Buddhism isn't "left wing liberal"

NOTaGangsta

Buddhism isn't "left wing liberal". What do everyone think?

Jeffrey

correct

vinlyn

I don't see Buddhism as "left wing liberal" or "right wing conservative".

Jeffrey

agree, buddha taught the dharma for all people

zlzl

Most Buddhisms don't touch politics at all.

caz

Buddhism isnt political, Politics is Samsaric and Buddhism is the path of renunciation.

betaboy

Buddhism encourages compassion, nonviolence, love, equality, justice - none of which I find compatible with right-wing politics.

Jeffrey

but buddhism isn't the compassion police which thinks you can put a bumper sticker on your car that says 'compassion vote blah blah 2012' and make much difference.

zenff

If Buddhism were "left wing liberal" I would be proud of being a Buddhist

Malachy12

Lol, this reminds me of a conversation I had with my uncles over vacation. They were watching the news everyday and made a comment about how polarized the country has become. I was like really? Is it really polarized or is the media just trying to convince us that everything has become either liberal or conservative? When we really started to discuss it, we realized that almost everyone in that house (9 people) actually considered themselves moderate. Two gay uncles from SanFransisco, an 80 year old Korean war vet, his homemaker wife, Lezzy buddhist me and my gf, her two sisters from a small town and a sister's bf... we're all moderate in our beliefs. I'm betting that most of the country, buddhists included are also moderate. I guess moderates are just not as vocal as the other two extremes.

NOTaGangsta

agree, buddha taught the dharma for all people

Indeed! He taught the method of "big compassion".

Infact, the whole aspects of family values, social responsibility, wisdom and tolerance before "heading down the street to protest" are taught, which are alot closer to the "right wing" crowd.

"Left wing liberals" ends being attached to self-indulging in their desires of "anything goes".

We all know how nasty and hateful the right wing crowd can get. But it's very self-denial when we are blind to the left's negative practices.

vinlyn

agree, buddha taught the dharma for all people

Indeed! He taught the method of "big compassion".

Infact, the whole aspects of family values, social responsibility, wisdom and tolerance before "heading down the street to protest" are taught, which are alot closer to the "right wing" crowd.

"Left wing liberals" ends being attached to self-indulging in their desires of "anything goes".

We all know how nasty and hateful the right wing crowd can get. But it's very self-denial when we are blind to the left's negative practices.

After 33 years of teaching and school administrating, I've known thousands of families. Family values are equally found on both the right and left.

StaticToybox

I find that when politicians speak of "family values" ultimately what they mean is they're anti-abortion and anti-gay rights.

NOTaGangsta

I find that when politicians speak of "family values" ultimately what they mean is they're anti-abortion and anti-gay rights.

Why is anti-abortion wrong?

Of course the vocal Christian and conservative groups create a bad name for themselves by attacking the opposition with hate and accusaing of "murder". But Buddhism is also against abortion, considering the popularity of abortion arises out the assumption humans and animals are just biological entities living in a nihilist reality where there is no rebirth, karma or consequence.

Actually, why is family value wrong? stable society are created by family values and respect for eldars and authority.

Buddhism talks about people having "upside down dream like thinking", it's a very accurate description.

vinlyn

...
Why is anti-abortion wrong?

...
Actually, why is family value wrong? stable society are created by family values and respect for eldars and authority.

...

Having an anti-abortion view is not wrong in my view. I personally feel abortion is generally undesirable. However, that my personal moral viewpoint. What is wrong would be me trying to FORCE my moral viewpoint on everyone else through politics.

Family values aren't wrong. But, it's assuming that those not like you don't have family values that is wrong. You're Black. There are a number of Americans who believe Blacks (for example) have inappropriate family values. Wrong.

Yishai

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

NOTaGangsta

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

You don't practice the middle way or buddhism.

vinlyn

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

You don't practice the middle way or buddhism.

I would suggest that it's not right speech to be so judgmental of others Buddhist practices.

aura

Buddhism is about realizing that a bird needs both wings to fly, that life is circular (go far enough west and you end up east), that rulers are reborn slaves and slaves reborn rulers until such time that both learn mutuality, and that labeling individuals serves the purpose of strengthening division, separation, duality, and dysfunction in a world in which "divide and conquer" is the oldest game on earth.

In short, Buddhism is about truth...
while politics is about advertising.

federica

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

You don't practice the middle way or buddhism.

You don't have the right to tell anyone what they practice or not.
Very Right-Wing.....

Daozen

Generally I would agree that the left-wing of politics is defined by more compassion towards the needy in society and hence is in a sense more naturally aligned with the buddhist perspective on life. For example, the left supports social welfare programs, whereas the right is more likely to favour an every man for themselves free market approach.

@aura
The best ads use a truth about a product to skillfully promote it. So truth and advertising can co-exist. Not always, but they can.

federica

It's called 'gilding the lily'....
Buy this and you will be slimmer, more beautiful, younger-looking, more attractive (to men/women) and faster on the road. You will smell nicer, have better clothes, and never suffer from heartburn, constipation, back-ache or bad breath ever again.

Claims which can all be substantiated, but which now have caveats ('always read the label', 'can help only as part of a calorie-controlled diet' 'lashes artificially enhanced', '74% of 115 participants agree', 'with hair extensions', 'extras not fitted as standard'....All 'truths' but on your screen for a fraction of a second.)

Yishai

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

You don't practice the middle way or buddhism.

Care to explain?

GuyC

Regarding gay rights and "conservative Christians", I thought this was quite amusing:

Vincenzi

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

I have similar conclusions, but will prefer a minarchy (since an anarchy is not yet viable).

Mountains

Buddhism isn't "left wing liberal". What do everyone think?

Nope, I agree with you. Buddhism isn't political in and of itself. However, Buddhism teaches lovingkindess, compassion, and empathy for all beings. That, per se, is more a characteristic of the political left (at least in America) than of the political right. Otherwise how to explain the platforms of the principle parties (in America)? Left: in favor of a social safety net. In favor of (in some fashion) universal access to health care. In favor of social and human rights. In favor of environmental causes. Right: vehemently against anything that remotely smacks of a social safety net. Vehemently against anything that smacks of making sure even the poor and dispossessed have universal access to even the most rudimentary health care. Vehemently against anything that is pro-environment that might in any way potentially cut into the almighty profits of big corporations.

See where this goes??

zombiegirl

Regarding gay rights and "conservative Christians", I thought this was quite amusing:

hilarious! now how come i never thought of doing something like that? oddly enough, i didn't see any protesters at pride this year though. i probably just missed them, otherwise this would make it the first year they were absent. my city moved pride from the suburbs to downtown and apparently, protesters couldn't be bothered to make it to downtown detroit.

StaticToybox

I find that when politicians speak of "family values" ultimately what they mean is they're anti-abortion and anti-gay rights.

Why is anti-abortion wrong?

Of course the vocal Christian and conservative groups create a bad name for themselves by attacking the opposition with hate and accusaing of "murder". But Buddhism is also against abortion, considering the popularity of abortion arises out the assumption humans and animals are just biological entities living in a nihilist reality where there is no rebirth, karma or consequence.

Actually, why is family value wrong? stable society are created by family values and respect for eldars and authority.

Buddhism talks about people having "upside down dream like thinking", it's a very accurate description.

There's is nothing wrong with having anti-abortion views. Your morals are your morals. What is wrong is when you seek to force your morals upon others.

Actually show me where Buddhism says anything about abortion.

Where did I ever say that family values was wrong? You seem to be making an awful lot of assumptions. You can have your family values if that's what floats your boat. However, something you need to be aware of: these politicians who talk about "family values" never practice such values themselves.

So, views you don't agree with = "upside-down thinking"?

Buddhism is the middle way, even in politics. It isn't conservative or liberal.

Personally, I prefer the libertarian way myself. I think the government needs to be as little involved as possible. People can take care of themselves. The government should only be there to step in and regulate when things get out of hand.

Also, when do we define the beginning of life? Why? These are important things to define before we even approach abortion.

You don't practice the middle way or buddhism.

You should probably work on understanding Right Speech.

Yishai

I'm actually thinking that Buddhism is Left/Liberal. Let us define compassion in this instance as making someone's life better or easier (more livable), which is a compassionate act. Buddhism says to have compassion for all others. Liberals extend that compassion to all of society through lower taxes, universal health care, and social freedoms. Conservatives reserve that 'compassion' for the upper class and even the upper-middle class through tax cuts to the rich, deregulation of business, and all the other ways they move money between the wealthy.

I don't really see anything wrong with left politics other than it requires a lot of money which the US doesn't have right now. I'd prefer to have a fiscally-conservative democrat over anything else.

NOTaGangsta

When the forum simply becomes a spa pool for people to self-congradulate eachother on their already pre-existing set views. No one will grow, instead arrogance and anger grows over judging pre-existing prejudice.

It's like a frog that gets slowly boiled to death in a tub of slowly warming views of self-indulgence.

Everyone including myself are UNGRATEFUL and IGNORANT to the democracy and freedom we already have. Instead of wishing to improve ourselves, so we can do greater things to help others. We instead waste our lives to chanllenge others to make ourselves feel better and worst of all, to cover up our faults by attacking "enemies".

Even John Lennon grew up.

GuyC

Hi Not A Gangsta,

When the forum simply becomes a spa pool for people to self-congradulate eachother on their already pre-existing set views. No one will grow, instead arrogance and anger grows over judging pre-existing prejudice.

It's like a frog that gets slowly boiled to death in a tub of slowly warming views of self-indulgence.

Everyone including myself are UNGRATEFUL and IGNORANT to the democracy and freedom we already have. Instead of wishing to improve ourselves, so we can do greater things to help others. We instead waste our lives to chanllenge others to make ourselves feel better and worst of all, to cover up our faults by attacking "enemies".

Even John Lennon grew up.

Sometimes we find pieces of the truth and think its the whole truth - this is often where we get stuck. The way to overcome this obstacle is to just hold that piece of a truth for a little while, see it for what it is, then put it down and keep looking for the bigger picture.

Metta,

Guy

NOTaGangsta

I totally agree with your comment!

Dandelion

On the face of it, I think left wing politics seems oh so lovely. But then, in reality it just feels akin to giving a child all the sweeties the child screams to have. I live in the U.K. Here, it seems cyclical. Labour throw money around, the country gets in debt, then the big bad conservatives come along and attempt to straighten out the books, but people do seem to suffer in the meantime. As far as i'm aware, (please someone correct me if I am mistaken) there are no influential people in politics in the U.K right now that are Buddhists, and that is quite interesting, in my opinion....... maybe politics and buddhism are a bit like oil and water, at least in terms of being a politician, not necessarily in terms of having political views. The problem with politics I should think from a Buddhist perspective is the amount of 'judgement' involved, and the need to take into consideration so many other people's views, needs. After all, aren't we all INDIVIDUALLY responsible for our own lives?
On a personal note, I find politics interesting, but in the same way I find people interesting. For me, a person's political views are information for me, about the individuals personal value systems, and information about their own requirements as human beings. I don't understand people's intolerances to other people's belief systems, be they political beliefs, or otherwise. After all, it is directly related to the individuals Karma, so what is there to get so het up about?

vinlyn

I think the lack of Buddhist politicians in the U.S. and England has nothing to do with Buddhism, but everything to do with numbers. After all, in Buddhist countries (such as Thailand), there's still politics and politicians. And by the way, there's nothing dirtier than politics in Buddhist countries such as Thailand, Cambodia, and Burma.

Dandelion

I think the lack of Buddhist politicians in the U.S. and England has nothing to do with Buddhism, but everything to do with numbers. After all, in Buddhist countries (such as Thailand), there's still politics and politicians. And by the way, there's nothing dirtier than politics in Buddhist countries such as Thailand, Cambodia, and Burma.

Yes, that is a good point, I hadn't looked at it from that perspective.

caz

Note: The petty theives they put in jail but the biggest ones they put in parlimen.
Maybe theres a lack of buddhists because they are unwilling to violate their precepts?

AMH

Okay i admit to skimming part of this. I started off more liberal sided for sure, and part of my buddhist path of compassion is to practice compassion for the 'other' from the place where I started. So that means I can appreciate (okay not every time) a more conservative viewpoint. In fact because I have worked more towards the middle I actually have my boyfriend. He would call himself conservative and I would consider myself liberal and we are often actually in agreement. I think so much of the differences are hyped up by the media. Most people I talk to about the abortion issue regardless of how they vote seem to agree with government staying out of early decisions in pregnancy, but also having a time limit of when a mother has that choice. Not that anyone is really feeling great about abortion just siding more on trusting the mother or the government.

In any case, I just find that both sides are inconsistent at some point. Conservatives want less government involvement until you deal with same sex marriage or abortion, liberals want lots of societal support but struggle with that line of compassion and then idiot compassion. It isn't that simple huh

vinlyn

AHeerdt, you second paragraph is American politics in a nutshell!

Mountains

Not sure I understand what that second paragraph means. "Idiot compassion"?? Is there a limit to how much compassion we should have? Should we not have compassion for idiots? That would certainly leave out a major portion of the population of America.

Barra

I came across the term "idiot compassion" for the first time on this site a few days ago. It was in connection with someone who wanted to show compassion for a loved one, but went too far when he started joining her in practicing some of her delusions. There needs to be a middle way in compassion, as well.

GuyC

Hi Mountain,

"Idiot compassion" can be explained using this simile:

If someone is stuck in a deep pit and you find them and think "oh, poor person, stuck down there, I better jump in and try to help get them out!" - Now two people are stuck - that is "idiot compassion".

In this simile, when we take the suffering of another person and make it our own, this helps no one. Empathy is an important ingredient of "real compassion", but pity and attachment are ingredients of "idiot compassion".

Instead, if you see that person stuck down that pit and you have some rope, then you can use that rope to pull them out. If you don't have some rope, then you can go looking for some (or some other equally useful object) - that is real compassion.

Bringing yourself down to the suffering person's level and making yourself sad is idiot compassion. Instead, we should raise them up to our level, if we can.

But, sometimes you throw down that rope and the person doesn't want it. If you stand at the edge of the pit day and night trying to convince them that climbing the rope is their way out, yet, they continue to refuse your help and you continue wasting your energy on this person - despite them not wanting to escape the pit - that is "idiot compassion".

What this simile means is that we should try to help people if two factors are met:

1) We are capable and have the necessary resources for helping that person. Sometimes we have to admit that we simply are either incapable or unequipped to help a person with a particular problem. In such a case we should save our energy. But, this does not mean that we cannot use our compassion to let someone else we may know who may be better equipped or more capable to help the person in question.

2) The person actually wants and accepts your help. If they don't want your help or if they don't believe they need your help or if they don't believe they are worthy of your help (despite your best effort to convince them otherwise) - then you can't help them.

In summary: If you can help someone, help them. If you can't, admit your limitations - maybe refer the person to someone else if they are okay with that.

Another point which I didn't mention is that sometimes our perceptions are wrong and we might think we are trying to help someone but actually they don't need our help to begin with. This another form of "idiot compassion" to be aware of.

Perhaps the most important thing to remember about compassion in regards to avoiding "idiot compassion" is that we are not Arahants, we are still subject to delusion, we still create suffering for ourselves. How can we effectively help others (to the highest degree possible) if we are still under the influence of greed, hatred and delusion.

In my opinion, the most important being to be compassionate towards is yourself. We must work primarily on ourselves. This is not to say that we should just let others suffer if we are in a position to help them, we should try to help if we can. But we must remember not to forget the being whom we have the most direct influence on - both for good or for bad - ourselves. Bearing this in mind is, I think, one of the best ways to avoid "idiot compassion".

Metta,

Guy

Jeffrey

Its also possible that they are not in a pit and you are offering un-needed help. Or that they do need help but you are offering something that is not helpful.

Finally we don't need to help someone to have compassion:

Each one of here today will at one time in our lives look upon a loved one who is in need and ask the same question: We are willing help, Lord, but what, if anything, is needed? For it is true we can seldom help those closest to us. Either we don't know what part of ourselves to give or, more often than not, the part we have to give is not wanted. And so it those we live with and should know who elude us. But we can still love them - we can love completely without complete understanding.

~ Rev Maclean in the movie a river runs through it

GuyC

Its also possible that they are not in a pit and you are offering un-needed help. Or that they do need help but you are offering something that is not helpful.

I addressed both of these possibilities in my 1000 page essay which you presumably and understandably skim-read.

:coffee:

Jeffrey

lol

vinlyn

Not sure I understand what that second paragraph means. "Idiot compassion"?? Is there a limit to how much compassion we should have? Should we not have compassion for idiots? That would certainly leave out a major portion of the population of America.

As for me, I was referring to what he said about inconsistencies in politics. As he pointed out, Republicans always preach less government involvement...unless it's related to being gay or abortion. When President Obama was in the Senate, he voted against raising the debt ceiling. There's too much game playing in American politics. The real political dogma is to disagree with the other party. Period.

GuyC

For it is true we can seldom help those closest to us. Either we don't know what part of ourselves to give or, more often than not, the part we have to give is not wanted. And so it those we live with and should know who elude us. But we can still love them - we can love completely without complete understanding.

~ Rev Maclean in the movie a river runs through it

I think the Reverend has just defined the difference between Karuna and Metta. Good job Rev!

GuyC

Hi Vinlyn,

In my opinion, the two-party system is a big joke.

There's too much game playing in American politics. The real political dogma is to disagree with the other party. Period.

Reminds me of a joke:

Q: How do you know when a politician is lying?
A: His/Her lips are moving
Q: How do you know when a politician is telling the truth?
A: He is accusing his opposition of lying

Metta,

Guy

Jeffrey

For me compassion is defined as wishing a being not come to harm. So that would be what happens in the revs quote. Metta is wishing them to be happy. Thats how I have heard the terms defined in popular buddhist books.

JRH

As far as liberal politics go it's supposed to be a hand up, not a hand out.

I fall more towards the libertarian group and being so I don't like and disagree with a lot of the things democrats and republicans do. Buddhism for me isn't about following anyone. Think for yourself.

Jeffrey

"Buddhism for me isn't about following anyone. Think for yourself."

It is about following the dharma and the teachings of buddha. Who has said to the contrary that one should not think for themselves?

JRH

So I should just accept everything verbatim and at face value.