A tale of two flags
One of the arguments I hear a lot from Chinese lately is that Tibet has been a part of China for hundreds of years. Although I don’t want to get into that particular debate here, I would like to know why on Earth the Chinese government has such a problem with the Tibetan flag.
Go here and you will read exactly how much Tibetan symbolism and culture is wrapped up in the flag’s design. It is no exaggeration to say that the flag is an integral part of Tibetan culture, the very thing that the CCP would have us believe they are committed to protecting.
The origins of the Tibetan flag, which adopted its present form in 1912, date back nearly 1200 years, longer than the Chinese claims that Tibet has been part of its territory. If anyone has more information about the history of the Tibetan flag, please let me know.
So why do these new CCP boys have such an issue with the Tibetan flag when previous dynasties just looked on admiringly at the lovely design (the PRC flag is very young by comparison).
Of course, the CCP’s jealous nature views the flag as a symbol of a Tibetan identity outside of their control, and Beijing has never displayed tolerance for anything or anyone that challenges them for popularity. Just ask the Falun Gong.
On a related note, I’ve been appalled at the weakness of foreign governments in bowing to Chinese pressure and harassing or arresting those protesters waving the Tibetan flag in countries that are supposedly defenders of free speech. Equally troubling to my mind have been the enraged reactions of overseas Chinese at the sight of the flag, often chasing down and fighting with those displaying it.
I have this message for all Chinese for whom this beautiful design induces hysteria: It’s a flag for Christ’s sake, and it’s been around for centuries longer than your own. It really is time to grow up on this issue.
The flag will remain on this site as a symbol of the tolerance the world demands and expects (but is so often denied) of a powerful country. If Tibetan history is intertwined with that of China and its people, then the flag is a part of their cultural heritage too. And yet, anyone daring to display these colours risks certain arrest and imprisonment.
Many people will be taking this flag to Beijing. How China chooses to deal with its display will say more to the watching world about China’s progress as a nation than gold medals or large buildings. If you’re in China, of course, delayed coverage and censorship will certainly deny people the right to see such images.
The Tibetan flag is full of meaning; it is a rich tapestry of history and culture dating back centuries. In the name of peace, harmony, and tolerance, let it fly.
- Censorship , Culture , Media , Olympics
April 19th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Great post.
April 20th, 2008 at 1:49 am
Thanks for visiting, Bill.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:20 am
North Ireland, Scoland and England used to be there independent kingdoms too. And I am sure they have their respective flags which must be much earlier than UK’s flag.
April 21st, 2008 at 3:49 am
North Ireland, Scoland and England used to be three independent kingdoms too. And I am sure they had their respective flags which must be much earlier than UK’s flag.
April 21st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Exactly, Monica; and the flags of Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and England are all flown without anyone suffering a seizure or the flag bearers being arrested and beaten.
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:05 am
“the flags of Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and England are all flown without anyone suffering a seizure or the flag bearers being arrested and beaten.”
-really? As far as I know, it is not like what you said. There used to be many conflicts between North Ireland and UK . It is a pity that I
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:25 am
the flags of Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and England are all flown without anyone suffering a seizure or the flag bearers being arrested and beaten.”
-really? As far as I know, it is not like what you said. There used to be many conflicts between North Ireland and UK . It is a pity that I am too busy to have further study of English history. If I could, I would find out some examples.
And, Stu, if we Chinese say “Indenpend Scotland(or North Ireland), will the English people keep silent?
Also, you have been criticizing us for destorying Tibeten culture, how about the culture of Scoland? Are Gaelic still popular in Scoland? Are all the lessons taught is Gaelic in Scoland? We never tried to destory the Tibeten culture, on the contray, we are trying to protect their culture- not only their culture, but also the culture of other minority nationalities.
You have always been criticizing Nationalism. What’s “nationalism”? I looked up the dictionary, Nationalism means devotion to one’s own nation; patriotic feelings, principles or efforts. If our Anti-France is nationalism, how about Tibet’s Anti-Han? By the way, I don’t think it right to Anti-France nor do I think it is right to Anti-Han, Anti- Tibet or anti something else. That can solve nothing except making the situation worse.
There is an old saying: teeth for teeth, eye for eye. Also, friendship will for friendship. We only want to live peacefully and respect one another’s culture.
April 22nd, 2008 at 2:10 am
Sorry, I made a mistake, I mean “Are all the lessons taught in Gaelic in Wales?”
April 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 am
I will study both English and Chinese history in the evening. It is a necessary
April 22nd, 2008 at 2:52 am
Just find an example about troubles in North Ireland:
~~~in the 1960s Catholics in North Ireland began a Civil Rights Movement, campaigning for equality, often marching in the streets. Groups of Protestants began to organise counter-demonstrations, and rioting broke out. Protestand mobs attaked catholic areas. The police(The Royal Ulster Constabulary, RUC) were overwhelmed by the fighting, and the Northern Irish Primister asked London for soliders to help restor order. In 1969, the first British soliders were seen on Northern Irish streets. They have been there ever since.
~~~~In the early 1970s the IRA carried out a campaign of bombing and shooting, usually targeting the security forces, but often bombing city-centres. Usually they gave warnings, but not always. The British Security forces were strengthened, with up to 20 000 soliders, and 10 000 armed police in the province. ~~~~~~~The protestants formed their own illegal “paramilitary” groups and took revenge on Catholics, often murdering individuals at random. Catholics in mainly Protestant areas, and Protestants in mainly Catholic areas were threatened, and sometimes their houses burned down , causing each to flee. ~~~~~~~~`
In 1971 the Northern Irish government took the desperate step of imprisoning terrorist suspects from both sides without rial, a policy know as “internment”. This suspension of civil rights caused anger on both sides, and, if anything, intensified the conflict.
In the following year, 1972, 468 people were killed in Northern Ireland, the worst year of the trouble. These included 13 Catholics who had been taking part in a peaceful (though banned) civil rights march. They were shot dead by British soliders. This was a key event in strengthening Catholic opposition to the Brititsh presence. This day has now been mythologised as ” Bloody Sunday”, an important symbol of British oppression.~~~~~
THE TROUBLES IN NUMBERS:1969-MAY 1994
TOTAL DEATHS:– 3 147
OF WHICH:
Civilians(including paramilitaries– 2 202
British Forces(police and army)-945
KILLED BY- Republican paramilitary-58%
Loyalist paramilitary-27.7%
British forces-10.9%
Stu, you see, there were rioting in your country too. If I study further, I will find more examples.
April 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 am
Monica, you miss the point.
Any of the countries you mentioned are free to express their opinions about, or campaign for, independence. And they can fly their flags openly and freely with pride. This is probably why the vast majority are content with a “United Kingdom.”
The troubles in NI are in no way relevant here. But if you want a comparison, then consider how progress was made through dialogue and that you have free access to information from all sides of the troubles in that region. Think about that in the context of Tibet.
Further, Think about ‘Bloody Sunday’ in the context of Tiananmen ‘89. In particular, consider its coverage, discussion, and investigation. See the difference?
As for quoting figures, why not research how many Tibetans have died under CCP rule. An even bigger difference!!
Now, back to the flags
April 22nd, 2008 at 10:11 am
It’s an interesting post. I agree 100% if the Tibetan Flag is only about Tibetan culture.
From an artist point of view, Nazi’s flag was well designed and reflected some vague connection with Christianity. But can we only appreciate it from an artist’s point of view? Can we ignore the tragedy associated with it?
My point is, a symbol can be interpreted from multiple levels. It conveys a package of ideas and not necessarily about its original meaning(s). There is another example of how the same thing has opposite meaning in different contexts. Japanese army uniform is a beloved symbol in Japan, it’s about courage, sacrifices and wonderful old days. It has absolutely negative meaning in China. Do you think it’s OK to have a group of Japanese walk around in China in this uniform?
In my eyes, and possibly lots of other Chinese, the tibetan flag is a symbol of an intention to break the unification of China. And if you really know about Chinese culture, you should know it’s the most important thing. (I agree it’s not really rational, but, hey, do you really think French is the most elegant language? It’s something we can only accept) No matter how the association was created, maybe manipulated by CCP, maybe it was displayed in Tibet only when Han Chinese were killed. And now, are you going to tell us it’s only about culture?
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Linan - thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Your points are well taken, and of course the Tibetan flag has a symbolism that goes beyond culture. I do think, though, that the reaction of those confronted with the flag (in the current climate, at least) is indicative of the inclination of many Chinese to overreact to even the most innocuous stimuli.
Besides, national sensitivities do not give overseas Chinese (with assistance from local police) the right to harass those that display the Tibetan flag during protests.
Further, there’s a huge difference between marching around Beijing in Japanese army fatigues and the carrying of a flag with political symbolism.
On the issue of flags and wartime sensitivities, read my subsequent post.
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:24 pm
“And, Stu, if we Chinese say “Indenpend Scotland(or North Ireland), will the English people keep silent?” -
Northern Ireland has it’s own assembly, Wales has it’s own national assembly, Scotland also has its own assembly - all that is accepted by the people of the UK.
Right now the Scottish National Party are calling for total independence from Britain and if the people of the Scotland vote for it they will be given it - no argument.
We don’t beat people up who express a desire for independence, but we expect them to show that they are capable of dealing with independence.
I’m not sure what your problem is, Monica, but you are missing the point - throwing a collection of statistics [from last century] into the argument seems to have very little to do with being able to fly a flag.
Take a walk around any city in Northern Ireland, England, Wales, Scotland and the Republic of Ireland and you will see many different flags hoisted outside town halls, banks, private houses and other places - no one bats an eyelid. Right now across the valley from where I am typing I can see the Union flag, the French flag and another flag I don’t recognise - a local company has guests from overseas. But display the Tibetan flag [which does not represent anything other than Tibet itself] anywhere in China and see how long before you are kicked to the ground. Not exactly a mark of a civilised country.
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Flotsam - I agree with you.
I’m often confronted with the counter-argument ‘how would you feel if Scotland tried to separate from the UK?’ in the belief that it would be resisted to the fall of the last man.
As you say, the Scottish people will ultimately decide if complete independence is right for them. In this regard there is absolutely no analogy with the people of Tibet (or their flag).
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:29 am
The 1984 Brighton Bombing plotted by the Irish Republican Army against the British cabinet and the Tory War-mongers was a classic example of the high degree of ‘content’ within the United Kingdom. The British occupation of Ireland, torture of Irish prisoners, and shooting of Irish people on their own streets perhaps are not something comparable to the Tibet incident. If you indeed want to continue digging out the good deeds British did to the world, I could go all the way back to the Opium Wars on China, enslavering of Africans, bloody crackdown on native Americans, and the brutal oppression in India and Australia. You should be ashamed of what your ancestors did to the whole human race!
You seem quite proud that you can express your opinion in a so-called free coutnry. The answer is yes. Such freedom goes beyong words and peaceful protests. Your comrades expressed his shallow activism by grabbing our torch, and he got the chance to show his face on the national TV!
Having dialogue and making compromise is probably what British are good at, since they were forced to participate many times with its colonies. Perhaps your government should make one more dialogue with the Afgans and Iraqis, apologise to them for the invasion and let them choose their own government.
You might want to argue that the Tian’anmen square is an example of brutal suppression. To a young government like the CCP, they have done more than you could possibly imagine to redeem what they had done to Tibetans and the Chinese. What have the British done to redeem their wrongdoings in the last century? I say, your government has continued the invisible social suppressions on different ethinic minorities, who became extremely ‘content’ after detonating bombs in the London Tubes.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:12 am
Having a flag does not fundamentally contradict China’s unity. Indeed, Hong Kong, Macau, and more controversially, Taiwan has their own flags. The problem is not about a regional flag. It is about their political purposes of separating China by instigating regionalism, and so called human rights dispute, which I am NOT AT ALL convinced.
Speaking about overaction, the British soldiers in India perhaps could demonstrate what the proper reactions should be. The Indians would say, the Brits reacted with their bullets. Would you still consider the patriotic Chinese were overreacting? Plus, when you say the national sensitivities should give overseas Chinese the rights to harass their protests. MY QUESTION IS, does that give your countrymen to put off the Olympic flame (with the assistance of an extinguisher)???? Your freedom criteria do not fit in ours and how we react to regional separatism is our freedom well within both the legal and moral criteria!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:36 am
You make it sound like you are the Prime Minister who dictates the decision whether to grant independence to your ’sub-continents’. Coming back to Tibet’s case, how sure are you the Tibetans in Tibet want to break up its relation with China by declaring independence. What you hear perhaps is just the voices from some activists (perhaps get paid to act frenzily in front of cameras), what you do NOT know is Tibet’s absolute dependence on China. I think this is an inreputable truth! How could they cope with independence, as you quite rightly pointed out? How would they feed themselves and defend themselves without being patronised by the Americans?
As speaking for civilisation, let me tell you, the Chinese first started using paper to wipe our butt, the English were still using ropes - something your history books do not teach.
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:44 am
‘throwing a collection of statistics [from last century] into the argument “-
flotsam, aren’t many of you mention the affair of 1989(from last century) to critisize China nowadays?
“Not exactly a mark of a civilised country.”
I’d like to say, a civilised country won’t interfer in other country’s internal affair.
Stu, ok, let’s return to the flag. I quote the rioting in North Ireland in order to mention you that there are much conflict and blood under UK’S flag too.
April 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 am
“You should be ashamed of what your ancestors did to the whole human race!” - Kitty.
Of course I shouldn’t.
I hear this kind of nonsenese frequently in China from people who seem to think that passport holders from former colonial powers should feel shame or apologise for events that had absolutely nothing to do with them.
For example, many people have verbally attacked me recently because of perceived bias in the BBC’s reporting. This is simply illogical, as was the physical assault on the American leaving Carrefour in Hunan.
If you care about tolerance and harmony, as the Chinese government often remind us they do, you would do better to address the disturbing nationalism whipped up by CCTV and China Daily. When blinkered, state-controlled ‘reporting’ has finally been replaced by serious journalism, I think you will begin to see a more mature social response to alternative viewpoints from Chinese citizens.
Seriously, Kitty, I think it is you who should be ashamed for the very suggestion that I ought to be.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:01 am
“Speaking about overaction, the British soldiers in India perhaps could demonstrate what the proper reactions should be. The Indians would say, the Brits reacted with their bullets. ”
Max, we really need to avoid counter-arguments that require a trip to the archives in order to justify present-day issues. “We can do this today because look what you did back then” is not the reasoning of a civilized nation.
As she becomes more powerful, the world looks to China to avoid the abuses of past colonialism, not to use those examples as a justification for its own global ambitions.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:07 am
“…how sure are you the Tibetans in Tibet want to break up its relation with China by declaring independence?” - Max
If you want the answer to that question, I advise that you take a trip to Lhasa and ask the Tibetans first-hand.
This post is about the Tibetan flag as the symbol of an ancient and significant part of an ethnic minority’s culture and why Beijing is so offended by it.
April 23rd, 2008 at 10:49 am
I had a stupid mistake in my first year in UK. I was mistreated and hesitated to complain until I found out that complaining in the British culture does not have the negative meaning towards complainee as it has in Chinese. Independency/isolation are interpreted differently in the two cultures. Therefore it sounds funny to Brits that Chinese challenge on Scotland, Ireland issues. And at the same time, it’s unbearable for Chinese to be challenged on Tibet, Taiwan issues. Without understanding of each other, big words like imperialism and anti-freedom are popular choices. I think, it’s time for us to listen to the west about her opinion. But thing I don’t get is why the west is so confident she is absolutely right and divined to judge others?
April 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
sorry about having been radical in saying that.
do you think China will be tolerant enough to see the protesters yelling “free Tibet”, and waving the Tibetan flag , which stands for nothing like what you called the integral part of the Tibetan culture or whatever, but definitely becomes a symbol of separation?
that’s why we have a problem with it.
and i do want to know why there is nothing like self-criticism of the biased reporting on your transparent news media.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:45 am
“and i do want to know why there is nothing like self-criticism of the biased reporting on your transparent news media.”
Western media sources don’t speak with one voice, Kitty, so you will find, taken as a single entity, they are quite happy to criticise themselves.
The ‘western bias’ label is overdone in the extreme. And guess who’s doing the cooking.
April 27th, 2008 at 10:08 am
[...] owner for aiding the forces of “splittism.” For a discussion of the Tibetan flag go here. (Thanks to Nicholas [...]
April 27th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Stuart,
You are an idiot. Any display of splittism is an insult to all Chinese. Untold millions of Chinese died to unite China. When China was weak and fractured we were bullied by whites such as yourself. Now you cannot stomach the rise of China, so you like many other Westerners prop up that phoney, the Dalai Lama, and claim that this phoney speaks for all Tibetan people in respect of ‘independence.’ The fact is Tibetans are independent. They are part of the Peoples Republic of China, a truly independent country, a country which since 1949 has faced off the two most powerful superpowers that ever existed, and has achieved the most miraculous transformation in the shortest space of time in all of human history.
Anyone who would want to undermine the interests of all Chinese people and destroy China are indeed traitors deserving of all the opprobrium, and night soil, that can be heaped upon them.
April 27th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
@Monica “flotsam, aren’t many of you mention the affair of 1989(from last century) to critisize China nowadays?”
- I didn’t mention 1989. It is irrelevant to this topic.
@Mongoloid -
“Any display of splittism is an insult to all Chinese” - on that point many would disagree.
“Untold millions of Chinese died to unite China” - millions of people died in the liberation of Europe [1939-1945] but that doesn’t mean that the world isn’t free to change. Some countries have become independent, others have stayed together as the people have chosen. There is nothing inherently wrong in ’seperatism’ or ‘independence’ and if the the people choose it so be it. In Tib@t the people haven’t made a choice, so no one genuinely knows what they want.
April 27th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Flotsam: Yes the people should decide - but ALL the people of China, not just those few who happen to inhabit about one fifth the land mass of China. Would Australia allow just 2million people in Western Australia to secede and form their own state, so that these 2million people alone could benefit from the natural wealth of that region? And would Australia allow this if this hypothetical new nation was to align itself politically closely to the Peoples Republic of China?
Would Australia allow the secession of the Northern Territories under Aboriginal rule, and also accept the ethnic cleansing of all white Australians from the region? Of course not. But this is exactly what some in the West demand of China.
Remember Abraham Lincoln fought the Civil War solely to prevent the secession of the south and preserve the Union.
April 27th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
“ethnic cleansing of all white Australians from the region? Of course not. But this is exactly what some in the West demand of China.” - I’m not aware of anyone demanding ethnic cleansing in China.
There is no need to invent hypothetical situations for discussion as there are enough real situations in the world.
In the UK a few million people in Scotland have chosen to adopt their own national assembly. In the future they may vote for full independence. It will be the majority of the people in Scotland who make the decision, those in the rest of the UK do not have a vote in the matter. The same could also happen in Wales.
Unfortunately, MW, you are making many incorrect assumptions - some are wildly inaccurate - particularly about the people you are communicating with.
- do not assume that everyone who is not Chinese is a ‘westerner’ [whatever that is]
- do not assume that everyone who does not have a yellow skin is white
- do not assume that everyone who is not Chinese is anti-Chinese
. . . and after reading through some of your postings I could go on adding to this list and fill all this page. If you are wanting to impress upon the rest of the world what a great place to be China is, are you sure you’re succeeding? If on the other hand you want to convince everyone that the PRC is for the Chinese people only, that there is only one people, one way of thinking and one way of speaking you are getting very near to success. Irrationality rarely impresses, only saddens.
By the way, I thought this article was supposed to be about a couple of flags.
April 27th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Flotsam: I’m not aware of anyone demanding ethnic cleansing in China.
One of the main concerns of the ‘Free Tibet’ crowd is the influx of Han people into Tibet. They want to reverse this trend. They want China to limit the freedom of movement of its own people.
How the UK wants to handle the Scottish issue is the business of the UK. How China handles the Tibet issue is the internal affairs of China.
How you bring up your children is your business, how I bring up mine is my business.
99percent of the anti-China brigade are white Westerners. I don’t, often, see Congolese, Brazilians, Vietnamese, Cubans, Russians, Belarussians and Turks caring too much for what is purported to be happening in Tibet.
So why only white westerners?
April 28th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
“So why only white westerners?”
It isn’t. You can find examples of anti-anything if you look for it. And the Chinese are sensitised to any criticism, seeing it as negative or aggressive rather than constructive and informative.
Why is China the only country in the world that dosn’t respect the Dalai Lama?
April 28th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Chinese factory produces Tibetan flag
Check it out:
http://tinyurl.com/5ugqel
April 28th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
“Why is China the only country in the world that dosn’t respect the Dalai Lama?”
Why Copernicus Nicolaus was the only one did not believe that earth was the center of the universe?
April 29th, 2008 at 4:01 am
Nice answer, Linan.
I think Copernicus had a bit of science to back up his theories, though.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:16 am
I don’t see Russia, Cuba, most of Africa, many countries in Asia going out to lick the Dalai Lama’s balls.
It is only Hollywood airheads like Richard Gere that copulate with this phoney lama. And I have read some of this phoneys lamas stuff. He prevaricates about homosexuality. He prevaricates about the Iraq War. He claims to offer only peaceful resistance - despite been funded by the CIA between 1959 and 1974.
More funny than that, the stuff he writes, any teenager could come up with. Just airy-fairy stuff about loving everyone, wanting peace - wow. Nothing of substance there whatsoever.
The guy is a Hollywood propped up fraud. Positions in his exile ‘government’ are filled with close relatives - incredible that the Western press ignores this incredible nepotism.
More than likely too a child molester (read Michael Parenti).
Most people in fact don’t care one way or the other about the Dalai Lama. What is important though is the Dalai cannot push his shit past 1.3billion Chinese people. This phoney is so obvious he might as well tatoo ‘fraud’ on his forehead.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Stuart,
I guess you don’t really know his religion, right? Lama religion is probably the only sub-religion of Buddhism has the idea of Apocalyptic War. In the final Holy War, the “Shambhala Warriors” will kill all — guess whom? Muslims!
The original text describes the Buddhist war-methods as “merciless” and “cruel”. It says: “The supremely ferocious warriors will throw down the barbarian hordes” and “eliminate” (them). (Shri Kalachakra I. 163/165) The Kalachakra Tantra describes over many paragraphs murderous super weapons which the Buddhist army will use against “the enemy of the Dharma”. (Shri Kalachakra I. 128-142)
Please, go to read Kalachakra Tantra, the highest Lama doctrine and think on it. I won’t read it to my children. It’s far more bloody than the OT.