Buddhist Anarchism

[Zhen Li]

Well, I'm not sure how I am engaging in justification, it's what is there. It's just like when you have any sensation, when mindful you just notice it is there, not pushing it away or wanting it to stay.

Everything we see in the world has positives and negatives. My shifo said to me, we should be less materialistic, but that doesn't mean we should stop working and buying stuff, because then the economy will suffer and people will have a harder life in general. See, every coin has two sides.

[ground]

This was written by Gary Snyder in 1961, ...

...
The mercy of the West has been social revolution; the mercy of the East has been individual insight into the basic self/void. We need both.

Anarchism and religious tradition are contradictory. "Buddhist anarchism" is a contradiction in terms.

[Sönam]

This was written by Gary Snyder in 1961, ...

...
The mercy of the West has been social revolution; the mercy of the East has been individual insight into the basic self/void. We need both.

Anarchism and religious tradition are contradictory. "Buddhist anarchism" is a contradiction in terms.

It depends on how you define anarchism and on the religious tradition we are speaking about ...

Sönam

[Grigoris]

This was written by Gary Snyder in 1961, ...

...
The mercy of the West has been social revolution; the mercy of the East has been individual insight into the basic self/void. We need both.

Anarchism and religious tradition are contradictory. "Buddhist anarchism" is a contradiction in terms.

Why?

[Sönam]

It depends on how you define anarchism and on the religious tradition we are speaking about ...

Sönam

about ... (wikipedia)

As a subtle and anti-dogmatic philosophy, anarchism draws on many currents of thought and strategy. Anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular world view, instead fluxing and flowing as a philosophy.[18] There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive.[19] Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism.[10] Strains of anarchism have often been divided into the categories of social and individualist anarchism or similar dual classifications.[20][21] Anarchism is often considered a radical left-wing ideology,[22][23] and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-authoritarian interpretations of communism, collectivism, syndicalism, mutualism, or participatory economics.[24]

Anarchism as a mass social movement has regularly endured fluctuations in popularity.[citation needed] The central tendency of anarchism as a social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism, with individualist anarchism being primarily a literary phenomenon[25] which nevertheless did have an impact on the bigger currents[26] and individualists have also participated in large anarchist organisations.[27][28] Many anarchists oppose all forms of aggression, supporting self-defense or non-violence (anarcho-pacifism),[29][30] while others have supported the use of some coercive measures, including violent revolution and propaganda of the deed, on the path to an anarchist society.

...

Anarcho-pacifism (also pacifist anarchism or anarchist pacifism) is a tendency within the anarchist movement which rejects the use of violence in the struggle for social change.[1][2] The main early influences were the thought of Henry David Thoreau[2] and Leo Tolstoy while later the ideas of Mohandas Gandhi gained importance.[1][2] It developed "mostly in Holland, Britain, and the United States, before and during the Second World War"

To day, except the Black Block, Anarchists movements are pacifists, and the learn to resist to the oppression with pacifists tools ...

and remember Dorothy Day, a catholic ...

Dorothy Day, (November 8, 1897 – November 29, 1980) was an American journalist, social activist and devout Catholic convert; she advocated the Catholic economic theory of distributism. She was also considered to be an anarchist,[16][17][18] and did not hesitate to use the term.[19] In the 1930s, Day worked closely with fellow activist Peter Maurin to establish the Catholic Worker movement, a nonviolent, pacifist movement that continues to combine direct aid for the poor and homeless with nonviolent direct action on their behalf. ...

[Grigoris]

And let's not forget Leo Tolstoy.

L.N.Tolstoy.jpg (28.61 KiB) Viewed 3409 times

"His literal interpretation of the ethical teachings of Jesus, centering on the Sermon on the Mount, caused him in later life to become a fervent Christian anarchist and anarcho-pacifist. His ideas on nonviolent resistance, expressed in such works as The Kingdom of God Is Within You, were to have a profound impact on such pivotal twentieth-century figures as Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Tolstoy

[Zhen Li]

I don't see their positions as being able to be actively change governments.

I think you might as well just be a Buddhist and spread the Dharma not caring about politics, it will have a better effect.

[Grigoris]

I don't see their positions as being able to be actively change governments.

I think you might as well just be a Buddhist and spread the Dharma not caring about politics, it will have a better effect.

You've got your opinion and they've got theirs.

[Zhen Li]

And Dharma is an eternal law, anarchism is a conditioned doctrine of the 19th century.

[Malcolm]

And let's not forget Leo Tolstoy.

L.N.Tolstoy.jpg

"His literal interpretation of the ethical teachings of Jesus, centering on the Sermon on the Mount, caused him in later life to become a fervent Christian anarchist and anarcho-pacifist. His ideas on nonviolent resistance, expressed in such works as The Kingdom of God Is Within You, were to have a profound impact on such pivotal twentieth-century figures as Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Tolstoy

This kind of anarchist may not recognize any political authority, but they nevertheless live in a political world. From my point of view, they are basically utopians. They may be admirable, indeed, but they are not important for their political voice, they are important for their philosophical voice, much in the same way that deep ecology/ecosophy is important as an environmental philosophy but not important as a political or social movement (much to the dissatisfaction of other environmental philosophers who come mainly from the left, like Bookchin and so on,)

[tellyontellyon]

Z.L.
I'm not sure about this 'Dharma is eternal law' statement....
Is anything eternal?
And by Dharma, do we mean precepts? The Vinaya?
In what sense are you using the term Dharma? How are you defining it? Can it be defined?
What exactly is it that you say is eternal?

[Malcolm]

Z.L.
I'm not sure about this 'Dharma is eternal law' statement....
Is anything eternal?
And by Dharma, do we mean precepts? The Vinaya?
In what sense are you using the term Dharma? How are you defining it? Can it be defined?
What exactly is it that you say is eternal?

Dharma is definitely "eternal" in that the principles of karma, dependent origination, emptiness and buddhanature always apply to all sentient beings in every possible universe.

When a Buddha awakens, he always awakens to these four principles.

It does not mean that Shakyamui's dispensation is eternal; on the contrary, it is impermanent and will disappear some three thousand years hence.

[Zhen Li]

The Dharma is a path through the forest to a great city, once in a while it is covered over and forgotten, and then a Buddha comes along and uncovers the path leading to the city again.

Na hi verena verāni sammantīdha kudācanaṃ
Averena ca sammanti esa dhammo sanantano.

All enmities by enmity,
Are truly pacified never —
Save by friendship and pleasantry:
This Law will endure forever.

[Grigoris]

And Dharma is an eternal law, anarchism is a conditioned doctrine of the 19th century.

And Zhen Li-ism is?

[Zhen Li]

I am just an upāsaka.

[Malcolm]

I am, in principle, in favor of “globalization” and the concept of “global” companies. In the past, communities and countries could live in isolation if they wanted to; that is no longer the case. Today, a stock-market crash on one side of the globe has a direct and immediate effect on the other side. Terrorism born in one country can destabilize a dozen others. And the effects of poverty, disease, and social unrest in a handful of nations impact the rest of the world. It is my opinion that global companies can be agents for positive change in our interconnected world.

Another positive result of globalization is increasing competition. Competition generates a very powerful force to produce what people want at reasonable prices. But it is a means; it is not an end. The end is to generate benefits for all. So why is it so difficult to arrive at fair competition and an equitable distribution of those benefits? Competition generates wealth. But if leaders of businesses are interested only in enriching themselves as fast as possible, with little or no regard for any harmful consequences to others, then competition is being used in the wrong way.

For much of my life, I was attracted to the socialist or communist system because I understood its objective as to provide a decent standard of living and justice for all. I was drawn to it for its equality; in such a system, extreme differences in standards of living between people are not to be tolerated. The stated objectives of socialist systems include abolishing poverty and furthering the brotherhood among people and among countries, which I, of course, found very appealing. But over time, I found out that the countries that practiced the communist system did not reach this objective; they did not even try to. On the contrary, I found that by suppressing free markets and individual freedoms like freedom of speech and freedom to own property, these systems were actually stagnating development and furthering poverty and hardship. Although I still believe that the initial objective was right, I have come to see the flaws in such a system.

It was not initially obvious to me that the abolition of private ownership would lead to ownership by the state, with a party elite in charge who would then institute their own restrictive command-and-control system and rule as an elite, like the aristocracies in the past. Of course, we now know this led to many human rights abuses.

It is through this process of listening and observing that I have come to put my faith in the free-market system. Although it has great potential for abuses as well, the fact that it allows for freedom and diversity of thought and religion has convinced me that it is the one we should be working from. Of course, I still believe we should strive for an adequate standard of living for all rather than the “survival of the fittest” position that the free market often follows. The recent developments in China demonstrate how even small movements toward a free-market system can boost economic development and help lift people out of poverty. But of course, in the case of China there is still much work to be done.

Adam Smith refers to the development of moral sense as imagining oneself in the position of others. That is what we refer to as “exchanging self for others.” Unfortunately, Adam Smith did not stress sufficiently the need of people to train in imagining themselves in the position of others. Even though he had a keen interest in and insight into moral issues, Smith believed that competition and regulation could lead to prosperity for all. But I believe that Right View and Right Conduct are also necessary. Without considering the impact of one’s decisions on others, it is not possible for regulation and competition alone to result in a decent standard of living for all. Adam Smith and other economists have concerned themselves with the generation of wealth, but they do not provide any guidance on the distribution of wealth. Karl Marx, on the other hand, looked at this the other way around. He was only interested in the distribution of wealth, not in how to generate it. In my view, both the proper creation of wealth and the proper distribution of it are very important. In order to reach such goals, one requires the right policies and the application of Right View and Right Conduct.

All human beings, whatever their cultural or historical background, suffer when they are intimidated, imprisoned, or tortured. It is not enough to define human rights as the United Nations has done; they must also be implemented. Rights depend on responsible action. This is why I put so much emphasis on the word “responsible” when I advocate responsible free-market economy.

Even though Adam Smith was concerned with the moral dimensions of the economic system, many of his successors ignored that aspect. I consider an economic system without a moral dimension to be dangerous. That is why I want to add the dimension of “responsibility” to “free market.” I agree with the concept of freedom advocated by Smith and Hayek but feel it does not take us far enough.

Globalization is a positive development as long as leaders of global corporations act responsibly and develop a holistic view of their role in society. And since organizations are also dependent on governments to act in a responsible manner, businesses should work constructively with governments to achieve a responsible free-market economy and reject an economic system without moral values.

Capital is a means, not an end. The end is freedom and prosperity for all. This can best be reached by a free-market system in which all participants act responsibly. In my way of thinking, integrating capitalism and Buddhism happens when Right View and Right Conduct become an integral part of the economic system. I see the word “responsible” in this context as standing for Right View and Right Conduct and therefore hope that the words “responsible free-market economy” will come to replace the words “capitalist system.”

The Leader's Way: The Art of Making the Right Decisions in Our Careers, Our Companies, and the World at Large. Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

HHDL say many more things, and his position is more nuanced than the citations I have posted might lead one to believe. But it quite clear he has abandoned his "Marxism" in favor of a free market style political economy.

[Zhen Li]

Sadhu! Sadhu!

HHDL and I went through the same line of reasoning in life.

I also agree with him that Socialists fundamentally are just well intentioned, they just want to make things better for everyone by bringing equality. It just doesn't work, and leads to more suffering. That's unfortunate and makes me feel an immense welling up of compassion in my heart whenever I meet someone who is a socialist - they really think they're doing something good and right for the world, which is admirable, even if they are naive.

May all socialists and communists be well, happy and peaceful.

[Malcolm]

Sadhu! Sadhu!

HHDL and I went through the same line of reasoning in life.

I also agree with him that Socialists fundamentally are just well intentioned, they just want to make things better for everyone by bringing equality. It just doesn't work, and leads to more suffering. That's unfortunate and makes me feel an immense welling up of compassion in my heart whenever I meet someone who is a socialist - they really think they're doing something good and right for the world, which is admirable, even if they are naive.

May all socialists and communists be well, happy and peaceful.

Personally, I have been a religious monarchist since I received teachings from HH Sakya Trizin (from the Khon, the oldest surviving royal family in the world), but more or less a supporter of representative democracy my whole life. I had a good friend who was a Trot, and listening to TOTO is just like playing a conversation with him from thirty years ago, identical in both word and fervor.

[AilurusFulgens]

Sadhu! Sadhu!

HHDL and I went through the same line of reasoning in life.

I also agree with him that Socialists fundamentally are just well intentioned, they just want to make things better for everyone by bringing equality. It just doesn't work, and leads to more suffering. That's unfortunate and makes me feel an immense welling up of compassion in my heart whenever I meet someone who is a socialist - they really think they're doing something good and right for the world, which is admirable, even if they are naive.

May all socialists and communists be well, happy and peaceful.

Personally, I have been a religious monarchist since I received teachings from HH Sakya Trizin (from the Khon, the oldest surviving royal family in the world), but more or less a supported of representative democracy my whole life. I had a good friend who was a Trot, and listening to TOTO is just like playing a conversation with him from thirty years ago, identical in both word and fervor.

I don't want to sidetrack the thread, but may I ask what makes the Khon royal family the oldest surviving in the world?

Why Khon and not for instance the Japanese imperial family or some other royal lineage?

A. Fulgens

[Malcolm]

I don't want to sidetrack the thread, but may I ask what makes the Khon royal family the oldest surviving in the world?

Why Khon and not for instance the Japanese imperial family or some other royal lineage?

Well, second oldest then. Though arguably, since the Khon family were the direct descendants of a god of the clear light realm who was elevated to kingship by the clans of Tibet, but this is not historical.

The ascension of the Khon to rulership of Tibet occurred in the thirteenth century. Apart from the Japanese royal family, I personally know of no other family with such a long continuous rule in one place.

M