Skip to main content

The Dharma of Non-Violence: Why Buddhists Should Oppose Coercive Political Systems

By Matthew Hayward

Buddhists are committed to the principles of non-violence, compassion, and non-harm. Every living being has inherent worth and dignity, and our actions should be guided by a deep sense of empathy and responsibility for the well-being of all.

For these reasons, it is antithetical to support any political organization or philosophy that relies on force or the threat of force to achieve its goals. This includes, but is not limited to, governments and political systems founded on the principles of coercion, domination, or control.

The use of force is inherently violent and coercive, running counter to the core principles of Buddhism. Buddhism teaches that our actions should be guided by a deep sense of ethical responsibility and a commitment to non-harm. It encourages us to cultivate compassion, wisdom, and understanding and to seek peaceful solutions to conflicts whenever possible.

Moreover, using force by governments and political organizations often leads to the violation of individual rights and the oppression of marginalized communities. It can also perpetuate cycles of violence and harm rather than promote genuine social justice and well-being.

Buddhists should reject any political system or ideology built on the use or threat of force. Instead, we should work towards building a society founded on voluntary cooperation, empathy, and mutual respect. We must prioritize the well-being of all living beings and seek peaceful solutions to conflicts that honor the dignity and worth of every individual.

A Buddhist cannot, in good conscience, support any political organization or philosophy that relies on force or the threat of force. Instead, we must strive toward building a society founded on the principles of non-violence, compassion, and voluntary cooperation, prioritizing the well-being of all living beings.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Grassroots Revolt Against GOP Elitism

By Matthew Hayward In the complex arena of political strategy, even those who occupy the highest echelons of power can falter, demonstrating a profound disconnect between their strategic intentions and operational execution. The recent failure to secure the endorsement for their preferred candidate, Dave Reichert, is not merely a setback; it is a revealing exposé of the grave strategic missteps at the heart of the Republican party's establishment in Washington State. These seasoned campaigners, these stewards of conservative strategy, have evidently underestimated the critical importance of grassroots engagement. While I acknowledge the logic behind promoting an established politician strategically positioned geographically and perceived as moderate in our swing state—a strategy driven by considerations of electability, which admittedly has its merits—the incessant focus on this argument and complete lack of any meaningful engagement and education has alienated the grassroots yet a...

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price  Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...

When the Census Goes Beyond the Constitution

 By Matthew Hayward The Census: From Counting People to Collecting Control The Constitution established the census as a straightforward tool for representation—nothing more, nothing less. Article I, Section 2 mandates an enumeration every ten years to determine how many representatives each state is allotted. That’s it. Simple. Effective. Proportional representation was the goal, and the census was designed to achieve it. So how did we end up here—with government agents asking about the number of bathrooms in our homes, our ethnic identities, and everything in between? This is the creeping hand of central planning at work. What began as a tool to empower individual representation has been twisted into a mechanism to empower bureaucrats, planners, and those who believe they know better than free individuals how to run their own lives. Central Planning: The False Promise of Data The justification for prying into the most intimate details of our lives is always the same: “We need the ...