[Buddha-l] Supporting Peace

curt curt at cola.iges.org
Tue May 24 19:17:22 MDT 2005

I have the impression that most Buddhist who are inclined to
politcal/social activism have a pretty narrow conception of
who they want to work with. What I mean specifically is that
a lot of Buddhists (including especially those inclined to political/
social activism) assume that the only people worth working with
are pacifists. This is often a problem within the peace movement
itself - and the problem usually arises from religious (usually
Christian) activists who assume that only pacifists can "really"
be against war. The percentage of Americans who would agree
that all wars (including the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812,
and WWII) are morally unjustifiable is vanishingly small. The
percentage of Americans who oppose the invasion and occupation
of Iraq is probably a majority, and possibly a large majority.
And within the peace movement itself there is a significant portion
of activists who are not pacifists. This is one of the reasons why
I personally have little interest in either the BPF or FOR - they
promote a very distorted (in my opinion) vision of what the
peace movement should be about. In order to end the occupation
of Iraq, to get explicit about it, what's needed is movement that
can mobilize the people who are already in agreement with that
- Curt

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

>I think most veterans of interfaith dialog learn pretty quickly that
>there is hardly any point at all in discussing doctrine, and really not
>much point in discussing practices. Where dialog becomes more fruitful
>is working on common causes such as working for prison reform,
>environmental integrity, international peace or getting despots out of
>office. (I didn't mention Bush by name, but now that you mention it....)

More information about the buddha-l mailing list