A careful reread of the twentieth century history will show that there have been certain issues and crises in world polity that were given undue importance and publicity.
Over the last fifty years, the patronage has only grown voluminously with groups like ‘Friends of Tibet’ fighting for an issue which has no connection to their race, religion or nationality.
While most of
The natives believe the Tibetans are not only patronised and their sustenance hugely subsidised but are literal goons who attack them physically and verbally and pose a serious threat to their chances to grow up in their own soil.
Akin to the Shiv Sena’s xenophobia? But in Himachalis’ case, the natives are at the receiving end, and the Tibetans are the aggressive ones. Well, this is first-hand knowledge, and not hearsay or what I have read in today’s unreliable newspapers. One might argue: Why single out
Now, coming to the issue, reams and reams have been written to further the “pitiable” cause of the Tibetan issue: the mass exodus, the Dalai Lama refugee status in
These are issue-based ones, right. But since
Many books, like that of Italian journalist Carlo Buldrini’s A Long Way from Tibet, claim that “[these books are] absorbing accounts of the Tibetan community in exile”, while looking at today’s
One has to appreciate and admit that many writers have spent considerable time to “research” books on the Tibetan issue. And most of them do interact with the members of the community, both in
Nevertheless, these part-time historians, or hacks, are too sympathetic to the Tibetan cause and the people. As a result the casualty is objectivity. And there is this apparent unwillingness to the probe the shortcomings of the Tibetan movement they are supposed to be reviewing or chronicling.