Thank you for a great perspective that some of us in the West don't think about because we don't take religion as seriously as many do and authoritarians must.
The CPC can choose the next Dalai Lama but no one can be forced to accept him inside or outside of Tibet.
The other Orthodox Christians Churches from the Ecumenical Patriarch down have condemned the path that the Russian Orthodox Church has chosen.
Since World War 2 the Roman Church has been vigilant to avoid letting the Church be co-opted whether from the political left or right but has also been solicitous for resistance movements against authoritarians.
The CPC has tried to force alternative spiritual leadership for Tibet and always failed miserably.
Benighted it is but he was talking about state encroachment into sacred spaces for the sake of legitimacy and control. Christian nationalism is a grass roots movement that might eventually take over the state and conjoin it with religion. But right now it doesn't quite belong here.
I support Tibetan independence and I highly admire the Dalai Lama -- but in all fairness, if we're talking about "capitalizing on the sacred to consolidate power, and reframing spiritual legitimacy to serve political ends" (let alone "taking over the state and conjoining it with religion") -- in contrast with liberalism -- what's the rationale for Tibetan theocracy?
A good example of what you're describing can be found in post WW II Poland, which was dominated by the U.S.S.R. and had a communist regime imposed on it. The Catholic religion served as a patriotic rallying point for the vast majority of Poles and helped hold the national identity together. They were ultimately successful in throwing off the totalitarian yoke.
Unfortunately, the Catholic religion has also served as "a patriotic rallying point" for the authoritarian Law and Justice party (as it did in Franco's Spain).
That's true, too. Orwell is famous for saying that, "Every line of serious work that I have written***has been written***against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism***." I would slightly amend it to reflect my view. I would substitute "social democracy" for "democratic socialism." Capitalism has proven to be too valuable and irreplaceable an engine for economic growth to jettison entirely.
Thank you for a great perspective that some of us in the West don't think about because we don't take religion as seriously as many do and authoritarians must.
The CPC can choose the next Dalai Lama but no one can be forced to accept him inside or outside of Tibet.
The other Orthodox Christians Churches from the Ecumenical Patriarch down have condemned the path that the Russian Orthodox Church has chosen.
Since World War 2 the Roman Church has been vigilant to avoid letting the Church be co-opted whether from the political left or right but has also been solicitous for resistance movements against authoritarians.
The CPC has tried to force alternative spiritual leadership for Tibet and always failed miserably.
I found this article interesting as well:
https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-opinion/viewpoint/tibetan-government-exile-has-new-strategy#:~:text=An%20unexpected%20development%20has%20taken,before%20his%20health%20declines%20further.
This article would be more comprehensive if it touched on the rising Christian Nationalism in these Benighted States?
Benighted it is but he was talking about state encroachment into sacred spaces for the sake of legitimacy and control. Christian nationalism is a grass roots movement that might eventually take over the state and conjoin it with religion. But right now it doesn't quite belong here.
I support Tibetan independence and I highly admire the Dalai Lama -- but in all fairness, if we're talking about "capitalizing on the sacred to consolidate power, and reframing spiritual legitimacy to serve political ends" (let alone "taking over the state and conjoining it with religion") -- in contrast with liberalism -- what's the rationale for Tibetan theocracy?
A good example of what you're describing can be found in post WW II Poland, which was dominated by the U.S.S.R. and had a communist regime imposed on it. The Catholic religion served as a patriotic rallying point for the vast majority of Poles and helped hold the national identity together. They were ultimately successful in throwing off the totalitarian yoke.
Unfortunately, the Catholic religion has also served as "a patriotic rallying point" for the authoritarian Law and Justice party (as it did in Franco's Spain).
Politics is a dirty business!
I can't disagree with you there, but the Church was instrumental in defeating the communists in Poland.
Yes, but the Church was also instrumental in Franco's defeat of the Communists in Spain -- and look what Spain got instead!
I'm with Orwell (i.e., "Homage to Catalonia") on this (and much else).
Be careful what you wish for! When it comes to politics, be very careful, period!
That's true, too. Orwell is famous for saying that, "Every line of serious work that I have written***has been written***against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism***." I would slightly amend it to reflect my view. I would substitute "social democracy" for "democratic socialism." Capitalism has proven to be too valuable and irreplaceable an engine for economic growth to jettison entirely.
Now we're on the same page!
I fully agree -- including your amendment to Orwell! :-)