Holocaust, Genocide???

I have to bring up the fact that these two terms always find their way into the discourse about Tibet, when in fact, neither are accurate terms at all.

Let me explain.

The term holocaust mainly refers to the extermination of European Jews by Nazi Germany, but in a more broad sense means an intentional extermination of a people, which is basically another word for genocide, just with more historical and emotional connotations. So we can really just deal with the term genocide.

The key to the term is that the slaughter is intentional, and focused on a certain group of people, with the intention of eradication them, period. This is the U.N.'s terminology, the same U.N. which gave us the declaration of universal human rights, which is almost always invoked by Free Tibet supporters.

Now let me explain why Tibet endured neither a holocaust, nor a genocide.

For the deaths that occurred in Tibet to be considered a genocide the Chinese government would have had to have had a goal of destroying Tibetans, as a people. They did not have this goal, never have.

If we are saying that the deaths that occurred during the Great Leap forward and the Cultural Revolution were a genocide, then one has to completely ignore the deaths of all the Chinese that took place during that time too, for the same reasons. Otherwise the Chinese would have committed genocide against themselves.

.....

Doesn't make sense does it? The same policies were inflicted on the entire Chinese state, not just Tibet.

Ok, so if the Great Leap Forward and the CR weren't genocide, then what about the succeeding years?

The protests of the late 80's can't be considered a genocide, because they were isolated incidents, not political policy with the intent of eradication of Tibetans either. They were in response to civil unrest, and an attempt by an authoritarian regime to maintain order, not slaughter. Was it heavy handed? Yes. Was it shocking and brutal and disgusting? Pretty much. But it wasn't genocide. Not even close.

You may say it's just semantics, and it is, but those words carry great significance, and to misconstrue them does disservice to the people who actually are undergoing, and have been victims of genocide.

The Dalai Lama doesn't even use those terms, and has only hesitantly used the term "cultural genocide" to describe what he feels has happened in his former home.

I don't deny horrible things happened there, and continue to happen, but I do reject the use of those two terms, and if that makes me a "holocaust denier" then forgive me for disagreeing a little.

If we really want to see a free Tibet, then we'd see much better response by everyone involved if we shouted "Free China" and not just "Free Tibet". To do otherwise is to put the suffering of Tibetans on a pedestal over those of the Chinese.