# The Horrible History of Tibetan Serfdom

An episode of [Human History ASMR](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/6793196842), 26 Sep 2026, 1 h 03 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/75116437/the_horrible_history_of_tibetan_serfdom_human_voiced_no_ads.mp3

Step into the complex social world of historical Tibet and explore the institution often described as Tibetan serfdom. This episode examines the lives of peasants, laborers, landholders, religious institutions, and government authorities within the traditional Tibetan system, while exploring one of the most politically and historically debated subjects in modern Tibetan history. Discover how land, taxation, labor obligations, and social status shaped everyday life before the major political changes of the twentieth century. Explore the relationships between rural communities and powerful estates, including those controlled by aristocratic families, monasteries, and the Tibetan government. Learn how labor duties, rents, taxes, and household obligations could affect the lives and economic opportunities of ordinary people. Beyond the political labels, this episode examines the realities of daily life. Explore agriculture, pastoralism, seasonal labor, family structures, religious life, debt, local administration, and the responsibilities attached to different social positions. Discover how social status could influence access to land, mobility, marriage, legal rights, and economic security. The episode also examines the forms of coercion and dependency that existed within the system, including labor obligations, debts, punishments, and restrictions on movement. At the same time, it considers the complexity of Tibetan society and the differences between regions, estates, occupations, and individual experiences rather than presenting every person as having lived under identical conditions. The term “serfdom” itself is central to the historical debate. Drawing on Tibetan and Chinese records, diplomatic accounts, photographs, oral histories, administrative documents, and modern scholarship, this episode examines why historians and political authorities have used different terms to describe traditional Tibetan society. It separates documented evidence from political narratives, propaganda, romanticized portrayals, and simplified modern interpretations. The episode also explores the dramatic transformation of Tibetan society after 1950, including the end of the traditional estate system, land redistribution, political upheaval, and the profound changes imposed on religious institutions and rural communities. These events reshaped the lives of both privileged and disadvantaged groups and remain central to debates about Tibet's modern history. Narrated with a calm, human voice, this episode is perfect for history enthusiasts, Tibetan history lovers, documentary listeners, and anyone interested in the realities of premodern social systems. Explore the evidence, controversies, and human experiences behind the complicated history of Tibetan serfdom.

## Transcript

[0:01] Speaker 1: What comes to mind when you think of the history
[0:02] Speaker 1: of Tibet? Perhaps you envision an idyllic mountain realm of
[0:08] Speaker 1: monasteries and monks, a Shangri-La of spirituality and peace. Yet
[0:16] Speaker 1: behind that romanticized image is a far more complex and, frankly,
[0:22] Speaker 1: darker social reality. For centuries, traditional Tibetan society was built
[0:28] Speaker 1: on a rigid hierarchy, in which the vast majority of
[0:32] Speaker 1: people lived as serfs or bound labourers under powerful lords
[0:36] Speaker 1: and monasteries. In essence, Old Tibet was far from a paradise.
[0:44] Speaker 1: It was a land of feudal theocracy, where a small
[0:48] Speaker 1: elite controlled all the land and wealth, and where ordinary
[0:53] Speaker 1: Tibetans bore the heavy burdens of servitude, a life effectively
[0:59] Speaker 1: in chains. This history of slavery and serfdom in Tibet
[1:04] Speaker 1: is a story of contrast and paradox. It's a tale
[1:08] Speaker 1: of a devoutly Buddhist society that preached compassion, yet tolerated
[1:13] Speaker 1: a social order that kept many in hereditary bondage. And
[1:19] Speaker 1: it's also a tale of abrupt transformation, how in the
[1:23] Speaker 1: mid-20th century this age-old system was shattered by outside forces
[1:29] Speaker 1: amid claims of liberation. another complicated aspect to the epilogue
[1:37] Speaker 1: of the story. So today, we are going to journey
[1:41] Speaker 1: through this contested history, from Tibet's feudal past through to
[1:46] Speaker 1: the dramatic reforms of the 1950s, and we'll talk about
[1:51] Speaker 1: the truths, the myths, the controversies surrounding slavery in Tibet.
[1:58] Speaker 1: And don't worry, We'll give both sides equal time to
[2:03] Speaker 1: talk about those. But before I start the video today,
[2:08] Speaker 1: I'd like to welcome you to the channel. It's good
[2:11] Speaker 1: to have you here if you're new. And if you're
[2:15] Speaker 1: yet to click that subscribe button, I encourage you to
[2:17] Speaker 1: do so. Like the video, leave a comment. It really
[2:21] Speaker 1: helps in the algorithm. Now, this video will be completely
[2:25] Speaker 1: uninterrupted for your enjoyment all the way through. Now, that
[2:30] Speaker 1: is because of the generous contributions on Patreon, YouTube members,
[2:36] Speaker 1: donations to the PayPal and Super Thanks on YouTube, and
[2:39] Speaker 1: also those who checked out the merch store. Thank you
[2:43] Speaker 1: very much. If you want to find those relevant links,
[2:47] Speaker 1: you can have a look in the pinned comment video
[2:49] Speaker 1: description or channel description. You'll get to where you need
[2:52] Speaker 1: to go if you want to go there. Now, with
[2:56] Speaker 1: all that being said, welcomes out of the way, let's go. begin. Now,
[3:02] Speaker 1: to understand slavery, or more accurately, serfdom in Tibet, we
[3:07] Speaker 1: have to picture the structure of Tibetan society as it
[3:10] Speaker 1: existed for hundreds of years up to the mid-20th century.
[3:15] Speaker 1: Traditional Tibet was essentially a feudal theocracy. And what does
[3:21] Speaker 1: that mean? It means that both political and spiritual authority
[3:25] Speaker 1: were intertwined. and land was controlled by two powerful groups,
[3:30] Speaker 1: that is the noble aristocracy and the Buddhist monasteries. From
[3:37] Speaker 1: at least the 17th century onwards, especially after 1642 when
[3:40] Speaker 1: the Dalai Lama's government was established, Tibet was ruled by
[3:45] Speaker 1: a clerical elite centered in Lhasa. The Dalai Lama himself
[3:50] Speaker 1: was the supreme authority, a spiritual leader who also governed
[3:55] Speaker 1: the state. Below him, a small number of aristocratic families,
[3:59] Speaker 1: perhaps only a few hundred families in total, and large
[4:03] Speaker 1: monastery institutions owned most of the land and pretty much
[4:07] Speaker 1: all the resources. These were Tibet's lords. Some were secular
[4:13] Speaker 1: nobles with hereditary titles, others were high lamas or monastic officials,
[4:20] Speaker 1: and they wielded immense power over the common people. The
[4:24] Speaker 1: majority of Tibetans in that era were peasants bound to land,
[4:29] Speaker 1: variously referred to as Miser in Tibetan, literally common people,
[4:35] Speaker 1: a term which has been translated into serfs, essentially. They
[4:41] Speaker 1: worked on the estates of the nobles and monasteries and
[4:43] Speaker 1: paid heavy taxes and labor dues. By most accounts, roughly
[4:48] Speaker 1: 90% or more of Tibet's population lived under this serfdom system. Essentially,
[4:57] Speaker 1: peasants tied by birth to serving a particular lord or estate.
[5:02] Speaker 1: Only a small slice of the population, such as about
[5:05] Speaker 1: 5% of families who were nobility, and perhaps an additional
[5:09] Speaker 1: few percent who were high-ranking lamas, officials or wealthy traders,
[5:13] Speaker 1: were free from these obligations. At the bottom of the
[5:17] Speaker 1: social pyramid were also a minority of outcasts known as ragyappa,
[5:25] Speaker 1: who did most of the undesirable work, blacksmithing, butchery, garbage work,
[5:32] Speaker 1: that kind of thing, and were treated as untouchables in
[5:36] Speaker 1: this stratified society. So, in short, the Tibet that Western
[5:42] Speaker 1: travellers romanticise as a mystical Buddhist utopia in reality had
[5:46] Speaker 1: a caste-like hierarchy, with a privileged elite and an impoverished
[5:52] Speaker 1: underclass which were bound in servitude. But what did it
[5:57] Speaker 1: mean to be a serf in Old Tibet? Because we
[6:00] Speaker 1: know this word from the European context and all of that,
[6:03] Speaker 1: and of course, while the term serf is borrowed from
[6:05] Speaker 1: European history, it captures key aspects of the Tibetan case.
[6:13] Speaker 1: But the Tibetan serf system is a little bit different.
[6:17] Speaker 1: Sea serfs were hereditarily bound to their lord's estate. a
[6:21] Speaker 1: family that tilled a plot of land under a lord
[6:24] Speaker 1: could not freely leave or permanently migrate elsewhere without permission.
[6:30] Speaker 1: They were not chattel slaves to be bought and sold
[6:34] Speaker 1: on a whim in theory. Tibetan serfs had certain customary
[6:38] Speaker 1: rights and owned some personal property, but their lives were
[6:43] Speaker 1: decidedly unfree. Each serf household owed taxes in kind, barley, butter, livestock,
[6:53] Speaker 1: other produce, and had to perform corvy labour for their lord.
[6:58] Speaker 1: This labour could include working in the lord's fields, building roads,
[7:03] Speaker 1: transporting goods or domestic service in the lord's manor. The
[7:08] Speaker 1: requirements were often onerous. Many servants had to spend weeks
[7:12] Speaker 1: or months each year doing labour for the monastery or
[7:15] Speaker 1: noble estate, in addition to tilling their own small plot
[7:18] Speaker 1: to feed their family. hard work. Now if a serf
[7:23] Speaker 1: failed to meet these obligations or attempted to flee, they
[7:27] Speaker 1: faced severe punishments under the law of the land. Now
[7:33] Speaker 1: it is important to note that traditional Tibetan serfdom was
[7:37] Speaker 1: also theocratic in nature. The largest landowners were not only
[7:42] Speaker 1: secular nobles, but also the great monasteries and incarnate lamas.
[7:49] Speaker 1: By the mid-20th century, Monasteries like Drepung, Ganden, Serra, and others,
[7:55] Speaker 1: each controlled huge estates with tens of thousands of serfs.
[8:01] Speaker 1: Devout peasants might faithfully deliver the share of their harvest
[8:04] Speaker 1: to support monks and believe the religious elite deserved these offerings.
[8:10] Speaker 1: Yet from a social perspective, the monasteries acted much like
[8:14] Speaker 1: feudal landlords. High lamas could be, in effect, feudal lords
[8:21] Speaker 1: in robes. This blend of religion and feudalism sets Tibet
[8:27] Speaker 1: apart from, say, medieval Europe, where the church and nobility
[8:30] Speaker 1: were separate estates. In Tibet they were often one and
[8:35] Speaker 1: the same. This ideology of karma also reinforced the social order.
[8:42] Speaker 1: Many Tibetans believed one's position in this life, whether wealthy
[8:45] Speaker 1: lord or poor serf, was a result of one's past
[8:49] Speaker 1: life merit. As one observer noted in Old Tibet, the
[8:54] Speaker 1: rich felt very little guilt about sitting on the necks
[8:58] Speaker 1: of the poor, and the poor were taught to accept
[9:00] Speaker 1: their lot patiently, as the karmic order. Compassion was preached
[9:07] Speaker 1: in theory, but in practice inequality was seen as just
[9:11] Speaker 1: the natural way of the world. And so within these systems,
[9:15] Speaker 1: There were several categories of unfree people, most common with
[9:19] Speaker 1: each tralpa or tax-paying serfs, who were attached to an
[9:23] Speaker 1: estate but typically had the right to farm a small
[9:27] Speaker 1: piece of land for themselves in return for heavy taxes
[9:29] Speaker 1: and labour duty. They could not sell or relinquish their
[9:33] Speaker 1: land without approval, and their children inherited the same obligations. Born,
[9:40] Speaker 1: live and die a slave, basically. Now other serfs, often
[9:47] Speaker 1: called du chung, small householders, had no land of their
[9:52] Speaker 1: own and lived directly on their lord's household or on
[9:55] Speaker 1: their lord's property, completely dependent on the lord's provisions. These
[10:00] Speaker 1: individuals were more akin to household servants or slaves, often
[10:04] Speaker 1: working as stable hands, servants or artisans at best of
[10:08] Speaker 1: the lord. There even existed a class of nangzang, literally
[10:15] Speaker 1: household slaves in a few estates. These were people whose
[10:19] Speaker 1: ancestors had been owned outright by the estate holders, a
[10:25] Speaker 1: form of slavery that predated the later arrangement of serfdom.
[10:30] Speaker 1: But by the 20th century, true chattel slavery, in which
[10:36] Speaker 1: people were bought and sold like property, was reportedly rare
[10:41] Speaker 1: in central Tibet. One British colonial officer in the 1920s
[10:45] Speaker 1: observed that, quote, Slavery is not common in Tibet compared
[10:50] Speaker 1: to some neighbouring regions. Nevertheless, a small number of Nangzan
[10:55] Speaker 1: slaves were still present in certain manors even up to
[10:59] Speaker 1: the 1950s, representing a vestigial form of bondage where humans
[11:03] Speaker 1: were treated as transferable property of a lord's household. In
[11:09] Speaker 1: one documented case, as late as 1943, a nobleman named
[11:12] Speaker 1: Trimon Norbuwangyal sold 100 of his serfs to a monastery official,
[11:21] Speaker 1: essentially trading human lives as you might sell goats or cows. Well,
[11:28] Speaker 1: this transaction was recorded in the Tibetan archives. It shows
[11:32] Speaker 1: how an estate owner's power over, quote, his people, could
[11:38] Speaker 1: extend to outright buying and selling. Now, if that's not slavery,
[11:45] Speaker 1: I don't know what is. So for the serfs and
[11:50] Speaker 1: slaves of Old Tibet, daily life was defined by obligation
[11:54] Speaker 1: to the Lord, and that could often be quite harsh.
[11:59] Speaker 1: A typical family of serfs lived in a small farmhouse
[12:02] Speaker 1: or shack on the land that they cultivated, barely managing
[12:06] Speaker 1: to subsist on what remained after they turned over the
[12:09] Speaker 1: prescribed share of grain and butter to the estate. Corvy
[12:13] Speaker 1: labour was a particularly dreaded burden. Lords could demand that
[12:18] Speaker 1: serfs transport goods long distances, spend weeks building a road
[12:23] Speaker 1: or a manor wall, or attend to the lords' herds
[12:27] Speaker 1: at a moment's notice. Families had to balance this unpaid
[12:31] Speaker 1: labour with the struggle to work in their own fields
[12:33] Speaker 1: and survive the brutal winters of the Tibetan plateau. And
[12:37] Speaker 1: believe me, they are brutal. Hunger and poverty were commonplace,
[12:43] Speaker 1: as the feudal dues were kept insolent. many households on
[12:46] Speaker 1: the edge of subsistence. And it has been noted that
[12:50] Speaker 1: Tibet society was extremely poor and subsistence-based, so even without
[12:54] Speaker 1: malicious intent, this system left the lower classes chronically vulnerable
[12:59] Speaker 1: to exploitation. Beyond economic exploitation, the serfs were also subject
[13:05] Speaker 1: to their master's legal authority and whims. In old Tibet,
[13:10] Speaker 1: landowners possessed a great judicial and punitive power over the
[13:14] Speaker 1: people beneath them. Local lords, including the big monasteries, administered
[13:19] Speaker 1: most day-to-day justice, since the central court system was minimal.
[13:25] Speaker 1: This meant a lord could punish or serve for disobedience
[13:28] Speaker 1: or delinquency as he saw fit, punishments that could be
[13:33] Speaker 1: shockingly severe. The routine one was flogging for serious infractions.
[13:39] Speaker 1: Physical mutilation was historically used as well. Thieves might have
[13:43] Speaker 1: a hand amputated. Debtors could be chained, put in stocks.
[13:49] Speaker 1: Foreigners who travelled to Tibet before the 1950s recorded some
[13:54] Speaker 1: gruesome scenes. Robert W. Ford, a British radio operator who
[13:59] Speaker 1: lived in eastern Tibet in the 40s, recalled seeing a
[14:02] Speaker 1: man who had all been deprived of an arm or
[14:05] Speaker 1: a leg for theft. The stumps crudely cauterised, if at all.
[14:11] Speaker 1: Penal amputations carried out without antiseptics or sterile dressings. He
[14:17] Speaker 1: described these sites to underscore that, whatever its spiritual renown, quote,
[14:22] Speaker 1: Old Tibet was definitely not Shangri-La, end quote. Similarly, Sir
[14:30] Speaker 1: Charles Bell, a British diplomat in Lhasa during the 20s,
[14:35] Speaker 1: wrote that a Tibetan landlord could have his tenant beaten
[14:38] Speaker 1: as severely as he wished, short of killing him outright.
[14:42] Speaker 1: and could even place the serf in wooden stocks or
[14:45] Speaker 1: iron fetters for long periods. The only check on the
[14:50] Speaker 1: brutality was a traditional legal code, which politely urged moderation,
[14:55] Speaker 1: advising that local lords not take things too far. In effect, however,
[15:01] Speaker 1: the serfs had very little legal protection. They had no
[15:05] Speaker 1: political voice and no ability to seek justice outside the
[15:08] Speaker 1: feudal hierarchy. except in some cases by appealing to higher
[15:12] Speaker 1: lords or the Dalai Lama's courts in Lhasa. But that
[15:17] Speaker 1: is a long and uncertain road. Now I will remind
[15:22] Speaker 1: you again that all of this is happening within the
[15:25] Speaker 1: twentieth century. This is not the medieval times, not even
[15:32] Speaker 1: early modern times, but well and truly into the twentieth century. Well,
[15:38] Speaker 1: despite these oppressive features, it would still be pretty oversimplified
[15:42] Speaker 1: to portray every aspect of Tibetan serfdom as unrelentingly horrific.
[15:49] Speaker 1: The system was buttressed by long-standing custom, and there were
[15:54] Speaker 1: understood obligations on the part of lords as well. Many lords,
[16:00] Speaker 1: secular and monastic alike, saw themselves as paternal figures to
[16:04] Speaker 1: their serfs. They were expected to provide some security in
[16:08] Speaker 1: lean times, to administer charity on religious holidays, and not
[16:14] Speaker 1: to wantonly kill or mistreat their dependents. Social relationships could
[16:19] Speaker 1: be personal and complex. In some estates, a form of
[16:23] Speaker 1: mutual dependence is said to exist. The serfs provided labour
[16:28] Speaker 1: and allegiance, while the lord provided stewardship and protection. A
[16:33] Speaker 1: traditional saying is that, quote, the head of the family
[16:37] Speaker 1: and the people drink from the same stream, implying a
[16:42] Speaker 1: kind of community bond, or at least dressing up a
[16:48] Speaker 1: poor system in its finest clothes, I suppose. To the
[16:53] Speaker 1: extent that serfs believed in the spiritual authority of their masters,
[16:57] Speaker 1: especially incarnate lamas, loyalty could even be willingly given There
[17:04] Speaker 1: were reported instances where serfs professed affection or respect for
[17:08] Speaker 1: a benevolent master who treated them well. Indeed, foreign visitors
[17:12] Speaker 1: noted that some serfs appeared cheerful or deeply religious, finding
[17:17] Speaker 1: meaning in their faith while enduring hardship. And I suppose
[17:22] Speaker 1: you have to remember, too, that serfdom was the norm
[17:25] Speaker 1: of life that they knew. Few could imagine a radically
[17:29] Speaker 1: different social order. Well, that being said, You shouldn't romanticize it.
[17:36] Speaker 1: Even if certain enlightened lords were kind, the structure of
[17:40] Speaker 1: society left serfs with no freedom of movement or economic
[17:45] Speaker 1: opportunity beyond what their birth afforded to them. Ambition was stifled.
[17:51] Speaker 1: A bright commoner's best hope might be to join a monastery.
[17:55] Speaker 1: Becoming a monk was perhaps one of the escape routes
[18:00] Speaker 1: from serf status for some boys. or to seek patronage
[18:04] Speaker 1: as a servant in a noble household. Social mobility was
[18:09] Speaker 1: pretty minimal, but a handful of serfs did manage to
[18:13] Speaker 1: improve their lot, for example, through trade or craft, some
[18:17] Speaker 1: became relatively prosperous, or even lent money to poorer neighbours,
[18:22] Speaker 1: but they remained legally under a lord's domain. In principle,
[18:25] Speaker 1: a serf family could also lease themselves temporarily away from
[18:30] Speaker 1: their estate by paying a fee to the lord, a
[18:33] Speaker 1: practice scholars call the human lease. Well, in such cases,
[18:39] Speaker 1: a serf who could afford it might buy the right
[18:43] Speaker 1: to live and work elsewhere for a year or more,
[18:46] Speaker 1: essentially renting out some personal freedom. Well, this indicates that
[18:54] Speaker 1: the practice of serfdom in Tibet had variations. It was
[18:58] Speaker 1: not entirely static, not entirely uniform. But nevertheless, the fact
[19:03] Speaker 1: that a person had to pay his master for the
[19:06] Speaker 1: privilege to move or avoid labour duty shows how constraining
[19:11] Speaker 1: the system was. Once again, a very ugly system dressed
[19:15] Speaker 1: up in its finest. Concrete examples from historical records drive
[19:20] Speaker 1: home the reality of this. We've already mentioned the sale
[19:24] Speaker 1: of a hundred serfs in 1943, an extreme but revealing case.
[19:29] Speaker 1: And another infamous example often cited is a punitive mutilation
[19:32] Speaker 1: case in 1924. In that incident, local officials ordered the
[19:38] Speaker 1: eye-gouging of a man as a punishment. A grotesque measure
[19:43] Speaker 1: out of a medieval playbook. You weren't finding stuff like
[19:47] Speaker 1: that in other parts of the world for a... At
[19:51] Speaker 1: that time, that's for sure. It's said that this punishment
[19:55] Speaker 1: was so rare by then that the officials actually had
[19:58] Speaker 1: to consult old techs to figure out how to carry
[20:00] Speaker 1: it out, and nobody alive had practical experience with it.
[20:06] Speaker 1: when the central government in Lhasa, led by the Dalai Lama,
[20:10] Speaker 1: learned of this brutality, the officials responsible were themselves punished.
[20:16] Speaker 1: Because by the early 20th century, even Tibet's Dalai Lama
[20:20] Speaker 1: and rulers recognized cruelty like that as excessive. In fact,
[20:25] Speaker 1: the 13th Dalai Lama who ruled Tibet in the first
[20:29] Speaker 1: half of the 20th century had formally banned capital punishment
[20:33] Speaker 1: and torture in 1913. issuing edicts to end practices like mutilation.
[20:39] Speaker 1: While this suggests that Tibet was taking slow steps towards
[20:44] Speaker 1: moderating the worst abuses, at least under more progressive leadership. However,
[20:52] Speaker 1: as the 1924 case shows, in remote areas, old habits
[20:57] Speaker 1: died hard, and enforcement of reform was spotty. The overall
[21:03] Speaker 1: picture is is that while not every lord was a tyrant,
[21:08] Speaker 1: not every serf lived in misery, systematic inequality and instances
[21:12] Speaker 1: of severe abuses were inherent in the Tibetan social system.
[21:18] Speaker 1: The majority of Tibetans had zero say in their governments,
[21:23] Speaker 1: and their labor and obedience were extracted by tradition backed
[21:26] Speaker 1: with force. The spiritual underpinnings of society did not prevent
[21:32] Speaker 1: earthly exploitation. but rather they were used to bolster it. Well,
[21:40] Speaker 1: by the early 20th century, Tibet was one of the
[21:43] Speaker 1: few remaining societies in the world still largely untouched by
[21:48] Speaker 1: modern concepts of equality or democracy. However, signs of change,
[21:53] Speaker 1: or at least the desire for change, began to appear
[21:57] Speaker 1: from within Tibet well before Communist China arrived on the scene.
[22:03] Speaker 1: Facing the winds of a new century, some Tibetan leaders
[22:06] Speaker 1: realized that their nation's archaic system needed reform. The 13th
[22:11] Speaker 1: Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso in particular, tried to modernize Tibet
[22:17] Speaker 1: during his reign, which spanned from roughly 1895 to 1933.
[22:21] Speaker 1: This Dalai Lama had the experience of the intrusion of
[22:27] Speaker 1: British forces in 1904 and the subsequent threat of Qing
[22:31] Speaker 1: Chinese domination. These crises convinced him that Tibet must strengthen
[22:37] Speaker 1: and update itself. He introduced a number of reforms, reorganizing
[22:45] Speaker 1: and enlarging the small Tibetan army, attempting to streamline the
[22:49] Speaker 1: administration and curbing some abuses by officials and monasteries. As mentioned,
[22:55] Speaker 1: he outlawed brutal corporal punishments like mutilation and the death
[22:58] Speaker 1: penalty in 1913, reflecting a modernizing vision of justice. And
[23:04] Speaker 1: in a notable social gesture, the 13th Dalai Lama also
[23:08] Speaker 1: declared an amnesty for runaway serfs in 1913, effectively forgiving
[23:14] Speaker 1: those serfs who had fled their masters and allowing them
[23:18] Speaker 1: to settle as free farmers on whatever land they would
[23:21] Speaker 1: be cultivating. He decreed that any unclaimed land tilled by
[23:26] Speaker 1: escaped serfs would become theirs, a policy aimed at undercutting
[23:31] Speaker 1: the power of surf owners and rewarding enterprise. And this
[23:36] Speaker 1: is a remarkable edict. It shows a top-down attempt to
[23:40] Speaker 1: alleviate serfdom by encouraging a transition to small, independent farming. Yet,
[23:48] Speaker 1: despite such progressive impulses, the feudal structure proved to be
[23:53] Speaker 1: deeply resilient. The Dalai Lama's reforms were limited and met
[24:00] Speaker 1: plenty of resistance. Powerful nobles and lamas had no interest
[24:05] Speaker 1: in relinquishing their privileges, and the Dalai Lama, for all
[24:08] Speaker 1: of his spiritual authority, often had to rule by consensus
[24:13] Speaker 1: with those elites. In the decades after his death, in 1933,
[24:17] Speaker 1: Tibet's government largely stagnated under regents and conservative advisers who
[24:24] Speaker 1: rolled back or slow-walked reforms. The young fourteenth Dalai Lama,
[24:31] Speaker 1: Tenzin Gyatso, assumed full power in the 1950s as a teenager,
[24:37] Speaker 1: just as new storms gathered around Tibet. Even in his
[24:41] Speaker 1: shorter tenure of de facto rule before exile, the 14th
[24:44] Speaker 1: Dalai Lama showed reformist inclinations. He was aware of his
[24:48] Speaker 1: people's impoverishment and spoke of wanting to improve education, infrastructure, and, well,
[24:56] Speaker 1: a lot of the ordinary person. In the mid-1950s, While
[25:02] Speaker 1: still in Lhasa under the shadow of Chinese occupation, the
[25:05] Speaker 1: Dalai Lama attempted some modest reforms. Notably, he reduced Corvii
[25:11] Speaker 1: taxes for poor peasants in certain areas and started Tibet's
[25:14] Speaker 1: first secular schools. He even implemented land rent reduction on
[25:19] Speaker 1: estates directly administered by his own office. These measures were small,
[25:24] Speaker 1: experimental steps, pilot projects towards reforming serfdom. But by all accounts,
[25:32] Speaker 1: the young Dalai Lama faced a delicate balancing act. If
[25:36] Speaker 1: he pushed reform too hard and fast, he risked enraging
[25:41] Speaker 1: the entrenched nobility and monastic hierarchs who formed his government's backbone. Ironically,
[25:47] Speaker 1: even the Chinese authorities, who were then working with the
[25:51] Speaker 1: Dalai Lama under a policy of gradualism, cautioned him against
[25:56] Speaker 1: being too aggressive, fearing it would spark rebellion among the
[26:00] Speaker 1: Tibetan aristocracy and clergy. You see, Beijing's official line in
[26:05] Speaker 1: the early 50s was that Tibet was not ready for
[26:08] Speaker 1: socialist reform and would have to change at its own pace,
[26:14] Speaker 1: a promise made in the 1951 agreement when China first
[26:17] Speaker 1: took control of Tibet. Thus, the Dalai Lama was encouraged
[26:23] Speaker 1: by the Chinese to postpone land reforms, and he did so,
[26:28] Speaker 1: waiting for a more opportune moment. You can't just click
[26:33] Speaker 1: your fingers and remove a system like that. The last
[26:38] Speaker 1: thing that the Communist Party wanted was blood on the streets. Well,
[26:44] Speaker 1: despite all these constraints, there was a growing recognition among
[26:48] Speaker 1: educated Tibetans by the mid-century that the old feudal order
[26:52] Speaker 1: had to evolve. A few lay officials and moderate monks
[26:56] Speaker 1: in Lhasa supported the Dalai Lama's mild reform initiatives. In
[27:02] Speaker 1: the eastern Tibetan regions, like Kam and Amdo, which had
[27:06] Speaker 1: come under direct Chinese administration earlier, some progressive Tibetan cadres
[27:11] Speaker 1: even collaborated with Chinese programs to end usury and relieve
[27:17] Speaker 1: peasants' burdens in the 1950s. However, the majority of the aristocracy,
[27:26] Speaker 1: the noble estate holders and high lamas, saw any talk
[27:30] Speaker 1: of land reform or serf emancipation as a dire threat
[27:34] Speaker 1: to their power, and the social fabric of Tibet in general.
[27:42] Speaker 1: Now this divide in Tibetan society, between a forward-looking minority
[27:46] Speaker 1: and a deeply traditional establishment, set the stage for the conflict.
[27:53] Speaker 1: The common serfs themselves, for the most part, were not
[27:55] Speaker 1: openly agitating for revolution. Tibet had little in the way
[27:59] Speaker 1: of grassroots peasant revolt in its history. Many in the
[28:04] Speaker 1: peasantry were illiterate, isolated, and imbued with reverence for their masters,
[28:09] Speaker 1: thus not politicized as a modern class. But if given
[28:14] Speaker 1: hope of freedom, it's likely they would have welcomed change.
[28:20] Speaker 1: As events would show, once the old bonds were broken
[28:24] Speaker 1: in 1959, former serfs did embrace their own land, and
[28:30] Speaker 1: a chance to be free of their lords, albeit with
[28:34] Speaker 1: a new government in charge. So, as of 1950, on
[28:39] Speaker 1: the eve of the Great Upheaval, Tibet remained essentially what
[28:44] Speaker 1: it had been for centuries, a feudal realm of lords
[28:48] Speaker 1: and bonded peasants, albeit one where the first glimmers of
[28:52] Speaker 1: reform had appeared. the last holdout in the world of
[28:57] Speaker 1: a medieval system. But the tragedy, or perhaps the irony,
[29:04] Speaker 1: was that internal reform had not gone far enough or
[29:07] Speaker 1: fast enough to spare Tibet from outside intervention. A society
[29:12] Speaker 1: that could not fundamentally change itself would soon find change
[29:16] Speaker 1: forced upon them. And that force came from the new
[29:20] Speaker 1: revolutionary state of the East, the People's Republic of China,
[29:27] Speaker 1: So the year is 1950, and the Chinese Communist Party
[29:30] Speaker 1: turned its gaze to Tibet as the last unpaid debt
[29:36] Speaker 1: of what is considered to be Chinese national unification. The
[29:41] Speaker 1: People's Liberation Army marched into Tibetan areas that year, and
[29:45] Speaker 1: by the following year compelled Tibetan delegates to sign the
[29:49] Speaker 1: 17-point agreement for the peaceful liberation of Tibet. Under this
[29:55] Speaker 1: 1951 agreement, Beijing proposed a promised rather to preserve Tibet's
[30:00] Speaker 1: existing social system under the authority of the Dalai Lama.
[30:05] Speaker 1: At least, for the time being. In other words, in 1951,
[30:10] Speaker 1: China did not immediately claim it was coming to free
[30:13] Speaker 1: Tibet's source from bondage. Rather, the Chinese rationale was couched
[30:17] Speaker 1: in terms of ending imperialist influence. They accused Tibetan elites
[30:22] Speaker 1: of being manipulated by British or American imperialists. and returning
[30:27] Speaker 1: Tibet to the motherland. The communist leadership initially followed a
[30:32] Speaker 1: cautious policy in central Tibet. They allowed the Dalai Lama's
[30:36] Speaker 1: government to continue functioning and left the serfdom system essentially
[30:41] Speaker 1: intact throughout the 50s. Now, it might seem surprising. One
[30:46] Speaker 1: might expect communist revolutionaries to instantly abolish landlordism. But Mao
[30:52] Speaker 1: Zedong and Zhou Enlai calculated that Tibet was too remote
[30:57] Speaker 1: and its society too devout and traditional to upend overnight
[31:00] Speaker 1: without triggering a massive resistance. So they held off on
[31:05] Speaker 1: land reform in central Tibet, and even while they were
[31:08] Speaker 1: simultaneously carrying out radical land redistribution and collectivization just east
[31:14] Speaker 1: of Tibet, in Chinese provinces, and even in Tibetan ethnic
[31:20] Speaker 1: regions of Sichuan and Qinghai, it was a paradoxical period.
[31:25] Speaker 1: Tibet under the Dalai Lama continued as a feudal theocracy,
[31:30] Speaker 1: but now under the shadow of a communist state that
[31:33] Speaker 1: had pretty much everywhere else abolished any trace of feudalism. Nevertheless,
[31:41] Speaker 1: tensions were rising. In the eastern Tibetan regions of Kam
[31:47] Speaker 1: and Amdo, many of which were outside the Dalai Lama's
[31:50] Speaker 1: administration and incorporated into Chinese provinces, Communist officials did push
[31:57] Speaker 1: reforms earlier, starting in the mid-1950s. They reduced rents and
[32:04] Speaker 1: tried to take land from local chieftains. These policies, combined
[32:08] Speaker 1: with the heavy-handed suppression of a bit of the local culture,
[32:14] Speaker 1: provoked violent backlash. Tibetan rebellions broke out in 1956 and 1957.
[32:21] Speaker 1: In these eastern regions, Kampa fighters, fiercely traditional and often
[32:25] Speaker 1: on horseback, took up arms to resist the Chinese changes.
[32:30] Speaker 1: This guerrilla resistance later received covert support from the American CIA,
[32:37] Speaker 1: a development that we will explore soon. The uprisings in
[32:42] Speaker 1: the east were a clear sign that many Tibetans, especially
[32:45] Speaker 1: those loyal to the old order, would rather fight than
[32:49] Speaker 1: allow the communist revolution to remake their lives. So, by 1959,
[32:56] Speaker 1: the instability had reached the heartland of Tibet. A revolt
[33:02] Speaker 1: erupted in Lhasa, driven by rumors that the Chinese planned
[33:05] Speaker 1: to kidnap or harm the Dalai Lama. In the March
[33:09] Speaker 1: of that year, thousands of Tibetans surged around the Lama's
[33:13] Speaker 1: palace to protect him. And soon, open fighting broke out
[33:17] Speaker 1: between Tibetan insurgents and the Chinese army. The Dalai Lama
[33:22] Speaker 1: fled into exile in India amid the chaos, and the
[33:25] Speaker 1: Chinese military crushed the Lhasa uprising. In the aftermath, Beijing
[33:32] Speaker 1: effectively tore up the 1951 agreement and dissolved the Tibetan
[33:36] Speaker 1: local government. With the Dalai Lama gone, and the old
[33:40] Speaker 1: ruling class either in flight or lying dead on the ground,
[33:45] Speaker 1: the communists finally implemented the reforms they had long deferred.
[33:51] Speaker 1: So what followed was, from one perspective, the long-awaited liberation
[33:55] Speaker 1: of Tibet's serfs, then from another perspective, a period of
[33:59] Speaker 1: trauma and upheaval, as an entire social system was dismantled
[34:04] Speaker 1: by outsiders. China declared democratic reforms in Tibet in 1959.
[34:10] Speaker 1: In practice, this meant the abrupt end of the nobles'
[34:17] Speaker 1: and monasteries' dominion. The communist work teams went village to village,
[34:23] Speaker 1: organizing the poor peasants to denounce their former masters and
[34:26] Speaker 1: the feudal system they were kept under. They held struggle sessions,
[34:33] Speaker 1: where serfs were encouraged or sometimes coerced to speak out
[34:37] Speaker 1: about the injustices they had suffered under feudalism. A cathartic
[34:42] Speaker 1: and often violent process, reminiscent of what happened in China's
[34:46] Speaker 1: own land reforms, The estates of noble families were confiscated.
[34:51] Speaker 1: Monastic lands were seized by the state. Serfdom and slavery
[34:57] Speaker 1: were officially abolished. Tens of thousands of serfs were now
[35:02] Speaker 1: told that they were free. They were no longer bound
[35:07] Speaker 1: to any lord. Land was redistributed. Each peasant family typically
[35:13] Speaker 1: got a piece of land. Well, no. Some of the
[35:16] Speaker 1: land that had already been farming for their masters was
[35:19] Speaker 1: now given to them outright, so it wasn't a big transition.
[35:24] Speaker 1: The Chinese authorities later boasted that a million serfs and
[35:28] Speaker 1: slaves in Tibet were now emancipated in this period, and indeed,
[35:33] Speaker 1: former serfs recalled the bewildering excitement of receiving ownership documents
[35:37] Speaker 1: for land, or of no longer having to deliver half
[35:41] Speaker 1: their grain to the manor. You can certainly imagine would
[35:45] Speaker 1: be quite a relief. In addition, all of those old
[35:49] Speaker 1: debts were cancelled. The enormous loans and interest that had
[35:55] Speaker 1: kept many peasant families in perpetual bondage to lenders were
[35:59] Speaker 1: wiped clean, and this was enforced by the new communist government.
[36:06] Speaker 1: The new regime also outlawed any corporal punishment or extra-legal
[36:11] Speaker 1: authority by former lords. From 1959 on, only the communist
[36:17] Speaker 1: law and police, and ultimately the party, could administer justice
[36:21] Speaker 1: in Tibet. So a landlord beating a peasant now was
[36:26] Speaker 1: a crime, when before it was just a norm. From
[36:32] Speaker 1: a social revolutionary standpoint, these changes were staggering and achieved
[36:37] Speaker 1: in an extremely short time. By the early 60s, The
[36:41] Speaker 1: age of secular and clerical feudal lords in Tibet was
[36:45] Speaker 1: all over. Many of the aristocrats, rather, had fled to
[36:50] Speaker 1: India with the Dalai Lama, and those who stayed were
[36:53] Speaker 1: often imprisoned or sent to re-education camps. The large monasteries,
[37:00] Speaker 1: which had been economic as well as spiritual centres, were
[37:04] Speaker 1: emptied of their landed estates, and soon, during the Cultural
[37:08] Speaker 1: Revolution a few years later, the monasteries themselves would be
[37:13] Speaker 1: physically demolished or closed. A pretty tragic blow to Tibetan culture,
[37:18] Speaker 1: but that's another part of the story. Rather a tale
[37:23] Speaker 1: of mass psychosis, I suppose. But for the ordinary Tibetan peasant,
[37:30] Speaker 1: one form of oppression, the localized, centuries-old oppression by landlord
[37:34] Speaker 1: and lama was lifted, only to be replaced by new
[37:38] Speaker 1: pressures under the new government. You see, initially, many ex-serfs
[37:44] Speaker 1: were grateful simply to have rights to the land and
[37:47] Speaker 1: not to fear the estate steward's whip. There are accounts
[37:52] Speaker 1: of poor Tibetans displaying obvious relief and even joy at
[37:56] Speaker 1: the changes around 59 to 60. They were finally free
[38:00] Speaker 1: to marry whom they chose. Previously, serfs often needed the
[38:04] Speaker 1: lord's consent to marry or risked having spouses separated if
[38:07] Speaker 1: they belonged on different estates. They could travel without a permit.
[38:12] Speaker 1: they could keep the full yield of their labour, aside
[38:16] Speaker 1: from a few new taxes to the state, which were
[38:18] Speaker 1: generally lighter than the old Corvie, by a great margin.
[38:24] Speaker 1: And in a symbolic act, the Chinese authorities held public
[38:28] Speaker 1: burnings of the old debt contracts and feudal title deeds,
[38:33] Speaker 1: proclaiming a new era of equality. But it's not that simple.
[38:43] Speaker 1: This liberation came at a tremendous human cost and coercion.
[38:48] Speaker 1: You see, Tibet in the early 60s was under military occupation,
[38:52] Speaker 1: and resistance was met with brutal force. Thousands of Tibetans,
[38:58] Speaker 1: especially former officials and monks who resisted, were killed or
[39:01] Speaker 1: jailed during the crackdown. Entire families of the old elite
[39:06] Speaker 1: were impoverished or persecuted. And while serfdom was gone, The
[39:12] Speaker 1: new regime imposed collectivization policies that required peasants to join
[39:17] Speaker 1: collective farms or communes, effectively meaning that after a brief
[39:22] Speaker 1: taste of private land ownership, they were organized into state-controlled
[39:26] Speaker 1: farming units. Food production initially improved. somewhat with the end
[39:31] Speaker 1: of the exploitative dive system, but then Tibet, like China,
[39:37] Speaker 1: was swept up in that disastrous great leap forward of
[39:40] Speaker 1: the early 60s. This radical campaign caused economic chaos and
[39:45] Speaker 1: famine across China. Tibet was not spared. Grain requisitions by
[39:50] Speaker 1: the state and agricultural upheaval led to food shortages in
[39:53] Speaker 1: Tibet as well. Former serfs, who thought their lives would
[39:57] Speaker 1: be immediately improved, sometimes found themselves going hungry, now under
[40:02] Speaker 1: new leaders. Additionally, the violent radicalism of the Cultural Revolution
[40:09] Speaker 1: between 1966 and 1976 brought in forced atheism. The destruction
[40:16] Speaker 1: of religious sites and harsh labor for many Tibetans. So
[40:22] Speaker 1: the 1960s were by no means a happy time in Tibet.
[40:26] Speaker 1: Despite the end of old serfdom, one might say that
[40:30] Speaker 1: one oppressive system was exchanged for another. The drudgery and
[40:35] Speaker 1: hierarchy of feudalism gave way to this regimentation and the
[40:39] Speaker 1: ideology of a communist revolution that had little tolerance for dissent.
[40:45] Speaker 1: But the difference was This was a short-term thing. It's
[40:51] Speaker 1: certainly worth noting that after the extremes of the late
[40:54] Speaker 1: Mao era, Chinese policy in Tibet moderated. In the 80s
[41:00] Speaker 1: and beyond, economic reforms and some cultural leniency allowed improvements
[41:04] Speaker 1: in living standards. Many former serfs and their descendants in
[41:09] Speaker 1: Tibet today will acknowledge that their material life is better
[41:12] Speaker 1: now than what their grandparents had under that serf system.
[41:16] Speaker 1: The Chinese government continually points to roads, hospitals, and schools
[41:21] Speaker 1: built in Tibet as proof of the progress. And indeed,
[41:25] Speaker 1: the feudal order that kept people illiterate and tied to
[41:29] Speaker 1: the land could not have provided these modern amenities. Yet,
[41:36] Speaker 1: alongside these improvements came that loss of political freedom and
[41:39] Speaker 1: cultural autonomy which Tibetans dearly prize. But the thing is,
[41:45] Speaker 1: they only ever had that for about a tiny percentage
[41:48] Speaker 1: of the population. So when they say the freedom that
[41:52] Speaker 1: Tibetans prize, they mean the freedom that the aristocracy prized.
[41:59] Speaker 1: So it's kind of a bittersweet legacy. It's fiercely debated.
[42:04] Speaker 1: Was it a liberation or an annexation? Well, the answer
[42:08] Speaker 1: is probably both. It depends on which aspect you consider.
[42:13] Speaker 1: It was the liberation of a class of people from
[42:16] Speaker 1: effective slavery, but it was achieved through the annexation of
[42:20] Speaker 1: a country and subjugation of a nation's independence. So, you
[42:26] Speaker 1: give a little, you get a little, I suppose. Well,
[42:33] Speaker 1: let's talk about both of those sides, because in the
[42:37] Speaker 1: decades since this has happened, there's been a war of narratives,
[42:41] Speaker 1: especially concerning the old, social system and the changes after 1950s. And,
[42:47] Speaker 1: while I have my own opinions, which might bleed through
[42:50] Speaker 1: a little bit, we have to tread carefully and critically here,
[42:54] Speaker 1: because both the Chinese government and the Tibetan exile community
[42:57] Speaker 1: have often exaggerated or selectively presented facts to serve political ends.
[43:03] Speaker 1: The subject of slavery in Tibet has become quite a
[43:09] Speaker 1: political weapon, I suppose. So let's examine the main viewpoints.
[43:15] Speaker 1: First of all, the Chinese government narrative highlights Tibet's pre-1959
[43:19] Speaker 1: society as one of an unrelenting feudal nightmare. Beijing official
[43:26] Speaker 1: publications describe Old Tibet as basically hell on earth for
[43:29] Speaker 1: normal people, painting lurid pictures of landlords slicing off peasants'
[43:34] Speaker 1: noses and lamas consigning child slaves to endless toil. Chinese
[43:40] Speaker 1: historians stress that 95% of Tibetans were serfs or slaves
[43:44] Speaker 1: brutally oppressed by the 5% of nobles and clergy. They
[43:48] Speaker 1: often cite the existence of debt slavery, cruel taxes and
[43:52] Speaker 1: punishments to justify that China's intervention was necessary on a
[43:57] Speaker 1: moral level. And in this narrative, The Chinese Communist Party
[44:03] Speaker 1: is certainly the hero that peacefully liberated Tibetans from a
[44:07] Speaker 1: backward and medieval system, ushering in human rights for the
[44:12] Speaker 1: first time in Tibetan history. And indeed, since 2009, the
[44:18] Speaker 1: PRC has even celebrated Serf's Emancipation Day on March 28th
[44:23] Speaker 1: to commemorate the abolition of serfdom in 1959. Well, I mean,
[44:28] Speaker 1: that's certainly something worth celebrating. an emancipation day, but it
[44:34] Speaker 1: is a pretty clear effort to legitimize Chinese rule through
[44:37] Speaker 1: a historical moral claim. And there is a truth in
[44:41] Speaker 1: the Chinese description of Old Tibet's inequities, as we have detailed.
[44:46] Speaker 1: They're just historical facts. Serfdom and harsh treatment did exist.
[44:52] Speaker 1: Tibet was not a nice place to be, and it
[44:57] Speaker 1: got a hell of a lot better once the Chinese intervened,
[45:00] Speaker 1: but The Chinese narrative is also carrying its own biases.
[45:06] Speaker 1: It tends to ignore any positive aspects of traditional Tibetan
[45:09] Speaker 1: culture or the reform efforts that Tibetan leaders make. Do
[45:13] Speaker 1: you remember that, yes, while the 40s and 50s were
[45:19] Speaker 1: certainly not good times, there were people within Tibet trying
[45:24] Speaker 1: to do their best to bring Tibet out of its
[45:27] Speaker 1: old ways? You know. It also conveniently forgets that China
[45:34] Speaker 1: itself didn't initially invade Tibet to free serfs. That humanitarian
[45:40] Speaker 1: rationale was retroactively emphasized. In fact, the Chinese rhetoric about
[45:46] Speaker 1: liberating the serfs really became prominent only after the 1959
[45:51] Speaker 1: uprising when Beijing needed to win domestic and international support
[45:55] Speaker 1: by portraying its crackdown as more progressive. During the initial
[46:00] Speaker 1: invasion of 50 to 51, Chinese propaganda spoke more about
[46:05] Speaker 1: expelling imperialists and unifying the motherland, not much about freeing slaves. Though,
[46:13] Speaker 1: for them, expelling the imperialists, unifying the motherland, it kind
[46:16] Speaker 1: of all comes in the same bag, really. The heavy
[46:20] Speaker 1: focus on serfdom would come later, especially in response to
[46:25] Speaker 1: the worldwide sympathy for the exiled Dalai Lama. You know,
[46:30] Speaker 1: That one guy kissed my tongue. Was it suck my
[46:35] Speaker 1: tongue that he said? I don't know if you've seen
[46:36] Speaker 1: the video. Certainly lost him a lot of respect, that one,
[46:40] Speaker 1: didn't it? In any case, we're not going to go there. Well,
[46:45] Speaker 1: it was a way to undermine the Dalai Lama's moral
[46:49] Speaker 1: authority by casting him as the former head of a
[46:53] Speaker 1: slave-owning regime. Moreover, the Chinese accounts almost never acknowledge the
[46:58] Speaker 1: suffering inflicted by China's own policies. For example, the famine
[47:02] Speaker 1: and political purges of the 60s, which is rather convenient
[47:06] Speaker 1: they don't mention them. They prefer to cherry-pick and idealize
[47:12] Speaker 1: a demonized past, which certainly is a one-sided equation. Now,
[47:20] Speaker 1: on the other hand, the Tibetan exile and pro-independence narrative
[47:23] Speaker 1: often downplays the worst aspects of Old Tibet and highlights
[47:27] Speaker 1: the atrocities of Chinese rule. The Dalai Lama himself has
[47:31] Speaker 1: openly acknowledged that the old system was unjust, and he
[47:35] Speaker 1: has called the relationship between landlord and serf in Tibet
[47:39] Speaker 1: a form of serfdom, but argues it was milder than
[47:44] Speaker 1: the Chinese version of serfdom, and that the poor in
[47:48] Speaker 1: Tibet fared better than the poor under Chinese warlords. Which
[47:53] Speaker 1: is a brave argument, I suppose. Tibetan exiles emphasize that
[47:58] Speaker 1: by the mid-20th century the Tibetan government was already moving
[48:02] Speaker 1: towards a reform, and given time the Tibetans could have
[48:06] Speaker 1: just modernized on their own without violent intervention. They point
[48:11] Speaker 1: out that no nation has the right to invade another
[48:16] Speaker 1: to enforce social change, and from this exile perspective whatever
[48:20] Speaker 1: problems old Tibet had did not justify the immense destruction
[48:24] Speaker 1: and repression that befell Tibet after 1950. They also questioned
[48:29] Speaker 1: the Chinese betrayal by noting that many claims of extreme
[48:32] Speaker 1: cruelty are exaggerated or unrepresentative. For instance, exile scholars and
[48:38] Speaker 1: Western sympathizers often note that serious punishments like eye-gouging had
[48:43] Speaker 1: been legally banned by the Dalai Lama long ago and
[48:47] Speaker 1: was virtually unheard of in later years that 1924 case
[48:51] Speaker 1: is cited as an aberration. They also argue that many
[48:55] Speaker 1: serfs had avenues to improve their condition, or that communal
[48:59] Speaker 1: ties softened class depression, essentially suggesting that Tibet's serfdom wasn't
[49:05] Speaker 1: as systematically savage as the Chinese accounts make it. Some
[49:10] Speaker 1: prefer to call the common people subjects or peasants rather
[49:15] Speaker 1: than serfs, to avoid the pejorative connotations. And indeed, there
[49:21] Speaker 1: is lively academic debate over the term serf. Critics say
[49:26] Speaker 1: it's a Marxist lens imposed on Tibet, whereas defenders like
[49:31] Speaker 1: scholar Melvin Goldstein say it's an accurate depiction of hereditary
[49:38] Speaker 1: bondage in any case. or regardless of the terminology, the
[49:43] Speaker 1: exile narrative stresses that Tibet's social ills were being addressed
[49:46] Speaker 1: gradually by Tibetans themselves, and that the efforts were cut
[49:50] Speaker 1: short by China's invasion and assimilation policies. But the exile side,
[50:00] Speaker 1: they also have their own vested interests and biases. Many
[50:05] Speaker 1: leading voices in the Tibetan diaspora come from the old
[50:09] Speaker 1: aristocracy or high monastic circles. Understandably, they have pride in
[50:14] Speaker 1: their own heritage and might be reluctant to fully acknowledge
[50:17] Speaker 1: their ancestors' system had grievous and barbaric flaws. There's a
[50:23] Speaker 1: tendency in some pro-Tibet literature to nostalgically portray Old Tibet
[50:28] Speaker 1: as harmonious and spiritually rich, glossing over the fact that
[50:32] Speaker 1: a large segment of the population lived in grinding and
[50:36] Speaker 1: enforced poverty. Furthermore, during the Cold War, the Tibetan exiles
[50:42] Speaker 1: received significant backing from the United States via the CIA
[50:48] Speaker 1: and others who were eager to embarrass communist China. This
[50:53] Speaker 1: support influenced how Tibet's story was told internationally. For example,
[50:58] Speaker 1: in the 1960s, the CIA funded a secret program to
[51:01] Speaker 1: aid Tibetan guerrillas fighting the Chinese. They also provided an
[51:06] Speaker 1: annual subsidy. on the order of $ 180, 000 a year directly
[51:11] Speaker 1: to the Dalai Lama's office in exile. Now, this doesn't
[51:16] Speaker 1: mean that the Dalai Lama was a complete puppet, but
[51:22] Speaker 1: there are certainly strings. It does mean that the Tibetan
[51:25] Speaker 1: cause was entangled in geopolitical interests, and people don't give
[51:31] Speaker 1: out money without expecting something in return. Now, Western media
[51:36] Speaker 1: during the Cold War often uncritically adopted the image of
[51:40] Speaker 1: the Danai Lama as a noble and unblemished victim, and
[51:48] Speaker 1: Tibet as this long-lost paradise of Shangri-La. It was inconvenient
[51:57] Speaker 1: in that narrative to acknowledge the pre-1950 Tibet had major
[52:01] Speaker 1: human rights issues of its own, and well, most of
[52:05] Speaker 1: them had disappeared under the new rule, at least after
[52:09] Speaker 1: the greatly forward and cultural revolution had gotten out of
[52:13] Speaker 1: the way. Thus, until more recent decades, relatively little popular
[52:18] Speaker 1: attention was given to the plight of Tibet's serfs under
[52:21] Speaker 1: the Dalai Lamas. Instead, focus was on the plight of
[52:25] Speaker 1: all Tibetans under communism, this CIA-sponsored Free Tibet Movement. Well,
[52:35] Speaker 1: Let's try and remain neutral. We have to try and
[52:39] Speaker 1: cut through these competing exaggerations. Now, most would agree that yes,
[52:44] Speaker 1: Tibet was a feudal surf society before 1959, and that
[52:49] Speaker 1: is a reality that cannot be sugar-coated. But you've also
[52:54] Speaker 1: got to realize that Tibet was not uniquely evil in this.
[52:58] Speaker 1: Its social structure was comparable to many traditional societies in
[53:01] Speaker 1: Asia before modern reforms. For instance, China itself had a
[53:06] Speaker 1: landlord-tenant system and even quasi-served him in some regions into
[53:10] Speaker 1: the 20th century. Many Himalayan kingdoms and even European countries
[53:16] Speaker 1: had served him in earlier times. Sure, but by the
[53:20] Speaker 1: mid-20th century, the problem is Tibet's retention of serfdom. This
[53:27] Speaker 1: retention was anachronistic. Sure, but it wasn't a wanton hellscape
[53:31] Speaker 1: of torture at every turn as Propaganda might imply. Anthropological studies.
[53:38] Speaker 1: Using interviews with earlier. Elderly Tibetans. Have revealed a picture where.
[53:43] Speaker 1: Some sorts of harsh treatment. And humiliation. But others look
[53:48] Speaker 1: upon the old days. A little bit more favorably. Emphasizing
[53:52] Speaker 1: their community bonds. Or perhaps a kind patron. In any case.
[53:58] Speaker 1: Both realities coexisted. And we can't just. throw one in
[54:03] Speaker 1: the dustbin to serve some kind of political narrative. Crucially,
[54:10] Speaker 1: historians note that after Tibet's incorporation into the People's Republic,
[54:14] Speaker 1: both sides in the conflict started to mythologize history. The
[54:19] Speaker 1: Chinese regime needed to justify its rule, so it fostered
[54:23] Speaker 1: the narrative of that liberation from slavery, going so far
[54:27] Speaker 1: as to publish books of former serfs testifying how grateful
[54:30] Speaker 1: they were. or staging exhibits of torture instruments allegedly found
[54:35] Speaker 1: in monasteries. Now on the other side, Tibetan exiles, to
[54:41] Speaker 1: bolster their claim for sympathy and support, often highlight the
[54:43] Speaker 1: devastation of Chinese rule, while maintaining dignified silence or vagueness
[54:49] Speaker 1: about the old-class system. And there is also quite silence
[54:55] Speaker 1: upon the child abuse within the Tibetan monasteries. You think
[55:00] Speaker 1: the Catholic Church is bad Well, it wasn't the only one.
[55:06] Speaker 1: Perhaps a video for another time. It's only in recent
[55:10] Speaker 1: years that exile writers become more frank in admitting that yes,
[55:16] Speaker 1: the old system was flawed and unjust. But they didn't
[55:21] Speaker 1: deserve foreign invasion. This is mainly what they say. The
[55:27] Speaker 1: Dalai Lama himself in his later writings acknowledges that, quote,
[55:31] Speaker 1: The old feudal system was exploitative and outdated, and that
[55:36] Speaker 1: one of his regrets was not being able to enact
[55:39] Speaker 1: reform before exile. He has even thanked the Chinese in
[55:43] Speaker 1: a way for awakening Tibet to the need for change,
[55:45] Speaker 1: while of course condemning the brutality of the methods. So
[55:51] Speaker 1: it's a bit of a juxtaposition of narratives, but you
[55:54] Speaker 1: have to acknowledge the Cold War context too. The Tibetan
[55:57] Speaker 1: struggle for peace became a kind of a... peace on
[56:02] Speaker 1: the Cold War chessboard, I suppose. The CIA's involvement, training
[56:07] Speaker 1: Tibetan fighters in Colorado, nonetheless, airdropping weapons into Tibet in
[56:13] Speaker 1: the 1950s, funding the Dalai Lama's exile administration in the 60s,
[56:18] Speaker 1: was driven by the US aim and propaganda efforts to
[56:22] Speaker 1: smear and destabilize communist China. And this meant that, A
[56:27] Speaker 1: lot of information about Tibet was filtered through intelligence efforts,
[56:32] Speaker 1: getting sympathy on the home front and abroad. For example,
[56:36] Speaker 1: in the 50s and 60s, many sympathetic Western journalists and
[56:39] Speaker 1: academics learned about Tibet via channels tied to the exile
[56:43] Speaker 1: movement and its sponsors, which naturally emphasized Chinese atrocities and
[56:49] Speaker 1: skirted around awkward questions of Tibet's former social inequality. Meanwhile,
[56:55] Speaker 1: communist bloc writers towed Beijing's line, focusing solely on the
[57:00] Speaker 1: evils of the old society, and never on the sufferings post-1959.
[57:05] Speaker 1: And so we see how Tibet has kind of been
[57:11] Speaker 1: the meat in the sandwich, used as a propaganda tool
[57:15] Speaker 1: by both East and West. The Chinese had their own
[57:19] Speaker 1: vested interest, to claim a moral high ground in Tibet
[57:23] Speaker 1: and deflect calls for self-determination. And the exiles and their
[57:27] Speaker 1: supporters had their own interest to win international support by
[57:30] Speaker 1: presenting Tibet as a noble and poor victim, an unjustly
[57:35] Speaker 1: crushed people. But for us seeking truth, it's important to
[57:42] Speaker 1: recognize these interests and read between the lines. In any case,
[57:49] Speaker 1: maybe you want to find out the truth for yourself.
[57:52] Speaker 1: So how about you get on a plane? Ignore all
[57:55] Speaker 1: the CIA propaganda. Ignore all the propaganda from the other side.
[58:01] Speaker 1: Just go and see it for yourself. Tibet's lovely. Lhasa
[58:06] Speaker 1: is beautiful. Potala Palace is fantastic. It's even on the
[58:09] Speaker 1: Chinese currency. Hey, they've even got Tibetan script on the
[58:14] Speaker 1: Chinese currency, along with, I think there's four scripts on it.
[58:19] Speaker 1: How many scripts? Let me have a look. How many
[58:21] Speaker 1: scripts are on it? Let's take a look. We have one, two, three, four, five.
[58:29] Speaker 1: We have five scripts on Chinese currency. Yes, I've just
[58:34] Speaker 1: got some sitting there. The desk is a little messy, okay? Well,
[58:39] Speaker 1: you'll find Tibetan on there as well. But yeah, do
[58:42] Speaker 1: go and have a look at Tibet. It's best if
[58:44] Speaker 1: you go on a tour. There's a lot of driving
[58:47] Speaker 1: and it's quite high elevation. In any case, thank you
[58:52] Speaker 1: for joining me today. Perhaps a video a little bit
[58:57] Speaker 1: on the political side. We don't want to go too
[58:59] Speaker 1: much into politics, but you can't really ignore politics when
[59:04] Speaker 1: you're talking about this kind of issue. In any case,
[59:08] Speaker 1: thank you for seeing this. both sides of it. Let
[59:12] Speaker 1: me thank my top dear patrons and supporters. Jessica, Madeline, Melissa,
[59:30] Speaker 1: Orthodox Review, Scott, Shell, Wendy, Josie, Sarah, Ryan, Thor, Cameron, Stefan, Kevin, HMSHH, Crystal, Dalvery, Anthony, Lucy, Brandon,
[59:43] Speaker 1: Guga Bubonic, Nicholas, Craig, Neftis, Alexander, Gokhan, Dorsey, Vinita, Claire, Courtesy, Carol, Robert, Mary, Bridget, Nefertari, Yvette,
[59:53] Speaker 1: Miss Mochi, Eleven, Allison, Free American, I bet he's CIA funded.
[1:00:01] Speaker 1: Probably not. Well, Jennifer, Brittany, David, Cody, Brian, are you
[1:00:08] Speaker 1: my mum? Rhonda and Gary, thank you so much. All right, well,
[1:00:15] Speaker 1: leave your thoughts in the comments. Let's have a very
[1:00:21] Speaker 1: civil conversation. Good night, everyone. Lots of love to you all. Oh,
[1:00:26] Speaker 1: my food is here. Good night. Bye-bye.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.