My earlier post was primarily aimed at discussing things at the national level.tobes wrote:Indrajala, politics does not equal national politics. They are not synonyms.
To be a political leader is not tantamount to being a leader of a nation-state.
Politics of course can include other areas not related to the direct maintenance and survival of the nation, like civil rights and so on. In that realm Buddhist values can generally be advocated without really infringing on basic Buddhist ethics. For instance, advocating laws against animal cruelty does not presumably require any unwholesome acts on our part. Buddhist ethics are perhaps best understood at macro and micro, or multiple, levels.
But that being said, I think most common people will be unable to really foresee the long-term consequences of their collective actions even with respect to civil politics.
I doubt everyone could ever get along. Even looking at history nations heavily influenced by Mahāyāna Buddhism still went to war with each other. One prime example was the conflict between China and Goguryeo during the early Tang Dynasty:The Mahāyāna is universal in scope: do you not recognise the possibility for a genuine Buddhist inspired cosmopolitanism?
Also, progress is not perpetual or irreversible. Rather than planning a utopia, better to deal with immediate conditions and try to work for the best with them.