JKhedrup wrote:I actually think the days of CPC control of China are numbered, the consequence of wanting to become a major world economic superpower is that you are confronted with globalization. Increasingly, ideas are becoming harder to control and monitor.
If anything they'll just drop the whole "party" colors and designation and just be a nominally democratic despotic bureaucracy, where basically the same people are in charge but just nominally represent different parties. That might take another two decades however.
I don't see the despotic bureaucracy changing much however because in practice this is how Chinese civilization has operated for two-thousand years or longer. Chinese civilization also has long standing resentment towards Tibetans, which means there's little political will to stop attempts at assimilating them. Liberal tolerance and multiculturalism are not appreciated in China. The PRC wants even their Han Chinese all speaking the same language (half of China doesn't actually speak standard Mandarin).
I firmly believe the oppressors of Tibet are the CPC and its cadres, not the Chinese people in general. Once the paradigm changes there is hope for Tibetans to salvage remnants of their culture, and there will be a huge opportunity for Tibetan Buddhism in the religious life of Han Chinese.
It really isn't so simple. The PRC opportunistically seized Tibet and consequently today the Chinese govern it and can't turn back the clock. There are a lot of Tibetans who would rather not have the Chinese ruling them, but giving up Tibet or even allowing autonomy and self-determination are politically unfeasible because of strategic concerns. China's control of Tibet gives them great military leverage against neighboring countries, in particular India. There is therefore zero political will to do anything other than ensure complete hegemony over Tibet and over the long-term assimilate Tibetans while settling many Han Chinese in Tibet.
The truth is even if the PRC apologized for what they did in Tibet (they won't), they can't realistically hand over autonomy to the Tibetans because they would still have a lot of understandable hurt feelings and quickly seek independence from China. This is not in the interests of China and could jeopardize their strategic interests and most importantly their power projection. If you're in charge of the welfare of over a billion people, the culture of a few million Tibetans might not seem so important.
There's actually a lot of logic behind the decisions undertaken by the PRC. It isn't necessarily moral by Buddhist standards, but they're not a bunch of psychotic monsters.
If Tibetans and their sympathizers looked at things a bit less emotionally they could possibly come to a negotiated middle way suitable to both sides, though ultimately China has the upper hand because they got the guns and money.