Humanitarian Dream
Well this was a welcome sight in my inbox given all of the images that came out of running the torch outta town.
Steve Varon, who I blogged about earlier has just launched a website called Humanitarian Dream in which he shares his dream with the world.
“Imagine the Dalai Lama carrying the Olympic torch past the Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet – or anywhere else along the torch relay route. That is my dream, my vision. A vision that represents the Olympic spirit of peace and will instill hope for all people around the world.”
When I first saw this video, I was taken with Steve’s wish and was struck by his desire to bring everyone together and unite rather than run down the path of hatred and animosity.
Rather than see this situation degrade further, I believe that more people should support Steve in his cause and lend their voices. Please spread the word on this and help Steve to see his dream realized, and in turn, help bring peace and rest to this issue which has troubled the Tibetans for so long.
Yes I know my dual mind is showing in that I have a ‘No Torch for Tibet’ banner right beside this one. I support any outcome in which the Tibetans are guaranteed human rights they rightfully deserve.
Comments are closed.
Hi, I just wanted to say that I love reading your blog =)
I thought you might be interested in seeing this youtube video on the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5sOm-uQH9Y
Will there be any Tibet-related events in Montreal in the near future?
Thanks for posting this video.
I personally support the Dalai Lama and his stance on Dorje Shugden.
Here is a link to Lama Yeshe’s replies when students have asked him about this deity practice…
http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamazopa/advicebook/practice/shugden.shtml
But do you support his interference in the affairs of other Tibetan sects, particularly the selection of the Karmapa of the Kagyu sect?
And do you support his use of the term “cultural genocide” to describe contemporary Tibet?
“Tibetologist Elliot Sperling observes that “within certain limits in the PRC does make efforts to accommodate Tibetan cultural expression” and “the cultural activity taking place all over the Tibetan plateau cannot be ignored.” Other supporters of the emigre cause, including Tibet scholar Robert Barnett and German Green Party leader Antje Vollmer, also recognize the inaccuracy of the cultural genocide claim. By all accounts, Tibetanness remains robust. As a US reporter recently observed: “[F]or all the changes in styles and attitudes–mostly among the small minority of Tibetans living in cities–Tibetan identity remains strong.”
If the concept of cultural genocide in Tibet is inapposite legally and empirically, the charge also has baleful political effects. In universal terms, the application of the concept exemplifies a language inflation that disserves the urgent struggle against destruction of peoples and their cultures. It has been said that “the notion of genocide is marked by conceptual confusion, often compounded by its rhetorical use on the part of those seeking to inflame and stigmatise social and political discourse.” Scholars have catalogued many misuses of the term, with one concluding that “when one needs a catch-all term to describe ‘oppression’ of one form or another, one often resorts to labeling it ‘genocide.’ The result is the debasement of the concept.”
…
In specific terms, use of the concept of cultural genocide as a tactical weapon in the Tibet case disserves the effort to resolve the Tibet Question. Genocide has been called the “crime of crimes” and the “crime of the century.” A UN body has deemed it “the ultimate crime and the gravest violation of human rights it is possible to commit.” As Koshkenniemi observes:
“To be branded as a genocidal State is to be classified as the worst kind of criminal, a pariah, an outlaw among States, to have been put beyond the pale of civilised humanity. The evocative strength or the symbolic value of genocide is formidable….Even to be accused of genocide affects a State’s international standing, its political, diplomatic and commercial contacts with other States.”
The attempt to associate China’s leaders with the level of criminality implied in a charge of genocide, even if “only” cultural, surely hardens their distrust of the emigres with whom they must deal if a compromise on Tibet is to be reached. PRC and local leaders, both Tibetan and non-Tibetan, are convinced that they have done the opposite of committing “genocide” by pouring great treasure and effort into the development of Tibet, while preserving key elements of traditional culture. They deem it an affront that accusations of “cultural genocide” emanate from emigre leaders. The latter, according to PRC leaders, have “done nothing to contribute to Tibet’s economic and social development,” “[know] nothing of the real situation there,” and seek to “set aside [Tibet] as a museum of ancient culture.”
“
Sautman, B. 2003. “Cultural Genocide and Tibet,” Texas Journal of International Law. 38:2:173-246.
Thank you anon. my friend.
Do you / will you have a blog to share your information.
Are you follow Buddhism or Shamanism? It is your freedom if you want to follow a worldly god like Shugden. Just don’t complain if we say you are no longer Tibetan. Shut up and don’t say you have no religious freedom! His Holiness is only try to protect you.
Don’t fall for tricks from the Chinese Communist agents! They are trying to split us!
I am a Buddhist.
I fully support the Dalai Lama.
I do not follow Dorje Shugden nor have any desire to follow him.
Thank you for your concern.