论文部分内容阅读
The social evolution and demo-cratic reform in the Muli Tibetan area was a typical case of the democratic reform conducted in the Ti-betan areas of Sichuan and Yunnan in the mid-1950s.After liberation (1949), the Muli region abolished 33 kinds of burdens , adjusted debts , and implemented a farming system which stipulated“he who cultivates , should receive the harvest”, in other words , a system was implemented con-cerning the rights of the peasants .The reason why Muli society could conduct such kind of reform was that in addition to changing the social system , the people ’ s government implemented a “redemp-tion” policy . They provided political positions , salary or food subsidies for the local people from the middle and upper classes , “ensured” the liv-ing allowance of the Lamas , and gave financial support for the temple activities .All of these ac-tions created conditions for future democratic re-form.The democratic reform in Muli acknowl-edged the peasants ’ ownership of land , handled the land and weapon issues of the temple and the Lamas, adjusted the rich peasants system of ren-ting land, and liberated the slaves , etc. As such, the reforms had many achievements .How-ever, even though social conditions were good for conducting a “moderate” reform, democratic re-form still encountered opposition from some indi-viduals from the middle and lower classes . Hence, some rebellion appeared.This indicated that the reform in Tibetan areas was a kind of ac-tion aimed at completely changing the old system . Therefore , it was hard to avoid the opposition in some areas.Thus, if reform were to be upheld and maintained , the rebellions must be quelled .
In tracing back the history and the reformprocess of Muli, we can see that it clearly reflectedthat changing the old system; eliminating exploitationand oppression; and liberating slaveswas the path for the development of Tibetan society.In fact, even part of the upper classes of theethnic groups was aware of this trend.They knewthat the system would change, and that they mustadjust to the new trend.
Compared with other Tibetan areas, the democraticreform in Muli was a classic case, whichwas carried out based on “redemption”, and alow “degree” of reform.The so-called “redemption”refers to the arrangements made for the upperclasses-in addition to providing them with salary,they were also provided with food subsidies .Moreover, the government also provided food forthe Lamas and ensured their daily life needs.Theyprovided necessary funds for the temples to maintainreligious activities, then, carried out the reformon this basis.In addition to liberating theslaves, the reform also included reducing burdensand debt remissions, recognizing the fact that “hewho cultivates should receive the harvest ”, andmaking some adjustments according to the practicalsituation.This did not happen in other Tibetan areas;it was a special aspect of Muli society duringthat time.
However, the reform process in Muli indicatedthat even such kind of “ moderate” reformwould also be resisted by some of the feudal lords ,even to the extent of their carrying out rebellionsand armed resistance; and murdering cadres, soldiers of the liberation army or general public.Theappearance of this rebellion proved that even“moderate” reform would be resisted, becausewhat the democratic reform tried to change was theold system, and what the reform touched was theroot of the system.Moreover, the rebellions appearedbefore reform.This kind of phenomena waswidespread in the Tibetan areas of Yunnan and Si -chuan at that time.Hence, this raises the questionas: whether the rebellions were caused by reform,or whether the rebellions advanced reformHow should we regard or evaluate the armed rebellionthat took place before the democratic reform?
Moreover, in looking at the composition ofthe leading insurgents, the main rebels were fromthe middle and lower classes; few people from theupper class were involved in the resistance .Thisphenomenon also appeared in other Tibetan areas.Hence, it was a “general characteristic ”.Weknow that the People ’ s Government ’ s “ redemption”policy mainly targeted the upper classes.In other words, the most important “representativepeople” got a relatively good settlementor subsidies, and the people from the middle andlower classes were encouraged to make their livingby labor.After all, the positions in the government,the People’ s Congress and the PoliticalConsultative Conference were limited, and thefunds were also limited.Hence, it was impossibleto “ feed” the majority among them.Althoughthey were provided with land, allowed to keeptheir houses, farming animals and large agriculturaltools, were they willing to accept and make aliving from laboring? This is an issue that was notincluded when the government elaborated on democraticreform, and is something which is now necessaryto recognize and analyze.
In tracing back the history and the reformprocess of Muli, we can see that it clearly reflectedthat changing the old system; eliminating exploitationand oppression; and liberating slaveswas the path for the development of Tibetan society.In fact, even part of the upper classes of theethnic groups was aware of this trend.They knewthat the system would change, and that they mustadjust to the new trend.
Compared with other Tibetan areas, the democraticreform in Muli was a classic case, whichwas carried out based on “redemption”, and alow “degree” of reform.The so-called “redemption”refers to the arrangements made for the upperclasses-in addition to providing them with salary,they were also provided with food subsidies .Moreover, the government also provided food forthe Lamas and ensured their daily life needs.Theyprovided necessary funds for the temples to maintainreligious activities, then, carried out the reformon this basis.In addition to liberating theslaves, the reform also included reducing burdensand debt remissions, recognizing the fact that “hewho cultivates should receive the harvest ”, andmaking some adjustments according to the practicalsituation.This did not happen in other Tibetan areas;it was a special aspect of Muli society duringthat time.
However, the reform process in Muli indicatedthat even such kind of “ moderate” reformwould also be resisted by some of the feudal lords ,even to the extent of their carrying out rebellionsand armed resistance; and murdering cadres, soldiers of the liberation army or general public.Theappearance of this rebellion proved that even“moderate” reform would be resisted, becausewhat the democratic reform tried to change was theold system, and what the reform touched was theroot of the system.Moreover, the rebellions appearedbefore reform.This kind of phenomena waswidespread in the Tibetan areas of Yunnan and Si -chuan at that time.Hence, this raises the questionas: whether the rebellions were caused by reform,or whether the rebellions advanced reformHow should we regard or evaluate the armed rebellionthat took place before the democratic reform?
Moreover, in looking at the composition ofthe leading insurgents, the main rebels were fromthe middle and lower classes; few people from theupper class were involved in the resistance .Thisphenomenon also appeared in other Tibetan areas.Hence, it was a “general characteristic ”.Weknow that the People ’ s Government ’ s “ redemption”policy mainly targeted the upper classes.In other words, the most important “representativepeople” got a relatively good settlementor subsidies, and the people from the middle andlower classes were encouraged to make their livingby labor.After all, the positions in the government,the People’ s Congress and the PoliticalConsultative Conference were limited, and thefunds were also limited.Hence, it was impossibleto “ feed” the majority among them.Althoughthey were provided with land, allowed to keeptheir houses, farming animals and large agriculturaltools, were they willing to accept and make aliving from laboring? This is an issue that was notincluded when the government elaborated on democraticreform, and is something which is now necessaryto recognize and analyze.