> That's of course nothing specifically buddhist, but the
> case in question was not buddhism per se, but how
> leftists see or should see the Dalai Lama. I opt for
> seeing him as a feudal lord in exile, with as much claim
> on my sympathy as a Russian ex-grandduke, or Batista's
> nephew. They've had their day. And Richard Gere shall
> meditate with whomever he pleases.
I beg to differ. The case in question, as I see it, or at least the most important question, is not what we think about the DL. It's what we think about the Tibet-China conflict. And I don't see why any clear-thinking leftist would side with China (on this or any other issue, for that matter).
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A gentleman haranguing on the perfection of our law, and that it was equally open to the poor and the rich, was answered by another, 'So is the London Tavern.' -- "Tom Paine's Jests..." (1794); also attr. to John Horne Tooke (1736-1812) by Hazlitt