Tag Archive | "leadership"

The Dalai Lama: Not so special after all

As far as world religious leaders go, there are probably who are held in higher esteem by the Western media and Western intellectuals than the Dalai Lama.  His cause is given much sympathy in the West, with numerous Hollywood celebrities and academics joining together to promote the independence of the mountain kingdom.  Having been a former Buddhist, I myself once had a great deal of respect for the man who calls himself Tenzin Gyatso, otherwise known to the world as the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.  Although I was not a Tibetan Buddhist, I had regarded him as a person to look up to, because I viewed him as a person to be respected.

Despite the Dalai Lama having only a few million followers, as compared to the His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, the Dalai Lama has received media coverage which is so overwhelmingly positive, that it would seem that there were many times more Tibetan Buddhists in the world than actually exist (the adherents of Tibetan Buddhism, number some 20 millon, in comparison to the 1.18 billion Roman Catholics worldwide).  For instance, shortly after the election of Pope Benedict XVI, people were quick to deride the Papacy as being a “dictatorship,” and refer derisively to the Pope’s past in the Hitler Youth, despite the fact that the Papacy is in fact an elected position, and that Pope Benedict  had no choice but to join the Hitler Youth.  On the other hand, the media will not tell you about the Dalai Lama’s own connection to the Nazi party.

On the one hand, some people see the Dalai Lama as a a vanguard of tradition for the Tibetan people, who keeps his quaint traditions alive in hectic times, while others see him as someone who has succeeded in harmoniously fusing modernity and tradition.  From our perspective, the former is possible only with a large and unprecedented effort to reject all attempts at the latter.  Any authentic traditionalist movement must fully reject liberal ideas, and be solidly based in hierarchy and order.

Whatever Traditionalist ideas the Dalai Lama might have once held, it seems that he has long since abandoned them for a modern outlook on life.  The fact is, that had the Dalai Lama not adopted his modernist (and globalist) viewpoints, he would not have the outpouring of support from even leftist, atheistic academics who so often rush to criticize Christianity.  In fact, speaking to the National Secular Society, the vice-president of that organization praised the Dalai Lama by saying, that he was, “sensible to say that a [secular] ethic is better than one based on religion”.  Furthermore, in a press conference in Tokyo, the Dalai Lama is reported to have said, “Secularism does not mean rejection of all religions. It means respect for all religions and human beings including non-believers”.  One might then ask how he is applying this idea to his treatment of followers of the very Traditional “Dorje Shugden” sect, but I digress.

The Dalai Lama has gone so far as to refer to himself as a “Marxist” and appoint himself as a critic of capitalism, and in one speech went so far as to say that the Soviet Union and China were not Marxist enough.  In another speech, he clearly articulated his globalist interests by stating that: ”The elected government, sometimes their number one…priority is national interest…That, I think, should change. The global issue should be number one.”  He further stated, “If someone comes to me and asks whether homosexuality is okay or not…then I think I would say…is okay’”.  Another favorite talking point of the Dalai Lama is, not surprisingly, feminism.  The Dalai Lama calls himself a feminist, and claims that women are more prone to compassion (perhaps the Dalai Lama doesn’t read the news very much).  On top of that, if this weren’t enough, the Dalai Lama was  first public visitor to the Holocaust “Shrine” in Washington DC.

Another side to this equation is that, for certain powers that be, he is a usefully asset in the imperialistic strangulation of Russia and China via a concomitant fake “revolution” like the one the world recently in Libya.  Those people do not honestly care about the Tibetan people, but rather wish to bring what yet remains of Tibet “into the fold”.  Perhaps, one might say that the Dalai Lama merely tones down his message for his Western audiences.  In some instances, he seems to do just this: by advocating closed borders for his own country, while condemning the racism of others (for comparison, think of the outrage which would follow if a French Catholic bishop were to condemn immigration into France!).  If this is the case, then he would appear to be more of a media-savvy politician than a religious figure; and one who has perhaps learned a bit too well from his handlers.

Posted in ReligionComments (1)

Mr. Obama of Amerikwa and Dr. Ahmadinejad of Iran

As the 2012 elections approach, the candidates of both American political parties are lining up to see who can best appease their masters.  A big issue, especially for certain lobbyist groups such as AIPAC, is how the next President of the United States will deal with Iran.  The major candidates, with the notable exception of Ron Paul, have already endorsed the position that military conflict with Iran may be necessary.  The Obama regime has not hidden its hostility towards Iran, by imposing sanctions in an effort to further cripple Iran’s economy, or by supporting anti-Iranian terror brigades.

So as Barack Obama attempts to run for a second term, it is only fair to compare to his Iranian counterpart, Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Ahmadinejad or Obama: Who represents the interests of his people better?

In 2010, the Indian press reported that Obama would spend nearly 200 million a day on a visit to India.  During that visit, he was accompanied by a staggering 40 aircraft and six armoured cars.  Obama’s private car, a black Cadillac had the ability to launch nuclear, chemical, and biological attacks at the press of a button.  Furthermore, Obama booked all 300 luxury suites and 27 deluxe penthouses of the five-star Taj Mahal Hotel, at a rate ranging from 20,000 to 40,000 Indian rupees (450 to 900 USD) per night, and arranged a private excursion to the Taj Mahal.  James Corum, an American military historian pointed out, that the trip was largely a lavish publicity stunt, complete with an entourage that would dwarf the armed forces of even large nations.

On an earlier trip to Spain, Michelle Obama was criticized as being a “modern day Marie-Antoinette.”  During her vacation, an entire beach was closed for Michelle Obama and 40 close friends, for a price that cost US taxpayers a staggering $100,000 a day, not including the $147,563 which it cost to fly Air Force Two to and from the destination.  The American Conservative reported that:

Americans have come to expect Michelle to wear $500 sneakers and carry $2,000 purses while dining on lobster and caviar prepared by her personal chef and traveling to five-star hotels on the Spanish coast. They are used to her wastefulness — and her hypocrisy, considering the lavishness that occurs while the Obamas ask Americans to make sacrifices for the good of the nation, vacation on oil-stained beaches off the Gulf of Mexico, and have patience while the president socializes the economy against the will of the people.

Obama’s inauguration, the most costly in the history of the United States, cost the American taxpayers a whopping $170 million USD.  His other expenses include a black-tie Super Bowl party, dinners consisting of $100/lb Wagyu steak, and flying in a personal chef to make his pizzas.  And, in 2008, Obama hosted a series of 28 parties with over 50,000 guests.

All this while Obama oversees three wars, sending the working poor to die on false pretenses, and a crippling deficit of 14.6 trillion dollars, and while six million Americans lost their jobs during the Obama’s first year in office and retail sales fell 6.2 percent for 2009.

Enter Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the son of a humble village blacksmith, and President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.  A civil engineer by profession, he gained popularity during his tenure as the mayor of Tehran by working to improve the traffic system and placing an emphasis on charity by setting up free soup kitchens for the disadvantaged.  Even as President of Iran, a nation of some 74 million citizens, he wanted to continue living in the same house in Tehran his family had been living in, until his security advisers insisted that he move. Ahmadinejad had the antique Persian carpets in the Presidential palace sent to a carpet museum, and opted instead to use inexpensive carpets.  African leaders, impressed by Ahmadinejad’s humility in daily affairs, noted that he refused the V.I.P. seat on the Presidential plane, and that he eventually replaced it with a cargo plane instead.  While Obama wears suits costing $1500 and up, Dr. Ahmadinejad, a former University professor, dresses in modest clothing, and insists on driving to the Presidential offices in his own car.

As president, he vowed to “putting the petroleum income on people’s tables,”, meaning tht Iran’s oil profits would be used to benefit the citizens.  Under Dr. Ahmadinejad’s presidency, Iran’s real GDP reflected growth of the economy, while inflation and unemployment have also decreased.

With all this, we might be prompted to ask – who is really a man of the people?  Which one is a true leader, and which one is merely an extravagant figurehead with no real concern for his citizens?  If being a competent leader who has a genuine concern for his fellow man and living a modest life is any indication, then the answer is clear.

Posted in Middle East, Politics, SocietyComments (1)

    Leave a Reply

  • Stay up to date

  • Subscribe to the RSS feed
  • Subscribe to the feed via email
  • Follow us on Twitter!

Find us on Facebook

Traditionalist Books

More books...