Recent uprisings in Tibet have raised international attention because of the spotlight on the Beijing Olympics. However, the Tibetan independence movement is nothing new. While we see the Dalai Lama tour the world seeking autonomy for his people, we should define who these people are, and then define Tibetan independence altogether.

Prior to the Chinese takeover in 1959, Tibet was a theocratic state based on feudalism. There was a social caste system where people were born into serfdom. The people born into serfdom, then, were taught the Buddhist notion of karma and reincarnation; that they were suffering from the sins of the past life. However, there was a way out of the caste system. One third of the boys in Tibet were forcibly taken by the monastery and could live in the life of harmony, along with a chance for molestation and rape.

The lamas and the feudal landlords, who owned the lands of Tibet, did not represent the majority of the population, who were illiterate and poor. The Drepung Monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, and it lent money to the peasants at an interest rate of 20 percent to 50 percent. In theocratic feudal Tibet, torturing methods such as eye gouging and amputation were common as punishments for thieves and runaway slaves. This is quite the contrary of the peaceful teachings of Buddhism, isn't it?

Most of us in the West have a Shangri-La view of the old Tibet, but that is hardly the case. Old Tibet was not a state based on peace and harmony, but of oppression and torture. We enjoy the religious freedom we have, and therefore should not hypocritically support a sectarian state of Tibet, especially when it is a state that allowed slavery and torture.

Reverting Tibet to its old days and restoring power to the Dalai Lama means Tibet will continue to be backward and oppressive. If we continue on the current trend, the Tibetans have only two limited options: live under oppressive Chinese rule or live under oppressive lama rule.

Western proponents of Tibetan independence often argue on the grounds of human rights. Well, the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights forbids torture and slavery, which were completely legal in the lama-ruled Tibet.

If you support both human rights and Tibet's independence, as I do, I implore you to support a democratic Tibet, not a theocracy.

> Chi-Wen Yao of Taiwan is a student at the University of Georgia majoring in international affairs.

New Attitudes is a weekly opinion column written by readers between the ages of 15-22. E-mail submissions or questions to dbeasley@ajc.com or call 404-526-7371.