Palimino
16-06-2009, 09:57 AM
Buddhism = essentially a philosophy overlaid with the trappings of religion (that’s why it is more coherent than most). It’s not fashionable to say so, but do people think beyond the slogan “Free Tibet”? The Dalai Lama is probably a good man, but not a deity and probably not even a particularly good ruler. They are guilty of a rather profound ignorance, fuelled by the Dalai Lama’s PR machine and American support – who couldn’t care less about Tibet, they just want to demonise China. Consider:
He [the Dalai Lama] travels around the world pressing his case with his message of peace, democracy and how he has devoted his life to opposing the evil regime in China. He promotes the idea of being the absolute ruler of Tibet (in exile) to gullible twits. He has never had to govern so has avoided any negative PR on that score. A theocrat, who believes in his absolute right to rule Tibet. In other words - religious rule. So really his claim to fame is no more valid than your average jihading Ayatollah (no separation of church and state here).
Democracy? Bwhahahahaha! Under Dalai Lamas, Tibetans don’t get to vote. They are feudal peasants who accept a reincarnated leader. Peasants who, under all incarnations of the Dalai Lama, lived lives of abject poverty and supplication, to their boss (his Holiness), who due to reincarnation, sometimes ruled them as a child. This political myth masquerades in the 21st century as enlightened governance? This totalitarian, autocratic, theocracy continued from 1391 till China stopped it in 1959. The current globetrotting Dalai Lama (and Oprah talk show guest and best selling author) is the 14th in a long line of absolute monarchs who ruled a poor country with iron fists, depriving their citizens of freedom, votes and general rights with impunity. What kind of ‘independence’ would Tibet have if they were ‘freed’ from China? They would degenerate into brutish anarchy within 6 months. Tibet would make Iran look like an unattainable ideal to be aspired to and have the kind of democracy like Zimbabwe under Mugabe.
How can these “Free Tibet” twits speak about democracy and campaign for human rights, when they support someone with such a philosophy? Do they really subscribe to the idea that hundreds of years of dictatorship were implemented without violence and force? Do they think that poor, selfless Buddhist monks ruling fairly and justly?
How can they keep a straight face with this New Age crap?
He [the Dalai Lama] travels around the world pressing his case with his message of peace, democracy and how he has devoted his life to opposing the evil regime in China. He promotes the idea of being the absolute ruler of Tibet (in exile) to gullible twits. He has never had to govern so has avoided any negative PR on that score. A theocrat, who believes in his absolute right to rule Tibet. In other words - religious rule. So really his claim to fame is no more valid than your average jihading Ayatollah (no separation of church and state here).
Democracy? Bwhahahahaha! Under Dalai Lamas, Tibetans don’t get to vote. They are feudal peasants who accept a reincarnated leader. Peasants who, under all incarnations of the Dalai Lama, lived lives of abject poverty and supplication, to their boss (his Holiness), who due to reincarnation, sometimes ruled them as a child. This political myth masquerades in the 21st century as enlightened governance? This totalitarian, autocratic, theocracy continued from 1391 till China stopped it in 1959. The current globetrotting Dalai Lama (and Oprah talk show guest and best selling author) is the 14th in a long line of absolute monarchs who ruled a poor country with iron fists, depriving their citizens of freedom, votes and general rights with impunity. What kind of ‘independence’ would Tibet have if they were ‘freed’ from China? They would degenerate into brutish anarchy within 6 months. Tibet would make Iran look like an unattainable ideal to be aspired to and have the kind of democracy like Zimbabwe under Mugabe.
How can these “Free Tibet” twits speak about democracy and campaign for human rights, when they support someone with such a philosophy? Do they really subscribe to the idea that hundreds of years of dictatorship were implemented without violence and force? Do they think that poor, selfless Buddhist monks ruling fairly and justly?
How can they keep a straight face with this New Age crap?