I am in two minds over Tibet. The way the ordinary people were treated was appalling, and monasteries fought one another for power and influence. Chinese Daoist Buddhism and the teachings of Kung Fu-Tse were far more positive towards the rural poor than was Tibetan Buddhism. It’s only really with the present Dalai Lama than Yellow Hat Buddhism has really had a good press.
The way the Chinese took over Tibet was bad, but they seem to be investing in it. It would be interesting to know what percentage of Tibetans are better off under Chinese Statism*. (I think there’s no real doubt that Afghan women were better off during the pre-Soviet and Soviet periods, and if the US hadn’t armed the Islamic crazies as part of their proxy war, Afghanistan might not be in its present mess.)
But I’m just perhaps prejudiced, because the Chinese seem to be more interested in investing in the UK than the supposedly British investors do.
*I don’t know the answer, I mean I really would like to know from the point of view of understanding a bit more.
