big part of our economy (as shakey as that is right now). A BIG part of our goods are imported from there. If we go pissing them off too much we are risking them cutting that supply line. Now, I personally would like to see that happen, but not until we have established cost efficient ways to manufacture more goods here in the states. So once that problem is fixed, I would love to see America have more of a broad acceptance of what the Dalai Lama stands for in the hopes that China will stop the inhumaine actions toward Tibet and it's people.
Posted by: Jenn | March 17, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Enough with the Dalai Lama already. He is as much of a politician as the pope. Both are for their own self-interests and the foolish people who support them are blind to their agendas.
Posted by: Francisco Cardenas | March 17, 2009 at 11:25 AM