Serfdom in Tibet

[Charlie Chan]

All of you guys do know that there were 700,000 enslaved people in Tibet while "his holiness" was in power, right? It was a feudal, brutal, theocracy. I don't exactly love Mao but are you people just ignoring the fact that the Dalai Lama had slaves and there was no social justice in feudal Tibet?

Sometimes I wonder about you people.

[icantsurf]

Dude , he was like 6 years old he went into exile... Am I supposed to hate on the Dalai Lama for alleged enslavement of people during his reign of power in Tibet from toddler hood to pull-up undies? :confused:

[Charlie Chan]

Actually he went into exile in 1959, when he was 24. He was in power in Tibet for 9 years.

And it's not alleged, he himself had slaves and there was an estimated 700,000 slaves in the entire country.

[icantsurf]

ah, you're right him being 24 , now tell me more about the slaves...

[Charlie Chan]

What more is there? Tibet was a feudal theocracy and was ruled by a dictatorship and the landlords. It had serfdom, aka slavery.

[icantsurf]

Better than the Maoist alternative though...

[Charlie Chan]

Better than the Maoist alternative though...
If you truly believe that, then I don't even know what to say. I'd rather live in a progressive country where there was hope than be a slave. You don't even know what poverty is bourgeois motherfucker.

Great job Mao, a truly great man who brought great change to China.

http://zt.tibet.cn/english/zt/history/200402004526101208.htm
Great pictures of the Tibetan revolution ^

Another great article exposing Tibet's brutal class system and slavery in Tibet.
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet1.htm

[milleson]

If you truly believe that, then I don't even know what to say. I'd rather live in a progressive country where there was hope than be a slave. You don't even know what poverty is bourgeois motherfucker.

Great job Mao, a truly great man who brought great change to China.


Yeah, hooray for the great leap forward!

[Ace42X]

Another great article exposing Tibet's brutal class system and slavery in Tibet.
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet1.htm

If by "great article" you mean compilation of propoganda.

[Charlie Chan]

Yeah, hooray for the great leap forward!
Mao wasn't perfect buddy, he was a revolutionary though, and he freed 700,000 slaves.

If by "great article" you mean compilation of propoganda.
It was an extremely well-researched article and was very factually accurate from what I have personally studied. I don't know what your basing this accusation on, that it is "propaganda."

[ToucanSpam]

uhhhhh


feudalism and serfdom arent connected.


Feudalism is the symbolical bond between a lord and his vassal. The act of hommage is taken by the vassal, and in return for the vassal's hands becoming the lord's, the lord will provie safety for his vassal.

Serfs have NOTHING to do with the feudal bond, or the feudal structure. The economic bond between a serf and a vassal or lord is called manorialism. The serfs get to live off of the land of the lord/vassal in return for a small portion of what the serf actually works.

SO the title of this thread is either incorrect or the terms being used are incorrect.

Serfs aren't slaves either. Serfs cannot be bought or sold, while slaves can.

[Ace42X]

It was an extremely well-researched article and was very factually accurate from what I have personally studied. I don't know what your basing this accusation on, that it is "propaganda."

That over 50% of the sources originate in China. Not that I am questioning "Revolutionary Worker #944"'s political bias.

[Qdrop]

Not that I am questioning "Revolutionary Worker #944"'s political bias.

hahahahahh!!

[Schmeltz]

You don't even know what poverty is bourgeois motherfucker.


... says the guy typing out the revolution on his home PC.

[Charlie Chan]

uhhhhh


feudalism and serfdom arent connected.


Feudalism is the symbolical bond between a lord and his vassal. The act of hommage is taken by the vassal, and in return for the vassal's hands becoming the lord's, the lord will provie safety for his vassal.

Serfs have NOTHING to do with the feudal bond, or the feudal structure. The economic bond between a serf and a vassal or lord is called manorialism. The serfs get to live off of the land of the lord/vassal in return for a small portion of what the serf actually works.

SO the title of this thread is either incorrect or the terms being used are incorrect.

Serfs aren't slaves either. Serfs cannot be bought or sold, while slaves can.

Are you supporting serfdom? The serfs in Tibet could be bought and sold.

[Charlie Chan]

That over 50% of the sources originate in China. Not that I am questioning "Revolutionary Worker #944"'s political bias.
It's in SO MANY other sources than that. Look around you stupid fuck. THERE WAS SERFDOM IN TIBET, THE DALAI LAMA HAD SERFS.

THAT IS FACT

[Charlie Chan]

... says the guy typing out the revolution on his home PC.
Get the fuck outta here you fucking faggot.

[Ace42X]

It's in SO MANY other sources than that. Look around you stupid fuck. THERE WAS SERFDOM IN TIBET, THE DALAI LAMA HAD SERFS.

THAT IS FACT

Did I say there was no serfdom in Tibet? No. If you were not a "stupid fuck", you might've picked up on that. But then, you couldn't even pick up on the fact that an article written by "revolutionary worker #blahblahblah" is biased and third-rate propoganda, so clearly interpreting simple text isn't your forte.

Why not read up on serfdom, before ignorantly conflating it with slavery, hmm? If the serfs in Tibet could be "bought and sold" (which I doubt is the case) then they are not *serfs*, they are *slaves*. Serfs, by definition, cannot be slaves.

Serfdom is a feudal system, by which peasants are allowed to work on a land-owners land, in exchange for a cut of the material produced, or an allocation of land for themselves. While this is far from egalitarian, it is not "slavery" in the conventional sense, any more than a factory owner allowing you to use his premesis and equipment to do your job is "slavery."

The practical implementation, and rights based system of serfdom, varies from culture to culture. However, you screaming "IT'S SLAVERY" is far from convincing, as are your wild assertions, or citing sources that originate from one of the least honest and open nations in the world, which has a direct motive for concealing the truth about the nation.

So, to sum up, your article was a farce, your argument childish, meritless, nonsensical, ill-researched and puerile, and your presentation weak to say the least.

All you have done here is convince me that you are a boob, a tool, and not someone worth paying any attention to. So fuck you, and your mum I rode in on.

[ToucanSpam]

Are you supporting serfdom? The serfs in Tibet could be bought and sold.
No, I wasn't supporting serfdom with my comments. I was simply pointing out that your choice in words was very poor and you STILL made an idiotic comment like 'serfs could ve vought of sold'.


SERF=CANNOT BE BOUGHT
SLAVES=CAN BE BOUGHT


So are you completely uneducated or do you just don't know what the correct definitions for words? Either way, you're a tithead.

[Charlie Chan]

There were both serfs and slaves in Tibet you idiots.

[zorra_chiflada]

Charlie Chan, Maoism is a lie. There is no point continuing to research it as it is bankrupt.

[Ace42X]

There were both serfs and slaves in Tibet you idiots.

Make your goddamn mind up.

And it's not alleged, he himself had slaves and there was an estimated 700,000 slaves in the entire country.

There were an estimated 700,000 *peasants* out of a total population of 1.2 million.

So what, there were 700,000 peasants, 700,000 slaves, and minus .2 million nega-humans?

You're talking out of your ass. Fuck off, do some proper research, and come back when you have an argument that isn't based on lies, propoganda and a willful misunderstanding of the facts.

[Schmeltz]

Get the fuck outta here you fucking faggot.


Why, how enlightened and visionary. To the barricades. Cast off your chains, you fucking faggots.

[icantsurf]

Get the fuck outta here you fucking faggot.

Hey Charlie,

I'm a big homo, is there room in the socialist revolution for me?

[zorra_chiflada]

this guy isn't a socialist, he's a maoist. don't get confused. real socialists are not like this.

[icantsurf]

this guy isn't a socialist, he's a maoist. don't get confused. real socialists are not like this.

I know it isn't actual Socialism, but they label it as such, kind of like how Nazism was National Socialism.
I consider myself a Socialist acutally, a democratic socialist to be precise.

Heirnrich Harrer, the man portrayed by Brad Pitt in Seven Years in Tibet was a Nazi.

So there ya have it, not only was His Holiness a slave master he was also a Nazi!

Freakin slave drivin' Nazi!

(JK)

[checkyourprez]

I consider myself a Socialist acutally, a democratic socialist to be precise


SELLOUT

...jk, but that would be the Marxian responce.