Sun Yat-sen Speaks on Tibet

.
Let me, in fact, refer any Chinese visitors here to some translated quotes from Sun Yat Sen’s landmark speech in 1924 (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Sun_Yat_Sen%27s_speech_on_Pan-Asianism) that can be applied to the Tibet question today:
.
“Though far away from China Proper and separated from her by Tibet, Nepal considered China as her suzerain State and up to 1911 Nepal sent annual tribute to China via Tibet.”
.
(Here, he acknowledges the obvious, and to him accepted and well-known, fact that Tibet is a separator between “China proper” [that is, the mainland, 大陸] and Nepal, not part of that mainland.)
.
“To oppress others with the cult of force, in the language of the Ancients, is the rule of Might. […]  The rule of might has always been looked down upon by the Orient.  There is another kind of civilization superior to the rule of Might.  The fundamental characteristics of this civilization are benevolence, justice and morality: This civilization makes people respect, not fear, it.  Such a civilization is, in the language of the Ancients, the rule of Right or the Kingly Way.  One may say, therefore, that Oriental civilization is one of the rule of right.”
.
(Here, he frowns, as I have frowned, on oppressive and forceful rule such as is utilized by the PRC today.)
.
“[…] Between 500 and 2000 years ago, there was a period of a thousand years when China was supreme in the world […] similar to […] America today. What was the situation of the weaker nations toward China then?  They respected China as their superior and sent annual tribute to China by their own will […]  But in what way did China maintain her prestige among so many small and weaker nations?  Did she send her army or navy, i.e. use Might, to compel them to send their contributions?  Not at all.  It was not her rule of Might that forced the weaker nations to send tribute to China.  It was the influence of her rule of Right.”
.
(Here he throws on its head the popular Chinese argument that Tibet “belongs” to China, by asserting that Tibet nor any nation ever properly “belonged” to China except as tributaries — or today, favoured trading partners — and by free will, not will that was manipulated by forced treaties and maintained by strict occupation, as Tibet has been.)
.
And in that last quote, he shows the path to China if she ever wants honour herself: to honour the humanity and dignity of others.  In particular, an honourable China first of all would stop defaming Tibet’s leaders, and second would hear the request of those leaders to replace the deceptive provincial title of “autonomous” with actual autonomy.
.
These are not hard things to do — only hard to those whose hearts are blackened and poisoned with pride.  But how amazing and transformative these actions would be for China’s image and credibility, and without any cost.  Imagine someday Tibetans holding demonstrations asking for the paternal assistance of a wise and generous China, rather than their constant protests today insisting and even begging that China take her unwanted troops and laws, her “cult of force”, and get out.
.
Well, the Chinese government won’t listen to me.  It’s the responsibility of the ordinary, free-minded Chinese, if they are free, to first believe in Tibet’s equality with China, and then to transmit that belief to others.  Reject that ridiculous notion that Tibet “belongs” to China.  Reject it wherever you hear it.  You may end up bringing infinitely more respect to your government than you will by parroting their ill-conceived policies.
.
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s