Tibetan Independence Day and Truth in History

On February 13, many Tibetans celebrated Tibetan Independence Day, which commemorates the Tibetan Proclamation of Independence made on February 13, 1913. Of course, Tibet is unfortunately not independent now, since it is occupied by China, a topic I have covered before. But Tibetans use this day as a reminder that their country has a long history of independence, one that dates back long before the proclamation. For instance, this year Tibetan groups commemorated the China-Tibet Peace Treaty signed in 822 CE. At that time Tibet was an empire, one that contested with Tang China for dominance in the Tarim Basin area (today East Turkestan, or, as China calls it, Xinjiang) and often won. The Tibetans even managed to sack the Chinese capital of Chang'an (present day Xi'an) at one point. Though the Tibetan empire collapsed in the 9th century, Tibet remained independent, if not always united, for most of the subsequent centuries, only succumbing to outside rule for two periods before the present, one being under the Mongols in the 13th to 14th century and the other being under the Manchu (China's Qing dynasty) from the 18th to the early 20th century (the Proclamation of Independence was made following the collapse of the Qing dynasty, which ended their rule in Tibet as it did in places such as Mongolia).

But of course China's version of this history is rather different. First they treat the Mongols, who conquered China at the same time as they did Tibet and set up what in Chinese history is known as the Yuan dynasty, as a Chinese regime, which they clearly were not, and then they claim that China ruled Tibet from that time on, even though the native Chinese Ming dynasty (1368-1644) exercised no control over Tibet, nor did the Republic of China that followed the Qing dynasty and preceded the present-day People's Republic of China. They constantly downplay, ignore or flat-out deny Tibet's history of independence. As a student of history and a strong believer in getting the facts right, I find these attempts to distort history infuriating. And Tibet is not the only area where China distorts history. Just yesterday I saw a news report in which China demanded that the US "respect historical facts" with regard to the East and South China Seas, presumably a reference to Chinese claims that islands in these regions were historically under Chinese rule. But, as I have noted before, these "facts" are in fact highly dubious, as there is no way any nation can make a meaningful historical claim to any of these islands, all of which are uninhabited, that goes back before the 19th century at the earliest. China's version of the history of Taiwan and its relationship to China is similarly full of omissions, inaccuracies and outright falsehoods. China also insists on a questionable view of its internal history, to the point of hysterically attacking contrary views of the Boxer Rebellion and the Long March, even when the evidence is on the side of the challengers.

Regrettably, China is not the only place where false accounts of history are common. Here in Taiwan, the KMT government has recently revised the school curriculum to conform to a more Sinocentric view of Taiwanese history, for instance by reverting to the loaded term "Japanese occupation" rather than the neutral "Japanese rule" to describe the period from 1895 to 1945. The other day at the lantern show there was a display that characterized Zheng Chenggong as an "ethnic hero", presumably in line with the idea that he "reclaimed" Taiwan from the Dutch, "restoring" Chinese rule. This ignores the fact that China had never actually ruled Taiwan, and while Zheng may have used ethnically-based propaganda, his motives for forcing out the Dutch had much more to do with establishing a base for his fight against the newly established Qing dynasty of the Manchus than any broad nationalistic interests. Elsewhere in Asia, last I heard, Japan was also still failing to present its early 20th century history with complete accuracy in textbooks, as it downplayed or ignored Japanese atrocities like the Rape of Nanjing or the widespread use of "comfort women". Indeed nationalists in just about every country distort their history to make it support chauvinistic claims, and it is common for groups on one side or the other of a contemporary political dispute to use history in their support, even if they have to falsify it. For example, in the US it is common for many on the right to claim that the country was established as an explicitly Christian nation, even though any reading of the Constitution and the writings of the most prominent founders clearly shows that that is not true.

Inaccurate accounts of history are not limited to politics. For example, numerous books, movies and plays portray history inaccurately, a phenomenon that has been repeated throughout history (even Shakespeare's plays, for all their literary merit, often get the history completely wrong). Some amount to little more than political propaganda, though in many cases, such as Hollywood films with historical settings, the rewriting of history is done for commercial reasons, even though in many cases there seems little or no justification for it, and a more historically accurate film could have been just as entertaining. But at least most of these entertainment products aren't presented as if they paint a historically accurate picture. Depending on the events they portray and how widespread their interpretations become, the harm most of them cause tends to be limited. In contrast, inaccurate views of history that are presented as the truth can cause great damage. For example, the false, rabidly nationalistic history that China has spoon fed its people on will create problems throughout East Asia for years to come, as even a democratic China would be full of people who think Tibet, Taiwan, and the South China Sea are rightfully Chinese. Of course I can't claim that all of my own historical knowledge is 100% accurate, or that I am free from bias, but even when discussing topics where I have fairly strong opinions, I make an effort to be as historically accurate as I can, even when some of the facts don't bolster my arguments. Needless to say, on all such topics, I think the preponderance of evidence supports whatever view I have taken, but I try to remain open to contrary evidence, and I have actually altered my former opinions of some historical events upon learning new things about them. Unfortunately, not everyone seems to make the same effort to be as objective as possible. While my more immediate personal goal is to produce a history of Taiwanese popular music, in part to correct some relatively innocuous misstatements of fact that have appeared in other books and articles, I also consider it important to counter false views of political history wherever they appear, though in many cases they are too deeply ingrained for those who believe them to change their views.