Dalai Lama claims he is half-Marxist!

[Chicom]

The Dalai Lama on Marxism
http://www.greaterthings.com/Images/People/Dalai_Lama.gif

"I was very young when I first heard the word communist. The 13th Dalai Lama had left a testament that I read. Also, some of the monks who were helping my studies had been in monasteries with Mongolians. They had talked about the destruction that had taken place since the communists came to Mongolia. We did not know anything about Marxist ideology. But we all feared destruction and thought of communists with terror. It was only when I went to China in 1954-55 that I actually studied Marxist ideology and learned the history of the Chinese revolution. Once I understood Marxism, my attitude change completely. I was so attracted to Marxism, I even expressed my wish to become a Communist Party member."

"Tibet at that time was very, very backward. The ruling class did not seem to care, and there was much inequality. Marxism talked about an equal and just distribution of wealth. I was very much in favor of this. Then there was the concept of self-creation. Marxism talked about self-reliance, without depending on a creator or a God. That was very attractive. I had tried to some things for my people, but I did not have enough time. I still think that if a genuine communist movement had come to Tibet, there would have been much benefit to the people."

http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=4028&t=1&c=1
http://www.greaterthings.com/Lexicon/D/DalaiLama_Marxist.htm
http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2003/4/10_2.html

"I am not anti-China. I am a half-Buddhist, half-Marxist. I am a socialist."

[Marukusu]

The God-Emperor of Occupied Tibet says that he's one of our comrades... I'm not falling for that.

[Labor Shall Rule]

I don't think marxists have feudal slaves.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

I agree; I wouldn't call him a "comrade" but I do see how he could fit into the social-democratic mould having been influence by Marx. (Hey, if it works for Tony Blair.)

[Fidelbrand]

"I'm not anti-China, but half-Buddhist, half-Marxist: Dalai Lama"

I regard that as nice to hear.

Put aside his religious beliefs, Dalai Lama is a good human with sincere wishes for peace and love and oneness of the world. I respect this guy, and now I know he is sort of into Marxism.... good news! ;)

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I read this a while ago. I am inclined to agree with Fidelbrand. I do think he is a good human.


However, I've read some pro-Mao stuff that said Dalai Lama was in favor of the U.S. war in Vietnam, and other imperialist wars. How true is this?

[Mare]

Deep down he really wants to sink his cock into a nice girl from Tibet. Have you ever read how he guards himself "against" sexual desires?

[More Fire for the People]

I think the Dalai Lama is either in reality a social democrat or democratic socialist. He appreciates what bourgeois society calls the ethics of socialism but opposes actual materialist and communist socialism.

[Morag]

He wasn't ever really given the chance to explore his politics, which is too bad. But he's a genuinely good person who was able to hear crap things but still overcame that poison to see the truth. Religious baggage and responsibility and political necessity didn't allow him to pursue his ideas. Sucks to be him. Famous and a bit rich (at least everything taken care of for him), but no freedom.


Deep down he really wants to sink his cock into a nice girl from Tibet. Have you ever read how he guards himself "against" sexual desires?

WTF?

[Mare]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2006, 06:06 PM



Deep down he really wants to sink his cock into a nice girl from Tibet. Have you ever read how he guards himself "against" sexual desires?

WTF?
During the early 1990's he claimed that he could suppress his sexual desires by imagining actual, living people, as "nothing but bone and skin".

[Janus]

His Holiness is now claiming to be a Marxist? :blink:


Once I understood Marxism, my attitude change completely. I was so attracted to Marxism, I even expressed my wish to become a Communist Party member."
Right, he also wanted to be a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and neopagan. :lol:


The ruling class did not seem to care, and there was much inequality. Marxism talked about an equal and just distribution of wealth. I was very much in favor of this
He was the ruling class!! I find it impossible that the Dalai Lama who believes in reincarnation and secular and spiritual authority could really be a true communist (though he may sympathize with certain principles). I seriously doubt that the Dalai Lama truly wanted equal distribution of wealth.

[Leo]

Right, he also wanted to be a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and neopagan.

I can&#39;t stand Dalai Lama for some reason <_<

[Labor Shall Rule]

I have read some of his self-help books. They are very inspirational.

[Janus]

At this point, the Dalai Lama looks like a really harmless, old man. But you should really read up about his life before the Chinese invasion.

The lamas formed a class that dominated much of Tibet and controlled all land. Sitting at the top of this hierarchy was the Dalai Lama (check out the Lhasa palace).

[Leo]

At this point, the Dalai Lama looks like a really harmless, old man.

Yeah, I know... Well, It&#39;s like him trying to embrace everything to get people to like him, and I am guessing that being in his company would be incredibly boring. He reminds me Cliffites from the SWP for some reason :rolleyes:

[Severian]

He started saying stuff like this during the period after Nixon went to China. The U.S. had cut off his subsidies, and he was looking for a new paymaster.

The USSR was very much in conflict with China, and so the DL hoped he could get in good with them with a little Marxist-sounding rhetoric. To a degree he did, but I&#39;m not sure if financial subsidies ever came through.

But it worked great in getting some vaguely lefty types in Western Europe and North America to jump on his bandwagon....so he&#39;s kept it up to a degree.

The DL claims: "I had tried to some things for my people, but I did not have enough time."

In reality, he didn&#39;t even abolish serfdom on his own personal estates. From &#39;51 to &#39;59 the PRC was pressing him to introduce some modest reforms and he dragged his feet every step of the way.

He asks for "genuine" (presumably meaning Soviet not Maoist) communism - but his regime expelled or executed even reformers right up until the Chinese army moved in. Among those expelled in &#39;49 was Baba Phuntsog Wangyal, who was later recruited to the CCP.

Additionally, suppose he did want to do change something, and the Chinese army wasn&#39;t in Tibet. The ruling elite would just poison him. Most Dalai Lamas in Tibetan history were very short-lived.

Then there&#39;d be 20 years or so before the new DL was found and grew up. The whole setup was designed to have a weak central government so the abbots and barons could do as they pleased. There&#39;s no way change would ever have come from above, for all their holy moral posturing.

[Comrade J]

Had he not been brainwashed with this Buddhist shite, he&#39;d probably be a fully committed comrade.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by Mare+Aug 27 2006, 02:36 AM--> (Mare @ Aug 27 2006, 02:36 AM)
[email protected] 26 2006, 06:06 PM



Deep down he really wants to sink his cock into a nice girl from Tibet. Have you ever read how he guards himself "against" sexual desires?

WTF?
During the early 1990&#39;s he claimed that he could suppress his sexual desires by imagining actual, living people, as "nothing but bone and skin". [/b]
Broaden your horizons little boy....

Imagining people as " nothing but bones and skin" is a prominent thought in general Buddhism. Dalia&#39;s emphasis, if you have the wit to acknowledge ... is about spirituality free from sex, thus he said what he said.

And I don&#39;t think it is "just" to accuse him of wanting to dip his dick intoa Tibetian girl.

&#092;

[Mare]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 09:39 AM

is about spirituality free from sex, thus he said what he said.



Actually it was not spirtuality free from sex. According to Theravada Buddhism (the "general buddhism" you wrote about focused mainly in Thailand) -- it is spirituality free from METTA, or, attraction. It goes down to what we covet, Fidel...and that is beyond the simple act of "sex". [1]

So thank you, thank you for your charming wit of how buddhism works.

[1] Spend time reading this book: Buddha&#39;s Path: An Introduction to Theravada Buddhism (pages 18-21 about Metta).

[Karl Marx's Camel]

During the early 1990&#39;s he claimed that he could suppress his sexual desires by imagining actual, living people, as "nothing but bone and skin".

It&#39;s a quite common practice in Buddhism.


At this point, the Dalai Lama looks like a really harmless, old man.

Yes.

So does Fidel. And so did Lenin during his last days. And so did (if I recall correctly), Alfredo Stroessner. But they are, like it or justify it or not, all three mass murderers.

Too bad many fall for the "innocent look".

[Morag]

Originally posted by Mare+Aug 26 2006, 06:36 PM--> (Mare @ Aug 26 2006, 06:36 PM)
[email protected] 26 2006, 06:06 PM



Deep down he really wants to sink his cock into a nice girl from Tibet. Have you ever read how he guards himself "against" sexual desires?

WTF?
During the early 1990&#39;s he claimed that he could suppress his sexual desires by imagining actual, living people, as "nothing but bone and skin". [/b]
Which has what to do with his communist or not communist beliefs? Is being sexually attracted to women (or men) anti or pro communist? Is kerbing the urge anti or pro communist? What has this got to do with anything about the Dalai Lama&#39;s political beliefs?

[Janus]

Nothing. He has taken vows of chastity and what he does to try to prevent "urges" is his own business.

[chebol]

NWOG wrote:

So does Fidel. And so did Lenin during his last days. And so did (if I recall correctly), Alfredo Stroessner. But they are, like it or justify it or not, all three mass murderers.

... and would his irrational and stupidly-rude highness like to quantify the "mass murders" that Fidel is responsible for, except for the murdering of lies the like of which you keep promulgating?

Or are you just going to float around and act the idiot ad infinitum with statements like this?

To put Fidel and Lenin in the same category as Stroessner is the work of either a child, an idiot, or a counter-revolutionary. Which are you, NWOG?

[Karl Marx's Camel]

You seem to misunderstand, chebol.

A mass murder involves the murder of large numbers of people. The "perpetrator" and the "victims" can be good or bad; It&#39;s not really relevant.

If you line up 100 serial rapists and some persons who have tortured and cut off people&#39;s toungue and shoot them, you are mass murder, no? I&#39;d say to such a mass murder "good riddance, why should we care about such such people". And I would hold nothing against that mass murderer.

If your job is to torture terrorists from some place in order to get out information to save innocent people&#39;s lives, you are still torturing people. But that&#39;s just a fact, it signifies an action; it doesn&#39;t tell wether that person, or that action for that matter, is good or bad.

[chebol]

You seem to misunderstand, chebol.

No, you do.


A mass murder involves the murder of large numbers of people. The "perpetrator" and the "victims" can be good or bad; It&#39;s not really relevant.

Actually, it is. "Murder" does not mean the same as "kill". It is a loaded term, carrying moral overtones of criminal wrongdoing, culpability, and implies the need for punishment. It is a threat to society as a whole. "Kill" is value neutral. It merely describes the act - whether it be murder, euthanasia, manslaughter, self-defence.

For example, you attack me with a knife and are going to cut my throat. If the only way to defend myself is to take away your life, and I do so, I have killed you. But I have not necessarily "murdered" you.


If you line up 100 serial rapists and some persons who have tortured and cut off people&#39;s toungue and shoot them, you are mass murder, no? I&#39;d say to such a mass murder "good riddance, why should we care about such such people". And I would hold nothing against that mass murderer.

And good for you. But if these people are killed after a fair trial, where their guilt has been established and the death penalty is part of a popularly accepted system of law, they have not been murdered, but executed.

Worse yet, your logic accuses Fidel of being a "mass murderer". Now, where did Fidel actually kill these people? Pray tell?


But that&#39;s just a fact, it signifies an action; it doesn&#39;t tell wether that person, or that action for that matter, is good or bad.

And to repeat again - that&#39;s the point. "Murder" does not signify an action - it is a value-judgement of the act of killing a person. Ie - that that particular act of killing "was bad". No more, no less.

You are therefore accusing Fidel of an immoral and criminal act (ie. being a mass murderer), without evidence of such, and I am demanding you to retract, or supply proof.

[Just Dave]

In response to some of the posts here, being upper class doesn&#39;t stop you from being a Socialist. Read about Tony Benn, He was the son of a viscount (which basically mean he was part of the royal family) but became socialist, abdicated, joined the labour party, and so far is the only MP who has proposed the the Monarchy be abolished.

[Rollo]

Che was middle class.

[Lenin's Law]

Yes, the Dalai-Lama is half-marxist and I am half-Tibetan.

I suppose the Dalai Lama will say now that the "communist" era of Chinese history is over and the unbridled capitalist part is rapidly approaching: "I am a half-marxist but with Chinese characteristics&#33;"

[perdido]

Someone mentioned he believed in reincarnation and such, in a recent article I read he said that if scientific evidence denounces any part of buddhism than that aspect of buddhism must be dropped and the scientific explanation accepted. He is a very smart man and probably knows that suddenly deciding to abolish the ruling class in which he is a member of would only have him lose his influence and he would no longer be able to promote peace and the teachings of buddhism like before.

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Yes I read that. The Dalai Lama does say some good things.

[Janus]

He is a very smart man and probably knows that suddenly deciding to abolish the ruling class in which he is a member of would only have him lose his influence and he would no longer be able to promote peace and the teachings of buddhism like before.
The lamas are no longer a ruling class. As long as the Dalai Lama continues his campaign and as long as his exile holds, his influence will not wane and he can go on as many good-will trips and to as many hippie conventions as he wants.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Che was middle class.

He was born into a petty bourgeois family, but he later became proletarianized.

[Comrade Marcel]

This news is so 2001.

[Pirate Utopian]

so is his mother or his father the carrier of his marxist genes?

[Janus]

so is his mother or his father the carrier of his marxist genes?
How dare you question the divinity of His Holiness. :angry: :lol: :lol:

[harris0]

What&#39;s all this hate on the Dalia Lama about? From everything I&#39;ve seen about him, he seems like a truly caring and loving person.

If you&#39;re going to send me some links. Give me a non-partisan source. I don&#39;t want to read any Maoist bullshit.

[boxinghefner]

he has previously described marxism as positive philosophy but "with no heart".


I&#39;m not a fan

[harris0]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2006 11:59 pm
he has previously described marxism as positive philosophy but "with no heart".


I&#39;m not a fan
That&#39;s understandable...and I think I would agree. Marxism is a materialist philosophy

[Ol' Dirty]

The Dalai Lamma is pretty cool. I don&#39;t give a damn if he is spiritual; so is my dad. He is actually a socialist, and has good intentions.I don&#39;t really give mind if you disagree with me. To be frank, I really don&#39;t care. I just think he&#39;s cool.

[Leif]

-sigh-
Comrades, can we please stick to the topic at hand instead of drawing our knives against one-another&#39;s throat?

As for the Dalai Lama, while he&#39;s no savior of mine, I at least think he&#39;s imperialist than other spiritual leaders, such as say Pope Benedict. He is comparitively better, but certainly not a comrade we can count on. The Dalai Lama is an old man who cares, maybe for the wrong reasons. I have briefly read some horrible things about his rule of Tibet.

In short, it&#39;s nice to hear him say he likes socialism, but until he backs his claims up he&#39;s just another social democrat.

[stevec]

Marx and Christ both have the same view of history: the love of money is the root of all evil. John was the first "marxist." (If you have two coats, and your brother has none, then give him one.) And Christ overturned the tables at the bank long before Osama had the idea of flying planes into banks.

Marx wants everyone to love each other, which is the same preaching as in every other religion.

The Dali Lama read Marx as theory, Communists read it as instructions to kill people. That is the same misreading that people take from the Bible, too.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 02:01 am
Marx and Christ both have the same view of history: the love of money is the root of all evil. John was the first "marxist." (If you have two coats, and your brother has none, then give him one.) And Christ overturned the tables at the bank long before Osama had the idea of flying planes into banks.

Marx wants everyone to love each other, which is the same preaching as in every other religion.
Nah, that&#39;s pretty a pretty weak comparison.

Both Osama and Jesus feel/felt that money gets in the way of piety. They&#39;re both explicitly anti-modernist icons. Marxists have no such hangups.

Marxists don&#39;t feel that money is the root of all evil. In fact, capitalism is a huge progressive step forward over fuedelism. But history isn&#39;t going to stop with capitalism- the proletariat are capitalism&#39;s most &#39;essential product&#39; who can transform the world through their solidarity and unity. Whether you agree with its theories or not, it&#39;s a materialist prediction rather than moral.

This is really basic Marxist theory, btw.


The Dali Lama read Marx as theory, Communists read it as instructions to kill people. That is the same misreading that people take from the Bible, too.

The vast majority of communists I&#39;ve met haven&#39;t killed anybody, to my knowledge. But since you know so much about what makes a communist tick, maybe you can correct me on that. :lol: :lol:

What&#39;s so special about communists killing anyway? You kinda got a hangup there it seems, odd since communists have historically been amatuers at killing compared to their enemies. You do know that the revolutions that (eventually) established democracy were pretty far from bloodless, right...?

[stevec]

Originally posted by PRC&#045;[email protected] 04, 2007 04:31 am



Marxists don&#39;t feel that money is the root of all evil. In fact, capitalism is a huge progressive step forward over fuedelism. But history isn&#39;t going to stop with capitalism- the proletariat are capitalism&#39;s most &#39;essential product&#39; who can transform the world through their solidarity and unity. Whether you agree with its theories or not, it&#39;s a materialist prediction rather than moral.

This is really basic Marxist theory, btw.


The Dali Lama read Marx as theory, Communists read it as instructions to kill people. That is the same misreading that people take from the Bible, too.

The vast majority of communists I&#39;ve met haven&#39;t killed anybody, to my knowledge. But since you know so much about what makes a communist tick, maybe you can correct me on that. :lol: :lol:

What&#39;s so special about communists killing anyway? You kinda got a hangup there it seems, odd since communists have historically been amatuers at killing compared to their enemies. You do know that the revolutions that (eventually) established democracy were pretty far from bloodless, right...?


Both Osama and Jesus feel/felt that money gets in the way of piety. They&#39;re both explicitly anti-modernist icons. Marxists have no such hangups.

All ideologies have an orthodoxy, and faithfulness to that orthodoxy becomes their piety. Marxist are no different. Also, it isn&#39;t money, it is "the love of" money.

As far as the "materialt prediction" goes, Jesus also said that the high shall be made low and the valleys should be raised up so that all will be smooth. Again, there is nothing new in Marx&#39;s claims, it is just a new wrapper.



The vast majority of communists I&#39;ve met haven&#39;t killed anybody

The same is true of religious people, capitalists, muslims, etc., but people still hold them responsible for all the worlds ills anyway, even if it happened before they were born.


What&#39;s so special about communists killing anyway? You kinda got a hangup there it seems, odd since communists have historically been amatuers at killing compared to their enemies. You do know that the revolutions that (eventually) established democracy were pretty far from bloodless, right...?

No hangup from me. I think all killing is stupid. I agree that a lot of people in different forms of empires have engaged in it. That is what this video blog (http://www.behappyandfree.com/pdf/BigHistory.mov) is about.

[stevec]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 09:31 pm


As for the Dalai Lama, while he&#39;s no savior of mine, I at least think he&#39;s imperialist than other spiritual leaders, such as say Pope Benedict. He is comparitively better, but certainly not a comrade we can count on. The Dalai Lama is an old man who cares, maybe for the wrong reasons. I have briefly read some horrible things about his rule of Tibet.

In short, it&#39;s nice to hear him say he likes socialism, but until he backs his claims up he&#39;s just another social democrat.
Count on him to do what?

He tells people to be less greedy. Most political opinions (marxist and capitalist) encourage greed.

Of course, as the leader of an empire, he probably lives "humbly" in very rich circumstances, but that is typical. "Do as I say, not as I do."

Power corrupts marxists as easily as any other group.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2006 09:49 pm
What&#39;s all this hate on the Dalia Lama about? From everything I&#39;ve seen about him, he seems like a truly caring and loving person.

If you&#39;re going to send me some links. Give me a non-partisan source. I don&#39;t want to read any Maoist bullshit.
Well, I am afraid that it is hard to find bourgeois sources that are not "biased" towards the situation in Tibet. I may of found a few that you may find some interest in.

Wikipedia enty on Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet#Relations_with_the_Republic_of_China)

"Though some of the population of Tibet at that time were serfs ("mi ser"), often bound to land owned by monasteries and aristocrats, Tibetans in exile have claimed that the Serfs and Masters formed only a small part of Tibetan society, and argued that Tibet would have modernized itself without China&#39;s intervention. Any attempt at land redistribution or the redistribution of wealth would have proved unpopular with the established landowners."

Of course, Wikipedia also dodges coming out and saying that not only did feudalism effectively exist in Tibet, but it was also a practice that this beloved "Dalai Lama" participated in. According to Melvyn Goldstein in An Anthropological Study of the Tibetan Political System, serfs made up a "vast majority of Tibetan society", and that they composed of about "700,000 out of 1,250,000 of all Tibetans". Alexandra David-Néel, a French explorer and anarchist, was extremely interested in the egilitarianism of Buddhism, but in her last month in Lhasa, she became convinced that the high priests of the local religion didn&#39;t even practice what they preached.

Tibet Myth (http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html)

I assure you, this article contains a list of sources that would explain the reasoning of the author. I would like to quote various parts of it in order to prove my point.

"In the Dalai Lama&#39;s Tibet, torture and mutilation—including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation--were favored punishments inflicted upon runaway serfs and thieves. Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: "When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion." Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then "left to God" in the freezing night to die. "The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking," concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet."

"Serfs and other peasants generally were little better than slaves. They went without schooling or medical care. They spent most of their time laboring for high-ranking lamas or for the secular landed aristocracy. Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners send them to work in a distant location."

The CCP was able to even "liberate" Tibet due to the fact that they reached out to the immense majority who were serfs, domestic slaves, nomads, and beggers. The Dalai Lama, who lived in a 1000-roomed palace in Lhasa, is not the "caring and loving person" that CNN envisions him to be. I am sorry if this breaks your liberal heart, but these are the plain facts.