The Dalai Lama is a revered figure who is universally admired for his lifelong, peaceful opposition to the oppression and subjugation of his country and people by the brutal socialist regime in the People's Republic of China. Ironically the political factions in the west who revere him most vocallly are supporters of socialism and authoritarianism, the two things he is most strongly opposed to.
This humble Buddhist monk, who symbolises the struggle for peace and independence, so it is strange that he is supported by the very voices who cried out for the west to invade Syria and depose the popular ruler Bashir al Assad. Now Assad is not a liberal by western standards and by no stretch of the imagination is it democratic, but Assad, a member of the minority Alawite Muslim sect has protected minorities such as Jews, Syriac Christians, Yazidi and Druze (the latter pair being ancient sects whose religious faith is Islamic, with elements of Hinduism and Zoroastrianism thrown in,) from the brutal fundamentalism of fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, the type who believe that the only thing worse than someone who is not a Muslim is someone who is the wrong kind of Muslim.
The west's liberals and progressives, all to willing to believe the anti Assad propaganda used to justify what has been called Obama's war, claim to believe in peace and harmony, but want it to be achieved on their terms. They want western style Cultural Marxism imposed in Syria as they have tried to impose it, with catastrophic consequences in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.
Syria is in fact a perfect example of who one-size-fits-all western solutions do not suit the very different collective mindset of middle eastern, African and South - East Asian communities. But back to the Dalai Lama, whose country, Tibet, is one of the strangest and most idiosyncratic in the world. Why is it that his efforts to rid Tibet of the oppressive socialism of Communist China so inspired the very people who spend their entire lives fighting against capitalism and campaigning for socialism/ communism / Marxism in the west.
His life has been devoted primarily to the struggle to win independence from China for his country, Tibet, and allow it to return to being a mysterious, spiritual community separated from the rest of the world by a cultural divide unbridgable to most western minds, and secondly to preserve Tibetan culture and identity against the efforts of the communists to swallow Tibet into the Chinese empire.
Away from his struggles for Tibetan heritage however, some think him a kind of spiritual placebo whose main purpose aside from pissing off China's communist leaders, is to offer platitudinous comments on the problems of the world.
"The Dalai Lama loves pease," a placard held by one of his western supporters at a recent event read (presuming they meany 'peace' and not the type of prrridge made from peas, don't we all, some of us would even go as far as bombing small nations to destruction in order to avert the threat of their leaders not doing what the peace loving western governments think they should.) So, peacenik, Sergeant Bilko lookalike, nationalist and all round good g..................... WHAAAAT? Nationalist?
But nationalism is evil. The EU are overturning election results in member states to stop emergent nationalist parties getting a hand on the levers of power. In the USA, Democrat extremists are still trying to get the nationalist Trump removed from power and replaced by the globalist warmonger Hillary CIniton (even though there is no way in U.S. law this could happen,) because nationalism is EVIL.
Yet I doubt that anyone has ever claimed that the world’s most famous Buddhist is a fascist, xenophobe or (that most common and inexact label of our time) “alt-right”. Perhaps it is time to rethink this assumption? For during a speech this week, the Dalai Lama said something that, if it had come from anyone else’s lips, would have had them labelled a full-on fascist. Whip up those robes, they would claim, and you will find jackboots.
Because the Dalai Lama, speaking honestly about problems caused by uncontrolled immigration in an EU member state that likes to think of itself as one of the world's most 'woke' nations, has to the surprise of most radical lefties but few people who actually know asnything about him and his life's work, has revealed himself as a nationalist.
His comments came while he was visiting Malmo, Sweden, one of the Swedish cities most badly hit by the epidemic of inter - community violence among migrant grous as the vie for control of the drugs, sex, contraband booze and illicit gambling businesses. In 2015 alone Sweeden added an extra 2 per cent to its population through migration. Over the ten year from 2008 to 2018 it is estimated that Sweden's total population increased by approximately 10% in total while the number of ethnic European Swedes actually fell. So the question of how many people Europe can absorb before it is culturally and economically disrupted and when an acceptable limit of illiterate, unskilled third world migrants might be reached is particularly relevant there.
The Dalai Lama gave his audience this humanitarian but pragmatic advice “Receive them, help them, educate them. But ultimately they should develop their own countries.” The Nobel prize-winning Buddhist leader then continued to pile on the agony for self - righteous lefties who had believed he would support all their crackpot theories about a single, global nation: “Europe belongs to the Europeans, he told them.”.
Over recent decades, proponents of that political philosophy that has been known as Cultural Marxism, The New World OrderThe Frankfurt School and Globalism have pushed an extraordinarily sociopathic and destructive plan for the future of civilised nations under a global, athroritarian, technocratic government. Emanating from university campuses outwards it has invaded the political establisment, mainstream media, the legal system, education and the arts: it proposes that wealth should be transferred from the prosperous nations to poor ones while poor people from third world societies should be transferred to wealth, developed nations.
Free movement is one of this philosophy's sacred cows; another is that the identity of a speaker or writer matters more than the content of their words, thus because minorities are oppressed, we must attach more importance to the words of a black, gay, Muslim, disabled, transgender or female person - and never mind the fact that females are not quite a minority, slightly outnumbering males in the human species, they "identify as an oppressed minority
One of the policies inflicted on EU member stated by the centralised buresaucracy of Brussels is 'open doors' immigration and in justification of this many EU leaders have made statements to the effect that Europe "belongs" to migrants
Unsurprisingly as someone who has been called a racist, xenophobe and bigot for arguing the case that while migration is both good and desireable it must be controled so that a balance is achieved, I totally agree with the Dalai Lama, though perhaps would not have spelled out the obvious solution to Sweden's social problems quite so bluntly to an audience of brainwashed Swedes. It is best that Europe does not become the home for everyone in the world who manages to arrive at the EU's borders. Societies that are fundamentally altered without the consent of their peoples will be hard-pushed to remain orderly or harmonious, which is exactly what is happening in Sweden, Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Ntherlands and Spain right now.
And it is totally unfair to the nations of the developing world the developing world that their most talented and driven people be encouraged by far - left charities funded by Marxist billonaires to come to Europe and eke out a living as office cleaners, sandwich stuffer or Uber drivers on the fringess of our legal economy.
Of course opinion polls show that most European voters agree with the Dalai Lama and this impression is backed by recent electon results in Spain, Germany, Italy and Sweden itself. Yet few people can hope to occupy the kind of platform mainstream media grant such a major figure as The Dalai Lama. So the recognition grows that what is tolerated from one mouth will not be tolerated from another. And the question of who is allowed to speak basic truths in our societies ferments away.
Over recent decades, the radical Left has pushed an extraordinarily divisive and destructive idea, from university campuses outwards: that the identity of a speaker matters more than the content of their words. That “who says a thing” matters more than “what is being said”. It is a claim which, among other things, inverts the central moral insight of Martin Luther King – that people should be judged by the content of their character, not their immutable characteristics. One wonders how long it will be before the radical left, in pursuit of their absolute power agenda, corrupt the Balai Lama's message
RELATED POSTS:
Sweden dystopian omnibusFormer Scania CEO Warns Sweden Heading For Civil War As Migrants Set Up State-Within-A-State
Immigratiuon omnibus
Left authoritarian tide
Cultural Marxism
The Davosocracy Gang Gather As Globalism Goes Into Retreat Worldwide
SWEDISH POLICE arrest, harass, intimidate Swedish professor for publicly exposing the horrific crimes of Muslim migrants
Former Scania CEO Warns Sweden Heading For Civil War As Migrants Set Up State-Within-A-State
Facebook Steps Up Censorship in Britain, Bans Populist News Site
<!-- *****************************
Today the most important thing
has become not the truth of an argument but the characteristics of the speaker. The Dalai Lama has the robe, religion, pigmentation, haircut and history to immunise himself from the worst accusations. But your average European is not so lucky. We are forced to lie, remain silent or be insulted if we wish to speak basic truths. And not just on this matter, but on any number of matters
pushed by the moral-flatulence of
the radical Left.
The consequences are all around us. Everywhere across the public and private sector, appointments based on merit are being weighed up – and increasingly losing – against appointments made on identity. Even our Government is far from immune from the temptation. After all, why was Karen Bradley appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland? This is a person so ignorant – and so confident in her ignorance – that she was happy to reveal in a recent interview that she knew nothing whatsoever about Northern Ireland before starting her present role. Was she put in her place for her great intellectual curiosity? Because the Prime Minister thought this an especially good moment to put a novice into that role? Or because as each day goes by everything becomes ever-more about the speaker not the speech?
This is why the rise of Jacob Rees-Mogg is pleasant even for those of us often in disagreement with him. In the world that the radical Left has set up, there should be no one so ignored. Not only pale and male, but rich and double-breasted. Yet he also happens to display two attributes which have been vanishing from public life of late: intelligence and courtesy.
The same far-Left who have spent recent years trying to present all non-Dalai Lamas as xenophobes are now trying to unload their whole armoury on Rees-Mogg. They seek to present his views on abortion as misogyny, his adherence to the Catholic faith as membership of an obscure, dangerous cult, and his devotion to fiscal responsibility as a barely disguised desire to kill the poor. Which is why people who presumably think of themselves as good human beings are happy to stand outside the Rees-Mogg house bullying the Rees-Mogg children.
A few years ago the actor and director Rupert Everett presented a television programme on prostitution. During its course, he interviewed a number of practitioners. At one stage he made some point and one former prostitute snapped: “I find that offensive.” In a moment of televisual bliss, Everett replied, “Oh yes, tell me why?” And she told him. And they argued the point.
On almost every issue, great and small, in our society today – from immigration to gender, race to Northern Ireland – everyone is happy to claim offence. And plenty of people are willing to accept the idea that basic truths cannot be defended by most people based on immutable characteristics.
Too few people are willing to say: “Tell me why.” Or even try to argue anything out. But perhaps we should give it a go – once again regarding facts, evidence and serious contestation as matters of import. After all, the world’s biggest bore cannot be the only person permitted to tell the truth.
MORE >>>
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-17/even-exiled-dalai-lama-agrees-europe-belongs-europeans
RELATED:
Election 2019: Stupid Labour Leaders And Supporters Just Don't Get It
Today, as we, Labour haers all, wallow in schadenfreude after the crushing defeat that elitist party suffered in the election, we'll have to rely on outside help in the form of a brilliant article from Shirelle Jacobs in the Telegraph and an equally brillian comment from Katherine Viners - Payczech (that sounds like a made up name, but whoever she is, congratualtions to the lady for her insight and pespicacity.
If you are a straight white male today then your chance of being listened to on any matter is vanishingly small. If you are gay then a window may be open for a nanosecond longer. If you are a woman you may get a pass on some issues. If you are from an ethnic minority you will be allowed a few more.
But even then you have to toe amazingly specific (and fast-moving) lines in order not to become anathematised by people who only pretend to care. Just ask those Labour women who raised objections to ex-men on all-women shortlists. For the truth is that while identity is the determining issue in the interim, it is merely the battering ram for a whole political project coming in behind once the gates are down.
Ignorant of this fact, even conservatives currently seem willing to rearrange our society not along the colour-blind, gender-blind lines that some of us still wish for, but along the lines of people who are gender and race-obsessed.
But even then you have to toe amazingly specific (and fast-moving) lines in order not to become anathematised by people who only pretend to care. Just ask those Labour women who raised objections to ex-men on all-women shortlists. For the truth is that while identity is the determining issue in the interim, it is merely the battering ram for a whole political project coming in behind once the gates are down.
Ignorant of this fact, even conservatives currently seem willing to rearrange our society not along the colour-blind, gender-blind lines that some of us still wish for, but along the lines of people who are gender and race-obsessed.
The consequences are all around us. Everywhere across the public and private sector, appointments based on merit are being weighed up – and increasingly losing – against appointments made on identity. Even our Government is far from immune from the temptation. After all, why was Karen Bradley appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland? This is a person so ignorant – and so confident in her ignorance – that she was happy to reveal in a recent interview that she knew nothing whatsoever about Northern Ireland before starting her present role. Was she put in her place for her great intellectual curiosity? Because the Prime Minister thought this an especially good moment to put a novice into that role? Or because as each day goes by everything becomes ever-more about the speaker not the speech?
This is why the rise of Jacob Rees-Mogg is pleasant even for those of us often in disagreement with him. In the world that the radical Left has set up, there should be no one so ignored. Not only pale and male, but rich and double-breasted. Yet he also happens to display two attributes which have been vanishing from public life of late: intelligence and courtesy.
The same far-Left who have spent recent years trying to present all non-Dalai Lamas as xenophobes are now trying to unload their whole armoury on Rees-Mogg. They seek to present his views on abortion as misogyny, his adherence to the Catholic faith as membership of an obscure, dangerous cult, and his devotion to fiscal responsibility as a barely disguised desire to kill the poor. Which is why people who presumably think of themselves as good human beings are happy to stand outside the Rees-Mogg house bullying the Rees-Mogg children.
A few years ago the actor and director Rupert Everett presented a television programme on prostitution. During its course, he interviewed a number of practitioners. At one stage he made some point and one former prostitute snapped: “I find that offensive.” In a moment of televisual bliss, Everett replied, “Oh yes, tell me why?” And she told him. And they argued the point.
On almost every issue, great and small, in our society today – from immigration to gender, race to Northern Ireland – everyone is happy to claim offence. And plenty of people are willing to accept the idea that basic truths cannot be defended by most people based on immutable characteristics.
Too few people are willing to say: “Tell me why.” Or even try to argue anything out. But perhaps we should give it a go – once again regarding facts, evidence and serious contestation as matters of import. After all, the world’s biggest bore cannot be the only person permitted to tell the truth.
MORE >>>
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-17/even-exiled-dalai-lama-agrees-europe-belongs-europeans
Even The Exiled Dalai Lama Agrees: "Europe Belongs To Europeans"
Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,
Is the Buddhist spiritual leader a white supremacist, an inveterate racist or even a closet Nazi? Only a very misinformed person would suggest such a thing. So how do we explain his recent remark that the millions of refugees who have been allowed to enter Europe should ultimately return to their homelands to “rebuild their own country"? Is that really such a vile and hateful suggestion?
Speaking at an event to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the founding of Individual Human Aid (IM), an international charity group that helped Buddhists resettle in Sweden following the 1959 Tibetan uprising, the 83-year-old Dalai Lama spoke without any fear of upsetting his PC-obsessed audience.
The comments by the Dalai Lama came across as a bracing slap in the face, a courageous wake-up call, and not least of all because the event took place in Sweden’s third-largest city of Malmo, where soaring crime rates among foreign-born nationals have made some neighborhoods no-go zones, where not even police and firefighters dare tread.
The reason the Dalai Lama is permitted to utter such unspeakable things goes beyond his spiritual authority; he himself is a refugee living in exile who dreams of returning someday to his native homeland of Tibet. It is that hope of return that informs his attitude to the ongoing migrant crisis, which is now dividing Europe along many cultural, social and political lines.
I am tempted to believe the Dalai Lama was invited to Sweden specifically to utter the things so many Swedes find it impossible to articulate; a sort of sadomasochistic exercise in humility and humiliation before the wise, plainspoken spiritual leader. After all, it is no secret that the Tibetan Buddhist leader has made such controversial remarks before.
Back in 2016, for example, in an interview in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, he remarked, with regards to migrants, “there are too many now". Then, in a swipe at Angela Merkel’s open-door migrant policy, which has seen millions of migrants flood the European Union since 2015, he said, with the perpetual, all-knowing smile on his face, “Germany cannot become an Arab country…Germany is Germany.”
Now just imagine the feigned fury had Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s former Chief Strategist, for example, uttered something similar. Actually, there is no need to imagine because it just happened this week as Bannon defended Matteo Salvini, Italy’s deputy prime minister, and Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, for attempting to protect the “sovereignty of their country”.
The Dalai Lama added that "from a moral point of view too, I think that the refugees should only be admitted temporarily".
However, for anybody who has studied the history of the mass movement of peoples, repatriation rarely if ever happens. Once a group of people have entered the borders of a sovereign state and set down roots - especially in the case of the European Union with its preponderance of bureaucratic red tape - it is excessively difficult to ‘send them back’ to where they originated. It is no exaggeration to say that the Swedish people may become in some not-so-distant future the minority, forced to accept whatever charity their conquerors will bestow upon them.
The one individual who seems to have the best grasp of the situation is Hungarian Prime Minister Orban, who just suffered a defeat in the European Parliament as MEPs voted to launch sanctions against his country. Viktor Orban’s unspeakable crime: daring to take physical measures to prevent an invasion of illegal aliens from entering Hungary – like constructing a barbed-wire fence that runs the length of the border with Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia.
Orban is the leading voice among the so-called Visegrad countries, made up of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. These nations played no role in conquering Middle Eastern sovereign states, which instigated the mass exodus of people in the first place. Why must Budapest sacrifice its social order and security, much like Germany, France and the UK have already done, which is evident by the terrorist attacks that have rocked these places on a number of occasions?
Furthermore, the only “moral responsibility” that true, unscrupulous leaders like Viktor Orban have in mind is the safeguarding of their nation and people. The feeling of moral responsibility should have come much earlier in the form of speaking out against illegitimate Middle Eastern wars that are responsible for producing these refugees in the first place. Where is the voice of the Netherlands, for example, the home of NATO, to make sure these barbaric acts of aggression did not happen in the first place? It is on the question of military aggression, conducted by NATO states, where the question of “moral responsibility” must first be heard, not after the fact by countries suddenly expected to absorb the flood.
Europe is experiencing a grave moral deficit from its major powers because they refused to speak out against America’s imperial ambitions in the first place. Now, unless more people begin to heed the wise words of individuals like the Dalai Lama and, yes, Steve Bannon, the entire European project will collapse and Western civilization as we know it will have changed to the point of irrelevancy.
Is the Buddhist spiritual leader a white supremacist, an inveterate racist or even a closet Nazi? Only a very misinformed person would suggest such a thing. So how do we explain his recent remark that the millions of refugees who have been allowed to enter Europe should ultimately return to their homelands to “rebuild their own country"? Is that really such a vile and hateful suggestion?
Speaking at an event to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the founding of Individual Human Aid (IM), an international charity group that helped Buddhists resettle in Sweden following the 1959 Tibetan uprising, the 83-year-old Dalai Lama spoke without any fear of upsetting his PC-obsessed audience.
“Recently large numbers of refugees, many from the Middle East, have fled to Europe in fear for their lives,” he told a group of journalists.Predictably, the comment struck fell like a lightning bolt not only in the globalist camp, obsessed as it is with bringing Europe to its knees, but throughout Sweden, which just witnessed the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats party take third place in the general election with 18 percent of the vote, an increase of nearly 5 points since the 2014 election. Third place may not sound great, until it is realized that it was the first time that Sweden’s ruling Social Democratic Party failed to win an absolute majority since its founding 129 years ago.
“They have been given shelter and support, but the long-term solution should include providing training and education, particularly for their children, so they can return to rebuild their own countries when peace has been restored.”
"Receive them, help them, educate them... but ultimately they should develop their own country," advised the 83-year-old Tibetan, who understands firsthand what it means to be an (legitimate) asylum seeker.
"I think Europe belongs to the Europeans," he continued, adding that refugees should understand that "they ultimately should rebuild their own country".
The comments by the Dalai Lama came across as a bracing slap in the face, a courageous wake-up call, and not least of all because the event took place in Sweden’s third-largest city of Malmo, where soaring crime rates among foreign-born nationals have made some neighborhoods no-go zones, where not even police and firefighters dare tread.
The reason the Dalai Lama is permitted to utter such unspeakable things goes beyond his spiritual authority; he himself is a refugee living in exile who dreams of returning someday to his native homeland of Tibet. It is that hope of return that informs his attitude to the ongoing migrant crisis, which is now dividing Europe along many cultural, social and political lines.
I am tempted to believe the Dalai Lama was invited to Sweden specifically to utter the things so many Swedes find it impossible to articulate; a sort of sadomasochistic exercise in humility and humiliation before the wise, plainspoken spiritual leader. After all, it is no secret that the Tibetan Buddhist leader has made such controversial remarks before.
Back in 2016, for example, in an interview in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, he remarked, with regards to migrants, “there are too many now". Then, in a swipe at Angela Merkel’s open-door migrant policy, which has seen millions of migrants flood the European Union since 2015, he said, with the perpetual, all-knowing smile on his face, “Germany cannot become an Arab country…Germany is Germany.”
Now just imagine the feigned fury had Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s former Chief Strategist, for example, uttered something similar. Actually, there is no need to imagine because it just happened this week as Bannon defended Matteo Salvini, Italy’s deputy prime minister, and Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, for attempting to protect the “sovereignty of their country”.
The Dalai Lama added that "from a moral point of view too, I think that the refugees should only be admitted temporarily".
However, for anybody who has studied the history of the mass movement of peoples, repatriation rarely if ever happens. Once a group of people have entered the borders of a sovereign state and set down roots - especially in the case of the European Union with its preponderance of bureaucratic red tape - it is excessively difficult to ‘send them back’ to where they originated. It is no exaggeration to say that the Swedish people may become in some not-so-distant future the minority, forced to accept whatever charity their conquerors will bestow upon them.
The one individual who seems to have the best grasp of the situation is Hungarian Prime Minister Orban, who just suffered a defeat in the European Parliament as MEPs voted to launch sanctions against his country. Viktor Orban’s unspeakable crime: daring to take physical measures to prevent an invasion of illegal aliens from entering Hungary – like constructing a barbed-wire fence that runs the length of the border with Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia.
Orban is the leading voice among the so-called Visegrad countries, made up of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. These nations played no role in conquering Middle Eastern sovereign states, which instigated the mass exodus of people in the first place. Why must Budapest sacrifice its social order and security, much like Germany, France and the UK have already done, which is evident by the terrorist attacks that have rocked these places on a number of occasions?
Furthermore, the only “moral responsibility” that true, unscrupulous leaders like Viktor Orban have in mind is the safeguarding of their nation and people. The feeling of moral responsibility should have come much earlier in the form of speaking out against illegitimate Middle Eastern wars that are responsible for producing these refugees in the first place. Where is the voice of the Netherlands, for example, the home of NATO, to make sure these barbaric acts of aggression did not happen in the first place? It is on the question of military aggression, conducted by NATO states, where the question of “moral responsibility” must first be heard, not after the fact by countries suddenly expected to absorb the flood.
Europe is experiencing a grave moral deficit from its major powers because they refused to speak out against America’s imperial ambitions in the first place. Now, unless more people begin to heed the wise words of individuals like the Dalai Lama and, yes, Steve Bannon, the entire European project will collapse and Western civilization as we know it will have changed to the point of irrelevancy.
RELATED:
Election 2019: Stupid Labour Leaders And Supporters Just Don't Get It
Today, as we, Labour haers all, wallow in schadenfreude after the crushing defeat that elitist party suffered in the election, we'll have to rely on outside help in the form of a brilliant article from Shirelle Jacobs in the Telegraph and an equally brillian comment from Katherine Viners - Payczech (that sounds like a made up name, but whoever she is, congratualtions to the lady for her insight and pespicacity.
No comments:
Post a Comment