The Dalai Lama only took political power in the late 60's I believe and he was only 12 or 13 then. These pictures look like they're from much earlier. I'm guessing from the quality of the photos maybe the early 1900's at best.

Keep in mind that before the Chinese invasion Tibet's GDP was actually twice that of China, and they were recognized by every country on earth including the United States as an independent, sovereign country.

Excellent points, although I doubt tiny_elvis will care to address them. DU like life is often not fair!

the little video is, in fairness, what a marxist thinks of old tibet
presented by me in comparison to a possibly offhand lama statement

lamas do not have superhuman wisdom and governing abilities
i would like to hear the lama say more about marxism and divine kings
but this is all we have

Because everyone knows that the world outside of pre-PRC invasion Tibet was a perfect world

P.S. I think it's much more relevant to consider the democratic nature of the current Tibetan government-in-exile.

as a marxist may be liable to do
lamas might be naive about some things,
the only acceptable explanation for the old lama's approval of european fascists

are posters presumed to take one of two sides in discussion?

the video
the video is trying to defend
or was your this my post, not the video?
pronouns can confuse
are posters presumed to take one of two sides?
are you eager for combat?
have you saved all sentient beings and united the workers of the world already?

...you are implying agreement with its content. Do you disagree with its content?

maybe i am not a good marxist
so what?

is the dalai lama a good marxist?

some may think the marxist i presented is not a good marxist

in kind, is the dalai lama a good buddhist?

that is all distracting nonsense

will you accept your fellows in the party defending usa imperialism?

would you accept your fellows in the party defending chinese imperialism?

would you accept a political opponent defending usa imperialism?

would you accept a political opponent defending chinese imperialism?

if the answers differ, what are the components of the questions which make the answers consistent?

if this
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1218
makes different answers consistent, do you write differently elsewhere?

would you answer the questions differently elsewhere?

are my questions inappropriate?

i think yours were

I would hardly consider China "Marxist" even under Mao. It was nothing more than state capitalism. Sure, in some ways it was a big improvement over feudalism and China did achieve rapid industrialization, but it was in no way coming close to building socialism. Beyond that capitalist China still continues to occupy Tibet and they are in no way "Marxist."

Furthermore, (and this may not necessary apply to you, I don't know) but I've noticed a major double standard when it comes to some communists and China. They will all criticize the U.S. for invading Afghanistan and Iraq (and rightly so) yet when China invades Tibet it's fine. When current capitalist China continues to occupy a country that doesn't want them there, many Communists support China, but oppose the U.S. doing it in Afghanistan. This is modern capitalist China they are supporting, mind you, not Maoist China And why? A lot of their answers are the same reasons some Americans support the continued occupation of Afghanistan because it's a backwards theocracy. It's the height of hypocrisy to oppose imperialism except when it waves a red flag. Some seem to hold the view that American Imperialism is bad, but if China does it's okay, because they claim to be socialist. Either oppose it or don't, but China has no more justification for the continued occupation of Tibet than the U.S. does for Afghanistan.

Once again, this may not apply to you, but I've noticed in on several websites and forums.

...in which he encourages the brutalization of a civilian population or the wholesale elimination of its heritage. Marx was for freedom and equality, Lenin perverted this notion with his concept of a "dictatorship of the proletariat." You are most correct that the People's Republic of China does not practice the teachings of Karl Marx.

a marxist's (dr parenti's) opinion on whether china is marxist is not dismissible on his defense of what he calls marxism

without explanation of uncertain phrases like 'state capitalism', the marxist doctor remains the only arguable reference to what is marxist in this thread

in general, you are basing your comments on the idea that imperialism is annihilative of socialism in the same system

skipping proof of that base, its derivations are rendered faithful

has marxism ever materialized after the first experiment?

is it a cloistered ideal?

The highest state according to Lenin (one of his few works that I agree with) so yes imperialism is incompatible with socialism. Furthermore, you have not addressed anything I said. China is not a socialist state neither now nor under Mao, because the working class did not hold power, the party elite did. Current China is even further from socialism than in Mao's time since they have openly embraced capitalism. Even Maoists don't defend current China so I'm not sure why you are trying. So once again you are displaying a massive double standard in regards to which imperialism is acceptable and have completely ignored the issues I raised.