Break Through in Tibet, Free China

Break Through in Tibet, Free China

Wang, LiXiong

 

Seek New Non-violent method to fight

The easiest way to solve the problem in Tibet is to get approval of self-government from CCP Chinese government. Then what is the next step if Chinese government does not approve?

 

All Tibet’s current fight against CCP is passive, and the way it works depends on whether Beijing is willing to give in. All the protest & international support only put pressure on Beijing. If Beijing does not care, it means nothing and accomplishes nothing. From the current situation, there is no party who can pressure Beijing to give in on Tibetan issues. Therefore, all the efforts on Tibetan issues yield no future.

 

The reality in Tibet & China calls for a new method, a non-violent fighting scheme against CCP. The new method does not need CCP government’s agreement, it progress step by step, and each step gets Tibet one step closer to victory. Only through such a method, Tibetan people can control their fate in their own hands, and rely on no mercy from BeiJing.

Progressive Democratic Model Breaks the Ice

Progressive Democratic Model can be such a method. Here is the brief explanation of the idea of Progressive Democratic Model (details could be found at my book <<Dissolve Power Progressively—Layer by Layer>> and <<Progressive Democratic Model-the Third Choice for China>>4).

 

The first step is to organize self government committee in villages, vote for village head, who makes decisions for the village. The village people follow only one rule—enforce their own decision, approve their own leader, do not follow current government’s decision or designation.

 

Through this, the village can achieve self government. When most of the

villages in one county reach this step, they should begin next level—village heads form a self governing committee, making decisions for the county, and elect county officials. From now on, the village heads only follow the county officials, and do not follow the government assigned officials. The county becomes more autonomous. Step after step, from village to county, country to state, region, the whole Tibet can achieve self-government through self-governing each social unit.

 

This model has little technical difficulty when putting into action. The older model for political change is the “transformation of structure”, which requires complete change of the system in the beginning. It either needs the government’s approval, or it has to overthrown the government in power. All these can not be achieved in the near future. Progressive Democratic model changes its building blocks, starts from the social units on the bottom. Each unit controls its own matters, and elects self-government in a progressive manner for each level. Each unit is in a small & flexible format, therefore can act freely.

 

Current problems the model facing is the suppression of the CCP government. CCP government always suppresses on democratic movement, and persons involved should have the courage to face it. If the persons have the courage to insist, then progressive democratic model will go forward. For an instance, when the county head elected by the villager was put into jail, what next? Elect another one. Village heads from the same county can vote easily. Even the current government assigned county official hold the county seal & office, if no village heads follow him, he has no power. If the second county head was jailed, we can vote the third. If all the village heads elected were put into prison, then new village head can be elected, and new county leader can be elected from them. This process involves no forces, only one following another to prison, and uninterrupted election. In this case, unless the CCP autocratic government jailed every one in the county, the election process will continue.

 

Can the CCP government jail all the people? They can jail all people maybe in one village, but impossible for a county. The prison is not big enough, and the world will not allow it. Therefore, it several village start this model, our first mission is accomplished. On the road ahead, it would be uneven paths with violent storms, but each step we take bring us one step closer to victory. We control our own fate, and depend on no

 

one. If we can get through the hardships in the beginning, our path to democracy will become broader and easily.

 

When each district, city, & region in Tibet has elected their own committee of self-government, the county leaders elected can form committee of the whole Tibet which includes all four Tibetan regions. .  They can vote for Tibet governors among them, and realize self-governing in Tibet. All Tibetans are under one government, which is the success of “the middle path” by Dalai lama.

 

Correction to “the middle path”

 

I conclude “the middle path” into one phrase—“Stay in China to realize self-government in Tibet”. Tibet agree to stay within China as exchange of CCP government’s approval of “Whole Tibetan Region” & “Self government”. Ensure Tibet staying with China is the condition for “the middle path”. Not just for CCP autocratic China, but also for the future of a democratic China. If Tibet stays in China, Self-governing movement in Tibet can become part of the body of China’s Democratic Transformation. If Tibet was separated from China, Tibet democracy & China Democracy will become racism & confliction (This is not my opinion, but what can happen in real world).

 

“The Middle Path” achieves “self-government” through Democracy. But if we apply the current congressional representative system, there is no guarantee that Tibet will stay with China. Democratic social transformation are usually followed by racial confliction, like India-Pakistan separation, Disintegration of The former USSR, conflicts of former Yugoslavia, Chechnya & etc. are all the result of it.

 

Why is that? Democratic transformation is the shuffle machine of relocation of power & resources. More potential candidates appear on the stage of congressional representative system. They all want to be voted. Any racial problems that trigger the public emotions become the hot spot of discussion. Politicians utilize the hatred of the suppressed races, fuel up the flame of racial conflicts.

 

The spaces opened by democratic transformation will bring many medias on the stage. They all mark their territory in the market & compete with each other with various races trying to catch the public’s attention. Among all topics, the most heated discussion will be racial confliction. All medias join the race of being the representative of the victimized race, reporting their persecution & heat up the racial

 

conflicts.

The public crowds are always moody and lack of logical thinking. They can be easily misled by calling for morale. Politicians & Medias are good at inciting & magnifying racial conflicts. After public media forms its trend, the politicians and Medias come back asking for votes & selling their advertisement, which feed the public appetite more specifically. Politicians, Medias and the public act accordingly and cause the race to the extreme on racial conflicts.

 

If future Tibet practices congressional representative system, I believe the politicians & leaders who advocate for the independence of Tibet will win the majority vote. The promise made by Dalai Lama of staying in China will be gone with him like wind. China doesn’t trust Dalai Lama, and China called “the middle path” as disguise of independence. The reason lays with the congressional representative system. CCP realize the eventual path of independence of Tibet at the first sight of “the middle path”.

 

Therefore, I suggest adding “progressive” before the “democratic system” of “the middle path”, and changed to “Stay in China and realize the self-government of Tibet through progressive democratic system”.

 

Make CCP feel safe

Resolving Tibetan issues can be measured in two standards. One is make CCP feel safe, the other is prosperity of Tibet. First we look at how Progressive Democratic System make CCP feel safe.

 

If one is familiar with common people’s living, he will notice most of Han people do not care if Tibet stays with China or leave. Most Tibetan people do not care about their independence either. What people from both sides concern the most is the security and prosperity of their families. But politicians has a broader concern, fighting forces for independence & staying in China are more powerful as well.

 

When people joined together and form a nation, acknowledgement of mutual culture background from each individual is the fundamental requirement. It is not created instantly in people’s mind. It needs to be planted and spreaded by those elite members from the social group. Yet human’s individualism has many variances. When agreeing with specific opinions, like independence of the ethnic group, it only reflects one

 

specific direction. That direction could be replaced by other concerns, i.e. fear of going into war. Elite members of social group usually mislead people on predefined questions, and then claim that as the public’s opinion. They hide or avoid other questions.

 

The public can not understand macro issues exceeding what they have experienced. They react passively to the questions those elite members

designed. It looks like what the public vote for is according to their will. But it’s only fanaticism controlled by the elite social group members, which as a result, turns the pursuit of independence from the elite members of the social group into public interests.

 

In the terms of progressive democratic model, people elected advocate for the committee elected. Each member of the committee represents interest of the lower level committee who elect them. National interests could be formed through Progressive Committee in a progressive manner, which avoids being controlled by the elite social group members since it does not require their guidance.

 

Progressive democratic model achieves self-government for each social unit, and protect their freedom & fairness, while acknowledging their difference. Independence of Tibet is no longer important. Independence of Tibet may offer elite social group members bigger stage to perform, but is meaningless to the common people. Getting rid of social elite group members’ control will focus more on reality issues, and weaken the forces of independence..

 

Till that time, Medias & elite social group members can still stir up public’s radical emotion. But the nature of public authority elected from each level will protect the decisions from higher office through “layers of protection”, which also save the higher authority from being involved or being directly affected by public opinions.

 

The improvement of the Progressive Democratic Model is also the process of selection of social awareness through each level. The final stage calls for the election of The Committee of Whole Tibet Region among representatives from lower states, regions, & cities. The committee holds the highest awareness of Tibet region, and will not bring Tibet into disaster just to suit the public radical appeal. In conclusion, progressive democratic model ensures that Tibet will not separate from China, and CCP government can trust “the middle path” completely.

Unite Tibet, & Unite with Han & all other ethnic groups

Let’s examine again how progressive democratic model can make Tibet better. “Unite all Tibetan people under one government” has always been the biggest obstacle in resolving Tibetan issues. The root of CCP’s fear is the independence of Tibet. Tibet independence not only makes Tibet stronger, but also doubles its damage if problem arise. If Tibet doesn’t pursue independence, to united Tibet becomes a technical question within the government, CCP has no reason to hold against it.

 

Progressive Democratic Model not only cut forces for Tibetan independence, it also prevents expansion of ambition when the model is practiced in a larger scale. Since each democratic unit is self-governed, its nature cares more about its own interests. This prevents Tibet from being one separate region, but become multiple self-governed units. Each unit focuses on its own interests, not the goal for the whole region. Even all Tibetan areas combines into a “whole Tibet region”, its nature will not be changed. Look through this angle, progressive democratic model break the obstacle for uniting Tibet.

 

Progressive Democratic Model not only decentralizes Tibet, Han people will be decentralized if China practice progressive democratic model. Progressive Democratic Model forms self-government, not nations. There are more Han people in China’s 31 provinces, but they will not unite against Tibet. Each province pursues its own interest. They do not consider ethnic difference but focus on mutual benefit when making decisions on national issues. Some Han people may not agree with Tibetan people, other Han people may agree with Tibetan people because of mutual benefit. Han provinces will not alienate Tibet, they consider Tibet an valuable vote among all 31 votes from all provinces, and will try to unite with Tibet and other ethnic groups. The most benefit for Tibet is that Tibet was raised up to the same level with Han people, becoming one of the provinces of China, uniting all other Han provinces. When facing ethnical problems, Tibet has support from XinJiang, Inner Mogolia, GuangXi, NingXia, even minority groups in YunNan, GuiZhou will support Tibet and these support help Tibet weigh in more vote-wise.

Prevent control of democracy by religion

 

Tibet has hundreds of years of tradition of politics & religion in one governing body, which contributes to Dalai Lama’s current supreme status. Religions in Tibet affect daily issues extensively. Under this background, practicing congressional representative system will not bring Tibet the real democracy. Even law forbids politics being controlled by religion, allowing no religious staff for election, many religious voters will vote for congressional representatives according to Dalai Lama’s opinion.

 

Democratic spirit first appears as the awareness of individualism & freedom on choices of variety. If majority of people submit their political judgments & social rights to people who work for religion, then it is the extension of religious power. Religious involvement in politics needs no control of power. It can be achieved through democracy. If one day religious power falls into the hand of a dictator, democracy may cause more damage by helping the dictatorship.

 

This concern is not against religion, it helps to protect the supreme status of religion in Tibet, as well as preventing religious involvement with politics. This is also what Dalai Lama has been thinking and emphasizing all these years. Common people get lost in a massive congressional representative system, and do not know who to vote, so they turn into religious leaders for guidance. In progressive democratic model, local election is held among small committee member groups. Voters are familiar with everything, and will vote according to their own benefits. Religion is only background and will not issue political orders. In higher level elections, voters are responsible for the self-governing region they represent. Religion could affect local people, but higher level voters needs not mind religious leader’s opinion as long as they have support from their own committee.

 

Progressive Democratic Model has two functions: one is to unite groups of loosely organized people; the second is to stop the affect of stronger forces of macro-elements. These two functions are equally important. Congressional Representative system is a macro-politic system. Due to its overlapping with religious leadership on the macro-level, it could be easily affected by religion, and it could restrict religious activity for the same reason. Progressive Democratic Model separates religion & politics without challenging the supreme status of religion, it avoids confliction of this two parties. This is extremely important for Tibet while entering into a new era of modern politics.

 

Different Ethnic groups form a republic government

Congressional representative system is the political ruling from top to bottom. The ruling structure allows only one group leadership. In a society of political groups against each other, whoever gets power means the other party losing power and being controlled. If the losing party is big enough, the society usually suffers being unstable or in a deep split.

 

Take Tibetan congressional representative system for an example, CCP is very likely to lose during the fights for power. This is unacceptable to CCP. Progressive Democratic Model has no win or lose of political groups. Election is loosely held among several committees, which has no predefined territory, nor grounds for political groups. CCP members &Tibetan leaders in exile are equal in each committee. Therefore, Progressive Democratic Model is more easily accepted by CCP government.

 

The first problem Tibet faces after self-government is the arrangement of former CCP government employees in Tibet, retirees, volunteers, & staffs of nation owned enterprises which are financed by the government. The number of these people is huge, and their influence is huge as well. Things could be complicated if not treated cautiously. When two political groups have to get along, whoever in power will cause problems, the other group can not be easily controlled. Since Progressive Democratic Model is not top to bottom ruling, and there is no one party overwhelmingly defeating another party. It is a model of system from bottom to top, and it offers space of peace for different political groups.

 

I.E. both Tibetans in exile and CCP members can have their own governing body, follow their own policies, promote their own culture & protect their own members. Communications between different self-governing groups proceeds in the higher level of progressive democratic model. Members of that level are more open minded and willing to negotiate. Progressive Democratic Structure allows mutual existence of different political groups, and promotes their cooperation. After enough time of transition, conflicts among different political groups start to melt away.

 

For the same reason, Progressive Democratic Model is more suitable to regions with multi-ethnic groups, especially places where “small ethnic groups reside densely” or “big areas loosely reside by many ethnic groups”. First step is to achieve self-government of own ethnic group in small densely populated areas, ensure their ethnic culture and living not being affected or suppressed by other ethnic groups. When progressive structure reaches a higher level, members elected from different ethnic regions should form managerial committee, and form a republic of multi-ethnic groups. “Different nature & same structure” should be the effective model of solving ethnic problems.

Tibet will influence China

Progressive Democratic Model has its advantage in solving Tibetan problems, and remains a suitable path for the transformation of Democracy in China. The beginning is the most difficult. Beginning in Tibet is easier than beginning in China. Firstly, Tibet can practice experimental society led by exiled members; secondly, Dalai Lama has the power of calling Tibetan people; thirdly, Tibetan religion can produce the spirit of “filling the prison”. All these are the elements China do not have. If Progressive Democratic Model succeeds in Tibet, this will give a good example for China, and starts the political transformation in China.

 

Tibet exile government has gone through tens of years under congressional representative system. They won’t break away from its current system easily. Current Tibet political system follows congressional representative system as its former exile government. Even if it operates well overseas, it has more problems copied to Tibet. Not to mention break the deadlock situation in Tibet.

 

Tibet problems & transformation of China is the most challenging problems facing the world nowadays. The two are inseparable. Without china’s political transformation, Tibet problems will not be solved. “The middle path” is stuck in the middle and can not move forward or backward, one important reason is that it does not consider the two problems simultaneously. A better future of Tibet lies on the condition of make China better. This condition can not be skipped.

 

For a better future of Tibetan people, Tibet should become the first domino card to fall to accelerate China’s transformation.

 

Feb. 11, 2007 BeiJing

 

« 上一篇 | 下一篇 »

Trackbacks

点击获得Trackback地址,Encode: UTF-8 点击获得Trackback地址,Encode: GB2312 or GBK 点击获得Trackback地址,Encode: BIG5

发表评论

评论内容 (必填):