While the current Dalai Lama is a worldly diplomat, I have some apprehensions about a free Tibet as a theocracy under his successor, under religious laws and with monks as policemen.
People assume Buddhism is peaceful and gentle and all that, but not all versions of Buddhism are like that. I doubt that we would see the equivalent of a Buddhist Taliban, but any form of government that isn’t democratic I have apprehensions about.
Yep, gonna have to rank that up there in the nigh-impossible category.
Do you think that the people of Tibet should live under communist dictatorship because of what you imagine could possibly happen.
By the way, you don’t live in a democracy if you live in the United States.
If there are real Buddhists monks that go around stomping heads and shooting people.. Well, you got a point.
I’d be really surprised if a Buddhist sect can get anywhere near as evil as the most enlightened islamic sect. It may happen on the extremes of them, but that’s hardly the norm.
You only need to look next door to neighboring Bhutan which recently held it’s first “election” in which the King’s party won 94% of the governing seats to see friendly Buddhists in action.
Bhutan has about 2.4 million people. Tibet has about 2.7 million.
Bhutan has sumptuary laws which forces subjects to wear native traditional costumes.
Bhutan has discriminatory legislation which puts into place quotas for the majority population for both education and employment.
Bhutan deprives non-Buddhist and non-Bhote ethnic groups of both political rights and economic rights.
Bhutan practices actual ethnic cleansing by using its army forcibly depriving over a hundred thousand people of their land and homes and driving them out of the country to “preserve” the culture of it’s majority.
Bhutan masquerades as a shangri-la to the hippy types. In reality, it’s just a severely underdeveloped statelet governed by a monarcho-ecclesiastic dictatorship.