Monarchy vs Democracy

Anything goes (almost).

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Nikolay » Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:54 am

Konchog1 wrote:Russian history is certainly some of the more interesting of national histories. All the leaders are amazingly charismatic or otherwise notable, from St. Olga to Putin.

It's a kind of history which is good to observe from a considerable distance :smile:
Nikolay
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 2:11 pm

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Sherab Dorje » Wed Apr 24, 2013 8:06 am

Konchog1 wrote:Democracies are peaceful are they?

straw men.jpg
straw men.jpg (6.29 KiB) Viewed 624 times
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9514
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Zhen Li » Sat May 04, 2013 3:07 pm

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote:
PadmaVonSamba wrote:Under a monarchy, your opinion on this topic doesn't count.


Under a Dharma king or queen, my opinion on this topic is not necessary.


Your opinion on this topic is not necessary anyway,
but at least in a democracy
your opinion matters.
.
.
.

Talking about strawmen, the whole notion of the Cakravartin is lost at this point due to their construction. If you think the issue is their lack, or that there are better ideologies which your brain can cook up and which can better affect subversion to that which we are averse to, then I believe the whole point of the Cakravartin has been lost. If you truly understand what it means, you will not be worrying about their lack.
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby kirtu » Sat May 04, 2013 3:19 pm

Karma Dorje wrote: I am much more comfortable with educated people,


George Bush and others had a fine education. However most politicans are not educated even with the diploma nor do many have integrity.

or in this case realized people, deciding for the community who best exemplifies the lineage.


And you have a Dharma Monarch that you can point to, do you?

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4421
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby kirtu » Sat May 04, 2013 3:22 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:And I am sure that the Irish would prefer not to have a (violently) imposed foreign monarchy.


That's unfair - Cromwell was quite a while ago .... what in the world have the British done since?

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4421
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby PadmaVonSamba » Sat May 04, 2013 7:07 pm

GREAT NEWS!!!

As of today, anybody who wants a monarchy is in luck. I am available to fill the position of Supreme Monarch. That's right, if you want a king, then here I am. To activate this offer immediately, all you have to do is to believe that I am your king. That's all there is to it! And, for a limited time only, during this introductory period, no taxes will be collected although gifts of tribute symbolizing recognition and/or servitude will be accepted. To become a subject of this realm, simply reply with a statement proclaiming my glory. Remember, all replies must begin with, "Your Royal Highness..." or they will be rejected. Ten lucky applicants will be appointed to the nobility. Thank you, thank you all. You are loyal and true, and as your new king I shall do everything in my power to rule over you fairly or unfairly, at my discretion.

Refreshments will now be served in the dungeon.
.
.
.
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Konchog1 » Sun May 05, 2013 3:55 am

Your Royal Highness and the various Lords and Ladies of the court,

Actually Polybius cites this method as one of several possible ways a monarchy starts. The other way is an informal election.

The safeguard with the first method is that if the new king is incompetent or unpopular, he's already taught the way to overthrow him.
Equanimity is the ground. Love is the moisture. Compassion is the seed. Bodhicitta is the result.

-Paraphrase of Khensur Rinpoche Lobsang Tsephel citing the Guhyasamaja Tantra

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.
Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.
Through the qualities of meditating in that way,
Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

-Ra Lotsawa, All-pervading Melodious Drumbeats
User avatar
Konchog1
 
Posts: 1318
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:30 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sun May 05, 2013 5:01 pm

kirtu wrote:That's unfair - Cromwell was quite a while ago .... what in the world have the British done since?
What are you talking about Kirt? Has the whole "Northern Ireland" deal just completely bypassed your reality? :shrug:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9514
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Zhen Li » Mon May 06, 2013 7:15 am

What are you talking about Kirt? Has the whole "Northern Ireland" deal just completely bypassed your reality?

Isn't this awfully simplistic thinking? There are thousands of people in every region who both support and oppose whatever government is in place, and Northern Ireland is an exceptionally good example of this. The only truth for all governments, villages, towns, cities, countries and empires is that they are marked by the three characteristics: impermanence, suffering, and not-self.

What really is the Buddhist position here? To support a system of government? To oppose it? Both? Neither? Or perhaps, the question simply does not apply.
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby treehuggingoctopus » Mon May 06, 2013 8:54 am

kirtu wrote:That's unfair - Cromwell was quite a while ago .... what in the world have the British done since?


Well, you could ask Kenyans, for one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... atrocities

(You meant 'what in the world have the British done to the Irish since', didn't you?)
. . . there they saw a rock! But it wasn't a rock . . .
User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: Mudhole? Slimy? My home, this is.

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Zhen Li » Mon May 06, 2013 8:43 pm

What is the use of pointing so many fingers?

Haven't you lived an uncountable number of lives prior to this one? Haven't you therefore likely engaged in the same kinds of war crimes countless times?

And aren't all those who engage in such crimes also our mothers in past lives?

Crime occurs constantly, and will never stop until all beings are liberated - it's just the nature of Samsara. Thus, being concerned with such matters leads only to discord and cannot be resolved, it is not right speech.
Whereas some ascetics and Brahmins remain addicted to such unedifying conversation* as about kings, robbers, ministers, armies, dangers, wars, food, drink, clothes, beds, garlands, perfumes, relatives, carriages, villages, towns and cities, countries, women, heroes, street- and well- gossip, talk of the departed, desultory chat, speculations about land and sea, talk about being and non-being, the ascetic Gotama refrains from such conversation.
DN i.7-8
*Tiracchana-katha: lit. 'animal-talk'. As animals walk parallel to the earth, so this kind of talk does not lead upward.
Translation by Walshe
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Namgyal » Tue May 14, 2013 1:33 pm

'Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.' (Edward Abbey)

'To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.'
(Pierre-Joseph Proudhon)

'The first man who, having fenced off a plot of land, thought of saying, ‘This is mine’ and found people simple enough to believe him was the real founder of civil society. How many crimes, wars, murders, how many miseries and horrors might the human race had been spared by the one who, upon pulling up the stakes or filling in the ditch, had shouted to his fellow men: ‘Beware of listening to this impostor; you are lost if you forget the fruits of the earth belong to all and that the earth belongs to no one.'' (Rousseau)
Namgyal
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 12:13 pm

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Simon E. » Tue May 14, 2013 2:07 pm

Meanwhile back in the real, non platonic, non idealistic world....
Simon E.
 
Posts: 2543
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Sherab Dorje » Wed May 15, 2013 1:12 pm

Off topic posts removed.

Please leave aside the personal remarks and keep the thread on topic.

Thank you.
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9514
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Sherab Dorje » Wed May 15, 2013 1:21 pm

Ben Yuan wrote:
What are you talking about Kirt? Has the whole "Northern Ireland" deal just completely bypassed your reality?

Isn't this awfully simplistic thinking? There are thousands of people in every region who both support and oppose whatever government is in place, and Northern Ireland is an exceptionally good example of this. The only truth for all governments, villages, towns, cities, countries and empires is that they are marked by the three characteristics: impermanence, suffering, and not-self.

What really is the Buddhist position here? To support a system of government? To oppose it? Both? Neither? Or perhaps, the question simply does not apply.
Simplisitc or simple? Kirt commented regarding Cromwell and I brought him up to date.

What would be the Buddhist position on violently imposed monarchies? I guess that depends on which Buddhist you ask. This Buddhist (me) says that violent imposed political rule is a no-no. I can find relevant quotes to back my position. Another will say... ad nauseum.

While it is true that samsara cannot be perfect, it is also true that (albeit temporarily) it can be (politically/socially/economically) organised a hell of a lot better than what it is right now. Now, all I have to do is to convince those that greedily cling to wealth and power to share some of it (not all) with those (the overwhelming, absolute, majority of people in the world) that do not.

Now what does Buddhism have to say about clinging and attachment to impermanent phenomena?
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9514
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby oushi » Wed May 15, 2013 1:49 pm

Maybe, when people face the end of civilization, they will finally invent a good solution. Sadly, it will probably be to late. Humans are really miserable, as social species.
Say what you think about me here.
User avatar
oushi
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:18 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Zhen Li » Sat May 25, 2013 10:22 am

gregkavarnos wrote:Simplisitc or simple? Kirt commented regarding Cromwell and I brought him up to date.

[1.] What would be the Buddhist position on violently imposed monarchies? I guess that depends on which Buddhist you ask. This Buddhist (me) says that violent imposed political rule is a no-no. I can find relevant quotes to back my position. Another will say... ad nauseum.

[2.] While it is true that samsara cannot be perfect, it is also true that (albeit temporarily) it can be (politically/socially/economically) organised a hell of a lot better than what it is right now. Now, all I have to do is to convince those that greedily cling to wealth and power to share some of it (not all) with those (the overwhelming, absolute, majority of people in the world) that do not.

Now what does Buddhism have to say about clinging and attachment to impermanent phenomena?

1. The Buddha taught individuals how to obtain happiness in this life, the next life, and how to obtain cessation. In the present moment, individuals are instructed to act with wholesome intention. Obviously this means unwholesome actions in the present are not conducive to a good destination, but I think that treating "states" as actual objects, rather than ideas, and not focusing on the individuals who make decisions and how they can act wholesomely or unwholesomely is somewhat unskillful. But the question of historical unwholesome actions thereof seems irrelevant to me in assessing how one can choose to act in the present (so long as the action is not still taking place). This approach seems to make sense to me, but I would be interested to hear how you would approach it differently.

2.A lot of people have stuff and we don't understand why. A lot of people do not and we don't understand why. We cannot comprehend fully the law of karma and can control human lives such that people get just what they deserve - this occurs by itself. We can encourage people to give, and that is the Buddhist approach, but to actively reorganise the world would be offensive to the security of property and order of society. Moreover, it would deprive those who are wealthy of that opportunity to generate good karma. As far as I can discern, when the Buddha instructs kings to provide wealth and jobs such that people are no longer poor, he is talking about the wealth of those kings, not the wealth which a modern government takes forcefully and redistributes. As for clinging to wealth, this seems like a bit of a mischaracterisation of how the wealthy are more likely to run their financial affairs. Certainly being stingy is bad for the poor and doesn't keep capital flowing in the market, but it also has automatic bad practical karmic repercussions for the wealthy owner of the capital, since it isn't growing if they're just "clinging" to it as you say, but rather would naturally diminish. "Further, householder, with the wealth thus gained the noble disciple makes provisions against the losses that might arise on account of fire and floods, kings and bandits and unloved heirs; he makes himself secure against them. This is the second case of wealth gone to good use." (AN 4:61; II 65-68) I am interested in what quotes you have which would give such wealth to kings, and proclaim it to be good use for kings to distribute it rather than the laws of nature, economics and karma (all causes and conditions and naturally non-forceful).
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat May 25, 2013 12:21 pm

Ben Yuan wrote:1. The Buddha taught individuals how to obtain happiness in this life, the next life, and how to obtain cessation. In the present moment, individuals are instructed to act with wholesome intention. Obviously this means unwholesome actions in the present are not conducive to a good destination, but I think that treating "states" as actual objects, rather than ideas, and not focusing on the individuals who make decisions and how they can act wholesomely or unwholesomely is somewhat unskillful. But the question of historical unwholesome actions thereof seems irrelevant to me in assessing how one can choose to act in the present (so long as the action is not still taking place). This approach seems to make sense to me, but I would be interested to hear how you would approach it differently.
I have no ides how this relates to what I said.
2.A lot of people have stuff and we don't understand why. A lot of people do not and we don't understand why. We cannot comprehend fully the law of karma and can control human lives such that people get just what they deserve - this occurs by itself. We can encourage people to give, and that is the Buddhist approach, but to actively reorganise the world would be offensive to the security of property and order of society. Moreover, it would deprive those who are wealthy of that opportunity to generate good karma. As far as I can discern, when the Buddha instructs kings to provide wealth and jobs such that people are no longer poor, he is talking about the wealth of those kings, not the wealth which a modern government takes forcefully and redistributes. As for clinging to wealth, this seems like a bit of a mischaracterisation of how the wealthy are more likely to run their financial affairs. Certainly being stingy is bad for the poor and doesn't keep capital flowing in the market, but it also has automatic bad practical karmic repercussions for the wealthy owner of the capital, since it isn't growing if they're just "clinging" to it as you say, but rather would naturally diminish. "Further, householder, with the wealth thus gained the noble disciple makes provisions against the losses that might arise on account of fire and floods, kings and bandits and unloved heirs; he makes himself secure against them. This is the second case of wealth gone to good use." (AN 4:61; II 65-68) I am interested in what quotes you have which would give such wealth to kings, and proclaim it to be good use for kings to distribute it rather than the laws of nature, economics and karma (all causes and conditions and naturally non-forceful).
:rolling: A "Buddhist" excuse for not redistributing wealth. Basically a "Buddhist" excuse for people to act based on greed, avarice, and desire. Actually sounds more like a Brahmanic account, like the excuses used to justify the existence of the caste system.
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9514
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Nilasarasvati » Sat May 25, 2013 3:41 pm

Whoah.
Last edited by Nilasarasvati on Sat May 25, 2013 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Nilasarasvati
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 3:08 am
Location: Trāyastriṃśa. Just kidding. What a cool sanksrit word, huh?

Re: Monarchy vs Democracy

Postby Nilasarasvati » Sat May 25, 2013 3:52 pm

Nilasarasvati wrote:I am stunned by so much of this thread; I would have thought it was totally impossible for a Buddhist (who knows a little history) to believe monarchies and feudal systems of governance could be anything but patriarchal warlordism birthed, maintained, and characterized by violence, oppression, and ethnic genocide. Always. Every time. Every example in history. You can tout your "great man" theories and talk about "enlightened" rulers...but I'm just baffled. Are we in the Victorian era?

Most appalling is the ignorance that systems aren't totally characterized by genocide. By Racism with a capital R.

As people who categorically believe that human potential is limited only to omniscience and perfection, why would you settle for anything less than a perfect form of governance?

Which cannot possibly be representative democracy, either; its a hellhole of corruption, violence and mass exploitation.

In my arrogant opinion, that perfect form of governance isn't that hard to Imagine.
"It's easy if you try."
(It is ironically really Daoist. )
Read Ursula K. LeGuin for details.
User avatar
Nilasarasvati
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 3:08 am
Location: Trāyastriṃśa. Just kidding. What a cool sanksrit word, huh?

PreviousNext

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nickfull and 26 guests

>