After having written this book on Tibet's history, Goldstein is still able to easily get visas to conduct research inside Tibet by the Chinese authorities. This tells you how his books and research conclusions are viewed by the CCP.
【 在 Faith 的大作中提到: 】
: amazon上唯一的负面评价：
: After having written this book on Tibet's history, Goldstein is still able to easily get visas to conduct research inside Tibet by the Chinese authorities. This tells you how his books and research conclusions are viewed by the CCP.
: 我想，这反映出作者的观点比较温和，不容易让人产生很
: (以下引言省略...)
The establishment of the PRC in October 1949 set in motion events that two years later broke the deadlock over the Tibet Question.
In its formative years, the Chinese Communist party had followed the Soviet Union's lead and adopted the policy that ethnic territories in China would be autonomous republics with the right of secession. By the end of World War II, however, this policy shifted to political centralism, and when the new Communist government began, its nationality policy held that Communist China
would be an indivisibly multiethnic state with autonomous nationality regions (rather than republics) that had no right to secede. Tibet was considered one such nationality region, and in late 1949 the new Chinese Communist government
proclaimed its liberation as one of the main goals for the People's Liberation
Army (PLA).[6]
The Tibetan government found itself in a very difficult situation. The string of fortuitous events that had prevented China from actively addressing the
Tibet Question after the fall of the Qing dynasty were no longer present, so
the modernization faction's fear that Tibet would some day have to defend its
independence militarily was about to come to pass.
Not surprisingly, Tibet's poorly armed and led military had only an amateurish plan to combat an invasion. Moreover, Tibet was more isolated internationally than at any time since 1913 because Britain no longer had any national interest in maintaining Tibet's "autonomous" status. Once it granted independence to India in 1947, London saw its role as supporting India's foreign policy, which at this time centered on establishing friendly relations with the PRC, not Tibet.
这本书只能算是个陈述观点的小册子而已，当然没什么好批的（何况amazon上的一般读者又能批出什么东西来），Goldstein更系统、严肃（因而也更值得批评）的历史考察与评论要看他另外的长篇著作A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State
Jamyang Norbu对后一本书写过一篇长文批判，BLACK ANNALS: Goldstein & The Negation Of Tibetan History，很值得一读：
第一部分：http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=22046&t=1&c=4
第二部分：http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=22113&t=1&c=4
Goldstein对Jamyang Norbu的批判也有一个简短的回应，没有什么实质内容，除了回骂以外，就是让读者看完他的书后自行判断：https://www.phayul.com/mobile/?page=view&c=1&id=22134
我的判断是Jamyang Norbu说的基本正确
【 在 Faith (faith) 的大作中提到: 】
: amazon上唯一的负面评价：
: After having written this book on Tibet's history, Goldstein is still able to easily get visas to conduct research inside Tibet by the Chinese authorities. This tells you how his books and research conclusions are viewed by the CCP.
: 我想，这反映出作者的观点比较温和，不容易让人产生很强的抵触情绪。
: ...................