Dalai Lama says he is "Half Marxist, Half Buddhist"

[ArabRASH]

“Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. Marxism is concerned with the distribution of wealth on an equal basis and the equitable utilization of the means of production. It is also concerned with the fate of the working classes—that is the majority—as well as with the fate of those who are underprivileged and in need, and Marxism cares about the victims of minority-imposed exploitation. For those reasons the system appeals to me, and it seems fair ... The failure of the regime in the Soviet Union was, for me not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist." Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama(1996)

Do you think the Dalai Lama supporting Marxist economics is a good thing?

I personally agree with him 100%(i'm sure all of you do too). But do you like that it's the "Dalai Lama" whose saying this?

[Hiero]

No, the Dalai Lama doesn't support Marxist economics.

If he did, he would first criticise the system he left in Tibet, before he even thinks about criticising the Soviet Union. The Dalai Lamas were the head of the an oppressive religious/feudalist system in Tibet. For the current Dalai Lama to even think of becoming even half a Marxist, he would have to cease being the current Dalai Lama.

[al8]

He's also a capitalist and has enriched himself from the labor of resent refugees from Tibet to Daramsala. More here # (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/mar2000/tib-m22.shtml) and # (http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet6.htm)

[Jazzratt]

Dalai Lama: half Buddhist and half full of shit.

[fredbergen]

100% CIA-funded counterrevolutionary.

[ArabRASH]

Ok...i didn't know you were all so hostile about this

Well if it's true what you were saying, then why did he say that in the first place?

[Red Blue Pen]

To garner more support, and thusly, more money.

[Holden Caulfield]

to pull in modern capitalist liberals who once ago in their youth agreed with marxism before they became wealthy enough to not need to give a fuck anymore but want to pretend to be radical

[bellyscratch]

Dalai Lama: half Buddhist and half full of shit.
:lol::lol:

[Prairie Fire]

to pull in modern capitalist liberals who once ago in their youth agreed with marxism before they became wealthy enough to not need to give a fuck anymore but want to pretend to be radical


:D Well put.

It is very important, I think, to confront and debunk those presented as "Heros" by the capitalist sphere, and the Dalai lama is the best example of this.

Now, any little bit of research on the Dalai lama or the state that he ran would be more than sufficient to smash all that "Peaceful pacifist" bullshit, (not to mention anything about "self-discipline",), and yet the notion still remains, intact, that the Dalai lama (the King of Tibet,) was some sort of passive, peaceful religious practitioner, who was kind to everyone, and the peasants (and slaves) of Tibet lived in prosperity and comfort.:rolleyes:

An excellent read on the subject (although it is printed by Maoists, hence it praises Maoism constantly,), is "The true story of Maoist Revolution in Tibet" by Mike Ely. I think it may be out of print, but here is a link;

Part 1
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet1.htm

Part 2
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet2.htm

Part 3
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet3.htm

Part 4
http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/tibet/tibet4.htm

I can't seem to find a link to part five (about life under the Dalai lama in exile,) or part six, but there is still plenty of fine information right there.

[Sentinel]

“Of all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles..I think this is the point where any marxist will stop reading, other than for the reasons amusement, and for being able to expose this charlatan. Marxism is not founded on 'moral principles' but on the rational, scientific observations of historical materialism. Buddhism on the other hand is a religion based on faith, and that does not mix with marxism at all.

Any assertions by the Dalai Lama that he would be a leftist of any sort are equally utter bullshit, which can be seen by observing the historical fact, that Tibet under the rule of the Lamas was a feudalist serf society, where the people toiled in unimaginable misery. So, considering the circumstances we might be wise to take anything this person has to say with a grain of salt..

Moreover, this is a topic on religion and doesn't belong in the Theory forum.

Moved.

[Die Neue Zeit]

There was a historical precedent: Catherine the Great and her admiration for liberal thought (of course, we know about her authoritarianism). :glare:

[F9]

Just dont believe those religon "fathers",the biggest liers!

Fuserg9:star:

[Demogorgon]

Not to judge one way or another here, but some people here need to check their own biases. I suspect a lot of the hostility is simply because he opposes China. And China ain't worth defending.

As for the talk of "the kind if state he ran", he never ran any state. China was already occupying Tibet before he came to power.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ So what's your position on the Dalai Lama's political views? :confused:

[Anyway, when I was much younger with less clarity, I read about this, just like Einstein's support for socialism. I thought that was a good thing. Please enlighten me with your opinion. Thanks.]

[Demogorgon]

^^^ So what's your position on the Dalai Lama's political views? :confused:

[Anyway, when I was much younger with less clarity, I read about this, just like Einstein's support for socialism. I thought that was a good thing. Please enlighten me with your opinion. Thanks.]

I don't have any particular position on the Dalai Lama's political views. They are probably shit, but he's not terribly relevant, is he?

I am just mocking the knee jerk reactions some people make to things without thinking them through.

If you want a more specific answer the Dalai Lama is not going to herald in any socialist revolution, or achieve diddly squit for that matter. But making silly comments about him on a western message board that don't stand up to factual scrutiny and being overly quick to defend China isn't terribly revolutionary either.

[RedStarOverChina]

Bullcrap.

Ok...i didn't know you were all so hostile about this

Well if it's true what you were saying, then why did he say that in the first place?
He first said that shortly after the Nixon visit to China, when the US promised to cut off funding to the Dalai Regime in India.

Clearly he was looking for a new boss to finance him and his theocracy, with the Soviet Union in mind.

Of course, the USSR wasn't paying attention and the US soon continued to finance him.

[Wanted Man]

Who cares about the man's individual views? They are of no consequence to anything. It doesn't make the "Free Tibet" campaign any better. Demogorgon, nobody wants to "defend China", but I certainly do think that the liberal Free Tibet bullshit should be refuted mercilessly. For starters:

Friendly Feudalism - The Tibet Myth (http://michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html)

[Demogorgon]

Who cares about the man's individual views? They are of no consequence to anything. It doesn't make the "Free Tibet" campaign any better. Demogorgon, nobody wants to "defend China", but I certainly do think that the liberal Free Tibet bullshit should be refuted mercilessly. For starters:

Friendly Feudalism - The Tibet Myth (http://michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html)You could say the same thing about liberals wanting to end the occupation of Iraq, pointing out what ruled in Iraq before was not very nice.

I am sorry, but this is a bit of a cop out

[Die Neue Zeit]

I don't have any particular position on the Dalai Lama's political views. They are probably shit, but he's not terribly relevant, is he?

I am just mocking the knee jerk reactions some people make to things without thinking them through.

If you want a more specific answer the Dalai Lama is not going to herald in any socialist revolution, or achieve diddly squit for that matter. But making silly comments about him on a western message board that don't stand up to factual scrutiny and being overly quick to defend China isn't terribly revolutionary either.

Fair enough. He left behind the feudalist crap when he was child, if I'm not mistaken. If so, he shouldn't be held responsible for my "Catherine the Great" accusation. :(

[Dyslexia! Well I Never!]

I would hasten to point out the Buddhism is in fact a philosophy rather than a religion in that requires no active worship but simply advocates adherence to a particular ethical system. It has a mystical aspect of bullshit supernaturality certainly but upon considering the superstitious folklore surrounding Siddhartha Gotama the man from which it supposedly came and the mindset of those he would have taught it to that can be understood.

[Prairie Fire]

I would hasten to point out the Buddhism is in fact a philosophy rather than a religion in that requires no active worship but simply advocates adherence to a particular ethical system.

Not Tibetan Buddhism; For a "philosophy", they certainly had temples, monks, rituals, relgious laws and persecution of other faiths. That is certainly very "philisophical." :rolleyes:

It was a religion; if anyone wants to debate wether or not Lamaist Buddhism is legitimate buddhism, make another thread.

[Hiero]

But Iraqi's were better under Saddam then under occupation.

The comments on the Dalai Lama were completly justified.

[Dyslexia! Well I Never!]

I would hasten to point out...It has a mystical aspect of bullshit supernaturality certainly but upon considering the superstitious folklore surrounding Siddhartha Gotama the man from which it supposedly came and the mindset of those he would have taught it to that can be understood.

I didn't say it lacked temples or laws but the first teaching of Siddhartha Gotama the Buddha was "I am not a god." As such what does one worship in a buddhist temple?

Of course in the older forms of buddhism there is the heavy baggage of Hinduism both by cultural osmosis and that Gotama himself would have expressed his thoughts in a way that is influenced by Hinduism, much as I myself would express things in a way coloured by the Christian society I grew up in.

[Janus]

To garner more support, and thusly, more money.
:blink: Yes, because Marxists are well known for having a lot of support and money.


I would hasten to point out the Buddhism is in fact a philosophy rather than a religion in that requires no active worship but simply advocates adherence to a particular ethical system.
In the West maybe but in Asia, it is very much an institutionalized religion.


He left behind the feudalist crap when he was child, if I'm not mistaken
I wouldn't call a 15 year old a child but I think it is clear that the problem is not with the Dalai Lama himself but the feudal system through which he and the lamas gained and perpetuated their power.

BTW: This subject was discussed not too long ago in the History forum:http://www.revleft.com/vb/dalai-lama-claims-t50097/index.html

[RedStarOverChina]

Dalai still runs Dharamsala exactly like a medieval theocracy, which is financed by "elms" from faithfuls and of course, the CIA.

there's no reason to expect that he has "changed"...Especially if you've been listen carefully to what he says.

[EwokUtopia]

Yes Tibet was feudalist. But do you think that Feudalism can be solved by Communism? Feudal states are incapable of acheiving communist society. Capitalism is a necessary phase of human development because it ends feudalism. Only when you have at least acheived capitalism can you approach Socialism, and finally stateless Communism. You cant just leap-frog over all these stages. At best you could arrange a democratic tribal system (anarcho-primitivism), but that is innefficient, non-industrial, and unable to survive long in the 21st century.

We have seen the horrible failures of semi-feudal regions attempting a Marxist revolution. Feudalism is not a political stance, it is merely a phase in human economic development. Opposing it is like getting politically active against the Bronze Age. Only Industrial Development can cure it, and only when it has been cured can capitalism be cured.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Shouldn't that be "half-baked"...?

[Lenin II]

The Dalai Lama is about as Marxist as Margret Thatcher. He is a pro-imperialist, religious reactionary asshole.

For him to even THINK about claiming to make up one millimeter of the left makes my blood boil. How can a Marxist be religious? And what the hell is "half Marxist" anyway?

He's just trying to appeal to pseudo-Marxist liberal crazies with their chauvenist 'Free Tibet!" stickers.

I would go further than jazzrat. Half Buddhist, 100% full of shit.

[Orange Juche]

Buddhism on the other hand is a religion based on faith

No it isn't.

[shorelinetrance]

No, the Dalai Lama doesn't support Marxist economics.

If he did, he would first criticise the system he left in Tibet, before he even thinks about criticising the Soviet Union. The Dalai Lamas were the head of the an oppressive religious/feudalist system in Tibet. For the current Dalai Lama to even think of becoming even half a Marxist, he would have to cease being the current Dalai Lama.

beat me too it.

[Dystisis]

Dalai Lama: half Buddhist and half full of shit.
Jazzratt: An ignorant prick.

See? Anyone can spout out shit if they feel like it. Explaining one's opinion takes effort, which granted seems above the common internet douchebag.

What the guy said about the Soviet Union is true. He even made it a point that Marxism is viable, and that Soviet was based on authoritarianism.

To answer the question, that the Dalai Lama brings it up - and holds these views - is entirely constructive and progressive.

[luxemburg89]

No, the Dalai Lama doesn't support Marxist economics.

If he did, he would first criticise the system he left in Tibet, before he even thinks about criticising the Soviet Union. The Dalai Lamas were the head of the an oppressive religious/feudalist system in Tibet. For the current Dalai Lama to even think of becoming even half a Marxist, he would have to cease being the current Dalai Lama.

So the majority of people on this site are not Marxists? It's just everyone has criticised China and the Soviet Union at times. I am a strong critic of both - China, in particular, I think is as damaging to Marxism as fascist and Nazi ideologies that seek to destroy it; perhaps even more so. I mean the people of the world look at the monstrosity that is 'Communist' China and think 'that totalitarianism is what communism advocates? - I cannot support that'. I mean China imposed itself on Tibet - 'communism' is imposed on the people. How is that right?? As in Eastern Europe the USSR interfered and imposed 'communism' on the people, communism should come from the people not a party - Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary etc should have, and evidence suggests they would have, come to Socialism their own way. The same with Tibet. And the communism that would appear from the people in these countries would be the communism we dream of - where people have liberty, where liberty is more than an empty promise made by those who keep it from everyone else. I hope China falls and this government is destroyed as I believe the break-up of the USSR is a good thing. It allows us to start again, on a clean slate and attempt to bring about Socialism in its true form - that is from the masses not from power-hungry beaurocrats.

And no, I don't like the Dalai Lama - I think he is an idiot, a deluded fool and, as with all religious leaders, an indoctrinating wanker.

[Bud Struggle]

So the majority of people on this site are not Marxists? It's just everyone has criticised China and the Soviet Union at times. I am a strong critic of both - China, in particular, I think is as damaging to Marxism as fascist and Nazi ideologies that seek to destroy it; perhaps even more so. I mean the people of the world look at the monstrosity that is 'Communist' China and think 'that totalitarianism is what communism advocates? - I cannot support that'. I mean China imposed itself on Tibet - 'communism' is imposed on the people. How is that right?? As in Eastern Europe the USSR interfered and imposed 'communism' on the people, communism should come from the people not a party - Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary etc should have, and evidence suggests they would have, come to Socialism their own way. The same with Tibet. And the communism that would appear from the people in these countries would be the communism we dream of - where people have liberty, where liberty is more than an empty promise made by those who keep it from everyone else. I hope China falls and this government is destroyed as I believe the break-up of the USSR is a good thing. It allows us to start again, on a clean slate and attempt to bring about Socialism in its true form - that is from the masses not from power-hungry beaurocrats.


A good critique. For the most part where Communists loose people is in trying to justify totalitarian regimes that have "Communist" somewhere in their names, but in truth have no real relationship to anything slightly akin to what Marx intended.

It's REALLY important to separate the political leanings of a country from their economics. It's a rather sad fact that Communism has been saddled with a long line of rather unsavory leaders. I for one don't quite understand why--but they're there.

Best to admit to past mistakes and look ahead.

[TheLuddite]

I would contend that Buddhism and Marxism are mutually exclusive.

[Orange Juche]

Half Buddhist, Half Marxist, 100% LOLZ