Pro-China bias?

[Niall]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

I do understand the realpolitik "larger picture" you have been espousing. It is an STS picture and STS game; power politics where the people are just cannon fodder, dumb donkeys, cockroaches in the view of the power players. Supporting one thug (China) to take down the top dog (US/West) will just lead to the thug becoming the new top dog, and then the cycle repeating: supporting yet another thug to take down the new top dog.

That you see it simply as 'Chinese-thug-vying-for-top-place' shows that you do not understand the "realpolitik larger picture." Such a scenario is within the realm of possibilities, but is extremely unlikely given what we know from the Cassiopaean teachings about an imminent and global catastrophic future, to say nothing of observing China's past actions.

There is a larger picture than your realpolitik one. It is STO vs STS, and it is a win lose situation where we have to fight for STO and defeat STS. The bigger enemy are the psychopaths, the elites, running every country, running every corporation. The bigger battle is trying to figure out how to stop them from eating the people.

It's not that simple. The elites aren't always completely pathological. In fact, 100% pathocracy is still rare rather than common.

So when you start advocating denying people's free will, suppressing their expressions, and supporting a psychopathic regime, all I see is you being caught up in an STS power struggle using STS methods against the people.

That you read it in this way tells me you are not ready to understand it. That's fine, carry on.

 

[Joe]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

Supporting one thug (China) to take down the top dog (US/West) will just lead to the thug becoming the new top dog, and then the cycle repeating: supporting yet another thug to take down the new top dog.

No one is saying that China is going to "take down" anyone. There is little evidence that that is going to happen in the absence of ALL "going down". China, like Russia, is useful to those who seek to expose the main aggressor on the this planet today - the anglo-American Empire - because Russian and Chinese interests run counter to the interests of the anglo-Americans and therefore Russia and China are trying to expose the truth of the nature of the anglo-American empire builders. In that respect our interests converge with those of Russia and China, so in that respect, fighting that fight, we are not going to focus on Russian or Chinese abuses because it would, in effect, be aiding our enemy.

Despite what you claim, you don't really understand the big picture, nor what we are trying to do OR the CONTEXT in which we are trying to do it. You would have us push a "higher reality" "STS Vs STO" message because that is the ultimate truth, but in doing so you totally ignore the level of understanding of most people of this world, even those who are relatively intelligent and well-informed.

Such people are what is being "fought" over here - the souls of all humanity are in play - and if we are going to fight for them, we HAVE to understand their level of understanding and tailor our message TO THAT LEVEL. You seem to lack the understanding to engage in such a fight because, in fact, it seems you are only concerned about what interests you, YOUR level of understanding, what YOU see, and you appear to be demanding that all should be ready and able to accept that level of understanding or...well or what? Reject them? Dismiss them? Ignore them?

You don't seem to have any experience of actually trying to educate people or how difficult it is and how much effort is required to try and tailor the message to the target audience so that they can possibly accept it and internalize it and understand it as the truth and, in so doing, move away from the place of utter lies and confusion and manipulation into which they have been placed by the Western PTB on this planet.

There is a larger picture than your realpolitik one. It is STO vs STS, and it is a win lose situation where we have to fight for STO and defeat STS. The bigger enemy are the psychopaths, the elites, running every country, running every corporation. The bigger battle is trying to figure out how to stop them from eating the people. So when you start advocating denying people's free will, suppressing their expressions, and supporting a psychopathic regime, all I see is you being caught up in an STS power struggle using STS methods against the people.

Again, you obviously missed the point, so maybe we didn't make it clear. No one advocated what you suggest here. What we said was that from a reading of true history, and a deep understanding of human nature, the most likely best system of government is a benevolent dictatorship by a leader who is loved by the people and does right by them because they themselves love the people. At the same time the leader understands the people, their limitations, their desperate NEED for an authority in their lives, someone to take care of them in the "big bad world" much like a parent cares for children.

People have always and WILL ALWAYS clamor for and demand leaders to "take care of them". This innate drive in people is extremely dangerous in a world where psychopaths exist and it is extremely dangerous to offer them the illusion of "free speech" because it prevents them from seeing the truth - that their "freedoms" are an illusion to divert their attention from the fact that they live under the rule of a psychopathic dictatorship.

In the rare cases where the type of benevolent leader I described has existed and ruled for a while, he/she has always ultimately been killed by psychopaths around him/her, very often ushering in a period of darkness across the planet. And guess what? Very often, it is under the pretext of "freedom and democracy" (for the people) that the one leader who could have provided the people with a decent world to live in was, is murdered by psychopaths that claim to stand for "freedoms" for the people.

You also seem to be twisting our words. No one said anything about suppressing "free will". Specific reference was made to "free speech" and specifically the type of "free speech" that we see around the world in manipulated "color revolutions" or the type of "free speech" march we saw recently in France. Perhaps you don't really understand what is happening, but that march in Paris, promoted as a shining example of the "will of the people" and "free speech", was an absolutely horrifying and disgusting example of massive emotional manipulation of the people by psychopaths in power, leading them down the road to their own destruction. People in France last Sunday were doing EXACTLY what millions of Germans did in response to Hitler and the Nazis, and you can bet your behind that the average German at the time declared it to be a perfect example of "free speech" and the "will of the people".

We have a duty to try to figure out STO ways of living (which is not using an enemy of my enemy tactic and supporting one STS against another STS). Maybe Putin is the closest thing to a Caesar with STO qualities and an actual benevolent philosopher king. But you guys are smart and I thought you would be able to see that the Chinese politburo is nowhere close to being compared to STO, Caesar, or Putin. Start seeing the pain and suffering of the people under tyranny, whether the tyrants be Western, Chinese, or any other elite. People everywhere have the right to self defense, and it is not moral or just to support a tyrant just because it advances your side of geopolitics. Let's be the conscience of the world, not the conscience of the west.

Again, twisting of our words. No one said the Chinese politburo was "STO" or close to it, and we have never said a word, here or on Sott, that suggests that the Chinese people live in some kind of utopia. Our point, which you consistently fail to understand, is that we are not going to demonize the Chinese government because the current conditions of the battle in which we are engaged (conditions set by the powerful players) mean that to do so would provide succor to the CHIEF AGGRESSORS on this planet today. So, I would again suggest that you do not seem to truly understand the situation and, as such, you should refrain from throwing around accusations when you lack such understanding.

 

[Renaissance]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

Where is the truth in the following lies against me that I have a West is the best illusion or that I think Western perspective of China has merit?

I'm not sure what I have said specifically triggered this response. I have a Western perspective of China? Maybe a lot of this conversation has been you responding to previous conversations with other people.

Maybe. And maybe that's not it at all. Maybe the "triggered response " here stems from an "invested position" of maintaining the illusion that 'the West is the best', despite all indicators to the contrary.

I don't see anything resembling a lie against you, hlat. Niall gave some options to consider, which wasn't smearing you. No one is perfect and we all have various issues/programs to sort out that we do not see on our own. That's the whole point of networking, isn't it?

I think whatever grievances there are about China, they don't compare to what is threatening the planet and humanity on a global level, i.e. the chaos of the West. We're in dire straits. China has been successful in blocking this influence, and that's no small feat. Accomplishments in this regard may also have it's part in holding the world together even if just by a thread. Imagine the world if China was a Western vassal state - things would be even worse than they are now, if things would even 'be' at all. Of course there's self interest, oligarchs, etc. involved, but this is an STS world and I think we've got to work with the hand we've been dealt.

 

[Siberia]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

There is a larger picture than your realpolitik one. It is STO vs STS, and it is a win lose situation where we have to fight for STO and defeat STS. The bigger enemy are the psychopaths, the elites, running every country, running every corporation. The bigger battle is trying to figure out how to stop them from eating the people. So when you start advocating denying people's free will, suppressing their expressions, and supporting a psychopathic regime, all I see is you being caught up in an STS power struggle using STS methods against the people.

So many great points have already been made by everyone in this thread, hlat. The above post is utopic, because it tries to challenge the Laws of Nature. In nature, wherever you look you'll see some hierarchy. This is how this material world works.

There have always been, are and will be elites in this world. There will always be some hierarchy. Some people will always be simple-minded workers, some will be scientists, some will be artists, some will be rulers. Everyone plays his/her role in accordance with their current level of development in the system. As well as there will always be the younger and the elder. And the latter will always restrict the excessive, mindless freedoms of the former thus teaching them in a mild way (otherwise the nature itself would teach the kids in a hard way).

When you suggest that some countries like Tibet or Taiwan must be set free from China, you suggest unnatural thing. In nature, planets subject to the influence of stars, they do not float free in space. Likewise, there will always exist the centers of power on Earth. Today those centers are represented by such countries like the US, the EU, China, Russia, India, etc. All these countries have smaller satellite states surrounding them. Those smaller states may be nominally considered free, but in fact, they are always subject to the influence of their stronger neighbour.

In the case of Ukraine, we could clearly see what happens when a small and proud, but basically powerless country decides to challenge her position. Imagine that Earth, for example, would try and exchange the Sun for some other "companion." What would happen to the Earth in this case? While the bigger players are arguing among themselves about such silly planet, it could simply be smashed in the process. If Ukraine remained within Moscow's orbit, none of this would have happened.

This is what you suggest for Tibet and Taiwan. Not freedom, but destruction. Thinking that Tibet or Taiwan can be free from the neighbouring giant is against nature. If these small countries really want independence, they need to grow mature first. It means that they need much bigger population and much more resources. Until then, they must stay real and understand that there is no better current choice for them than under China's protectorate.

 

[obyvatel]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

[quote author=Mal7]
I think this is the Dalai Lama's schtick - he hugs everyone. He is not the person who will tell you George Bush is a lying psychopath.
[/quote]

No. He would say that George Bush Jr is one of the most impressive people he has met (after Nelson Mandela) and he loves him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPE97m9K5a4 (a short 1minute video clip of this part of his speech)
http://www.sott.net/article/173852-Dalai-Lama-Stuns-Audience-Admits-I-Love-George-Bush


[quote author=Mal7]
I think it is pretty clear from watching him talk about various things that he is absorbing and repeating the mainstream media's lies, e.g. you won't find him talking about false flags.
[/quote]

Even some of the mainstream media came out criticizing Israel's last war on Gaza. This is what "his holiness" had to say in July, 2014.

_http://tibet.net/2014/07/24/his-holiness-the-dalai-lama-says-violence-in-gaza-unthinkable/

Tibetan spiritual leader His Holiness the Dalai Lama has described the ongoing violent conflict between Palestine and Isreal in Gaza as ‘unimaginable’, saying he did not expect such sort of violence from people who claim to hold religious principles.

“All major religious traditions — Islam, Christianity, Hindu, of course, Jainism and Buddhism – all major religious traditions — teach us the practice of compassion, love, forgiveness, tolerance. So then a person who believes in certain faith, why do you involve in such violence?,” His Holiness the Dalai Lama told reporters on Monday in response to a question about the crisis.

“It is really very, very sad,” His Holiness the Dalai Lama said.

Note that Judaism is missing from the list of religions he mentions while Islam is at the top. So even while a significant portion of the world was condemning Israeli aggression, the above quote from "his holiness" would sort of put the ball in the Palestinian court in a subtle way. Deliberate or unconscious, still quite notable I think.

This is what he had to say earlier in 2012 about Israel
_https://peaceandcommunity.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/challenging-the-dalai-lama-on-his-views-on-the-israeli-occupation/

“Among Tibetan refugees we are always saying to ourselves that we must learn the Jewish secret to keep up our traditions, in some cases under hostile circumstances,”
......
‘Tibetans and Israeli’s want to live in peace.’
.......
“I’ve been to Israel a few times. On hearing the Jewish viewpoint, it still looks sort of sub-reasons from thousands of years old they have certain rights in their place. They themselves in ancient times they became refugees thousands of years ago in different countries. Then on the same occasion, I met some groups of Palestinians and I heard their sort of complaint and they also want rights that the place belongs to them, so it is difficult to judge. The best way is, no matter who they are they should live together and help each other. I’m very much impressed that in Jerusalem where the Jewish community there, their land is much greener and they use every technique, water, trees and grass is much greener. Whereas on the Palestinian side it still remains dry like the desert. It is better to live together and use the Jewish communities skills and in the mean time live together.

In case of Putin, it can be said that he is following the mainstream media - if by mainstream you understand the anglo-us media. His "holiness" though officially resides in India and should logically have access to much more than what the typical north american/western european/oceanian gets as mainstream news. His comments on Putin were so "profound"

_http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/11080133/Dalai-Lama-attacks-self-centred-Vladimir-Putin.html

The Dalai Lama, in an interview with a German newspaper, pointed out that Mr Putin had served as Russian president, then prime minister and then president again.

"That's a bit too much," he told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. "This is very self-centred." "His attitude is: 'I, I, I'," Tibet's exiled spiritual leader explained.

Also, he went on to say China was better than Russia. So I would speculate that maybe unlike you, Mal7, his "holiness" may not object to the perceived "pro China bias" on Sott, though he would surely object to the "pro-Russian bias."

[quote author=Mal7]
I certainly don't think the Dalai Lama should be seen as being a geopolitical master strategist or oracle.
[/quote]

Don't know about "geopolitical master strategist" but he does seem to know pretty well which side his bread is buttered. Is he really as naive and gullible, the spiritual man filled with compassion who wishes all the world could get together and live peacefully - as his public image suggests? My guess would be no. However, if you wish to persist in drinking the "dalai kool aid", it is your choice.

 

[Mal7]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

This is what he had to say earlier in 2012 about Israel
_https://peaceandcommunity.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/challenging-the-dalai-lama-on-his-views-on-the-israeli-occupation/

Thank you obyvatel, some very good points and observations here, and nothing I wish to disagree with.

I thought the article above in particular was the most compelling piece "against" the Dalai Lama I have seen, at least for those who have some knowledge of the real history of what is going on in Israel/Palestine. There were a few good comments made in the comments section at the end of the article too.

By contrast three of the links to sources on the Dalai Lama provided earlier in the thread (the article by Parenti, and the review article and link to the book "Shadow of the Dalai Lama" by Victor and Victoria Trimondi), had the opposite effect to that intended, i.e. they seemed to me so selective or sensational in their presentation of information, that rather than being convincing in their arguments to someone who drinks Dalai Kool Aid, they would only encourage rebuttal.

 

[gdpetti]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

psychopathic or meglomaniac? It seems before the communists, it was old-school corruption by the oligarchs, same as everywhere, then came WW2 and the civil war didn't disrupt it much, and even our man on the scene down in Indochina supported the Commies because they were fighting the Japs when Chiang's guys seemed intent to kill off their political challengers, the Communists, not yet Maoist, and when that day came after the war, is when china seemed to slide from the corrupt to the mental... perhaps we could blame it on the Long March? or Mao getting rid of all opponents in the party, but he and his wife seemed to go 'mental' after they really took over power, and the party itself seemed to get filled up with lackeys or yes-men types that helped Mao 'lose it'.... Great Leap Forward and all that crap, which seems a popular Marxist?? policy as you find similar policies in the soviet Union, later Vietnam, Khmer Rouge!!!..they really went crazy, so much so that even vietnam had to deal with those crazy psychos, who still seemed to have escaped the noose, same as most WallStreet psychos... the only difference seems to be the nature of the game in which they play, and whether they need to hide their true natures in public or not.

This same setting of 'evil' reminds me of that scene with the old king in one of those 'Ring' films... under the spell from his own court magician, the whole kingdom suffers under this spell by default, and China seems about the same. The spell didn't seem to pass until after the Dragon Lady and her team were dispelled from the kingdom and the outsted old party crew allowed to return to the fold... slowly returning life to the land (can't remember the old guy's name who initiated the push for modernization, 'Westernization' in an attempt to shorten the time needed to do so). This process is typical under such regimes(like the Meiji era in Japan), and a common pattern with them all, China was just greatly 'assisted' during this phase under the Clinton's regime here in the USA... same as the USA assisted Russia in its bolshevist phase... same underlying oligarchic plan running everytime. It seems the torch has been passed to Asia.... if it wasn't for those pesky comets et al... conveniently left off the menu... and aren't those some of the best dishes a good restaurant makes?

It's hard to know what the Dali Lama knows or doesn't know from his public speeches/interviews made public etc.... his upbringing is as strange as most public figureheads in Western history, so perhaps he can't be expected to be what he isn't? Truly awake and aware? Being in that situation from the times of his childhood to now is not normal (ask any overly rich and famous kid), and sort of reminds me of what the American 'Indians' went through with all the European adventurers running rampant in the Americas.... meglomaniacs or psychopathic conquistadors/prophets of doom, death and destruction through their self-declared status as knights of Christ and all that BS. Was China really any different when Mao's ideas took over the Party? Same as Hitler's ideas used Socialism? makes Mussolini's black shirts look tame by comparison... or American troops/cops today... so far... which isn't nearly as bad as we were when we were taking over the Phillippines, or earlier with those natives of the northern continent... lebensraum anyone? Yet at the same time the 'Founding Fathers' were fighting the Brits and 'Indians' for control of the land mass...The Brits came and went, but the fight to secure the empire stayed and no one mentions it? No nation reports or teaches it's bad history.. not for long... or without 'context'. The same game everywhere. Peace equals stasis which equals the need for disequilibrium here in Purgatory... ie, catalyst... and psychos, meglomaniacs and their associates are great at that job.

It seems China, like Russia in recent years, is just at a different point on the circle now than then, same as are we... and everything comes around again, sooner or later.... like the concept of being Middle Earth, the Middle Kingdom, the center of the world. Being 'Pro-China' or 'Pro-Russia' just now is a question of looking at the larger picture and not the earlier one.... same with a person... same with Dali Lama or any other person in a position of power from which great responsibilites are given in concert with that power.... and seeing how they play their part. Abe in Japan seems under the spell of Western court magicians in trying to turn back the clock on both his family's and his nations ill-gotten imperial history... the new textbooks are being re-written, the military budget supplanted, the stage is set for perhaps a 'blast from the past'... if not there, then perhaps in another area of our new Atlantean styled world domination... time will tell.... if there is enough left before the bells rung.

But this topic is on Bias... on China... which shouldn't be any different than anywhere else. If you don't support the American led empire, then any country not actively a part of it, takes on a different role by comparison, and the bigger and more powerful it is, the larger that role. China's engagement with our empire isn't as yet as direct as is Russia's, but that could change soon enough, so far it is has been mostly on the edges, be it Tibet, the Muslim West or through our allied interests in the South China Sea or up north with Japan... like 4DSTS, most of the 'work' is done through others whenever possible... like the Wonderful Wizard of Oz. China's current leadership is undergoing the usual 'consolidation' of power, something Russia has already finished, thanks to our actionns... again through others in the EU, Ukraine and surrounding territories. India is playing the same hand they always seem to play of attempting to remain neutral, like Switzerland in WW2... it keeps you in the game, but you pay the price of silence as a result, and not having a voice equals not having made a choice... something we do individually based on the subjective experience of our lives as people or civilizations... which leads to these little choices that transform our environment and all experiences in it that follow.... until we eventually are faced with the need to make The Choice... individually and as a people/civilization. Russia seems to find itself in this position a lot over its history, while China seems to be different... unlike Japan in its Meiji Era transformation utilizing what aspects of Western technology and education it deemed useful to arm itself for combat with those same Western powers that were intimidating it, China seemed to have fallen into the opium den and stayed there for a long time...under the evil magician's spell... which seems now to be wearing off... time to make a choice about who its friends are and who is not, especially as battle lines have been drawn and positions are being taken. Tibet is now just a side issue of its past under Mao and his attempt to colonize the weak areas around their territory, especially when still surrounded by Western imperial interests everywhere they look, then and now... same now as they look to continue in the South... only America seems to be in its way with the remnants of its ageing empire... 'out with the old, in with the new'. The oligarchs in each country will sway with the wind when it changes direction, most play both sides simultaneously anyway... like corporations here in the States. The only real difference between East and West historically seems much the same... whether power is up front and known or hidden behind masks, so beloved here in the West, and that seems mostly a question of ancient tribal impulses, not known for much change over the eons... ancient bias, seemingly locked into our DNA.

So, doesn't Sott's treatment in this regards seem to reflect these patterns? Most of what's I read on this topic/thread seems more to do with Tibet... which seems more of a personal bias by some and not really a comment on Sott's bias, which of course they have, or they wouldn't be making any comment at all worth a damn. If an entity doesn't have bias, they have yet to 'feel' their experience in life... be it a snail, as Laura has written about, or a human, or a Logos for that matter... 'as above, so below'.

 

[Niall]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

What if the CCP's ideologically-founded atheism, like the USSR's, has been rounded-out over time - through internal power struggles - towards a more nuanced understanding of people's spiritual needs? Whatever about the official status of religious or spiritual beliefs in China, the very fact that there's a relatively stable cohesion of 1.3 billion people speaks to there being common understanding among the Chinese of a national-cultural ethos.

Xi Launches Cultural Counter-Revolution To Restore Confucianism As China's Ideology

Huffington Post, 29 September 2015

Mao, who sought ferociously to rid Chinese society of its traditional Confucian roots during the Cultural Revolution, is surely turning in his glass sarcophagus in Tiananmen Square.

In a remarkable address last week to the International Confucian Association that met in Beijing to commemorate the 2,565th anniversary of Confucius' birth, Chinese President Xi Jinping extolled at length the ancient virtues of Confucius as the guiding light of modern China.

"The ideology and culture of today's China," Xi told the assembled scholars, "is a continuation and sublimation of traditional Chinese ideology and culture. To understand present-day China, to know the present-day Chinese, one must delve into the cultural bloodline of China, and accurately appreciate the cultural soil that nourishes the Chinese people."

"Confucianism," Xi continued, is key to "understanding the national characteristics of the Chinese as well as the historical roots of the spiritual world of the present-day Chinese. Confucianism has morphed with the times, and evolved in accordance with corresponding conditions, constantly refreshing itself while responding to demands of the times. This is why it has had such lasting vitality."

President Xi then went on to recite the key principles and ethics of Confucianism and explain how they should be applied not only to Chinese society, but also to relations among nations and cultures. In Xi's revival, traditional Confucian values are enlisted to promote cultivation of individual character, to fight corruption with the revived moral rectitude of officials and to co-exist peacefully through respect for civilizational differences while being open to learning from others.

Toward the end of his speech, Xi did mention Marxism, but only in the context of another influence from abroad that traditional culture has absorbed and synthesized according to China’s concrete realities.

Clearly, The Analects of Confucius is for Xi's Chinese Renaissance what The Little Red Book was for Mao's Cultural Revolution.

Below are selected excerpts from Xi's speech, translated into English for The WorldPost by China-US Focus. The whole speech can be found here.

PEACE IN THE MINDS OF MEN

I visited [the] headquarters of the UNESCO in March. The words engraved in multiple languages on a stone tablet in front of the main building impressed me deeply: "Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed." It makes a very good point. I believe it is crucially important for realizing peace to firmly establish the love for peace in people's minds.

The Chinese nation has always been peace-loving. Our love for peace is also deeply rooted in Confucianism.

Since ancient times, Chinese people have held in esteem these Confucian ideas preaching peace:

"Coordinate and seek harmony with all nations"

"Associating with the benevolent and befriending neighbors is a precious virtue of the state"

"Within the four seas, all men are brothers"

"A far-off relative is not as helpful as a near neighbor"

"Neighbors wish each other well, just as loved ones do to each other"

"A warlike state dies inevitably, no matter how big it is"

The love for peace has been embedded firmly in the spiritual world of the Chinese nation, and remains China's basic idea in handling international relations.

In short: Don't do unto others what you don't want others [to] do unto you.

CHINA WITH CONFUCIAN CHARACTERISTICS

The formulation and development of China's traditional culture, that of its core component -- intellectual achievements, in particular -- has roughly gone through the historical periods of pre-Qin contention of different schools of thought; the rise of Confucian classics studies in west and east Han dynasties; prevalence of metaphysics in Wei, Jin, south and north dynasties; the co-existence of Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism in Sui and Tang dynasties; and Neo-Confucianism in Song and Ming dynasties.

From this historical process lasting more than 2,000 years, we can see several characteristics.

First, Confucianism and other schools of thought in Chinese history have competed with and complemented each other, constituting unity of opposites. Despite its long dominant status, Confucianism has been in a state of harmonious co-existence with other theories.

Second, like other schools of thought that have existed in Chinese history, Confucianism has morphed with the times, and evolved in accordance with corresponding conditions, constantly refreshing itself while responding to demands of times. This is why it has had such lasting vitality.

Third, Confucianism and other schools of thought in Chinese history all adhered to the principle that theories must serve the management of state affairs and benefit real life. Confucianism has emphasized giving play to culture's educational and enlightening functions in cultivating worthy personalities, and combined the cultivation of individuals' and society's moral qualities with management of state affairs.

CONFUCIAN ETHICS FOR TODAY'S CHINA

In the present-day world, human civilization has made amazing progress both materially and spiritually. Material abundance, in particular, is beyond the wildest imaginations of ancient times.

Meanwhile, contemporary human beings face such outstanding problems as widening wealth gaps, endless greed for materialistic satisfaction and luxury, unrestrained extreme individualism, ever-degrading ethics, and increasing tension between man and nature.

Resolution of such conundrums not only entails utilization of the current wisdom and strength of mankind, but also calls for that of the wisdom and strength human beings have accumulated over time.

Some people of insight believe that the traditional culture of China, Confucianism included, contains important inspirations for solving the troubles facing us today. Such ideas include:

Following the intrinsic nature of matters and integrating nature and man;

- The whole world as one community based on equality.

- Persistent self-improvement and cultivation.

- Profound moral characters worthy of rich material reward.

- Serving the people's interests as the state's fundamental aim.

- Governing with moral principles and uprightness.

- Perpetual reform, eliminating obsolete practices and setting up fresh mechanisms, and advancing with the time.

- Adopting a down-to-earth attitude and seeking truth from facts, of making knowledge and theories meet society's practical needs, combining theory and practice, and practicing what one preaches.

- Drawing on collective wisdom and absorb all useful ideas.

- Governing with clean hands and engaging in public affairs diligently.

- Being frugal and faithful to moral principles and adopting strict self-discipline against extravagance.

- Restraint and appropriateness, seeking common ground while reserving differences, harmony but not sameness, and harmonious co-existence.

- Keeping in mind dangers and disasters in times of safety, destruction in times of survival, unrest in times of stability, and being prepared for danger in times of peace.

RESPECTING EACH OTHER'S CULTURE AND CIVILIZATION

Human civilizations have existed thousands of years. Each country, each nation has arrived at the present by taking over from the past and blazing new trails for the future. The world has become what it is today amid the exchanges and mingling between different civilizations. Promoting such exchanges and mingling as well as mutual learning and reference is an indispensable path toward a better world and better lives for people of all countries.

Properly treating civilizations of different countries and nations as well as traditional and contemporary cultures is a significant subject for us to explore. I think we should mainly stick to the following principles:

[list type=decimal]
[*] First, preserve diversity of the world's civilizations. "It is an objective truth that all things are different from one another." Diversity is a natural character of the universe. The world is always diverse in thousands of ways, and presenting dazzling colors and hues. The development of things and progress of the world will come to a stop once all things become homogeneous.

The civilization of each country and nation is rooted in its soil, with its own characteristics and virtues. We should preserve the diversity of civilizations of all countries and nations, enhance mutual communication, learning and reference, instead of mutual estrangement, exclusion, and even displacement.

Differences between the civilization of one's own country and that of others should be handled rationally, with the awareness that every civilization is unique.

We must seek common ground while reserving differences, learn from others to make up for one's deficiencies, and refrain from attacking or disparaging other civilizations. Don't feel displeased or try to transform, assimilate or even replace other civilizations when they are different from your own. History has repeatedly proven that any attempt to resolve differences among civilizations by compulsory means is doomed to fail and wreck havoc on civilizations.

History has repeatedly proven that any attempt to resolve differences among civilizations by compulsory means is doomed to fail and wreak havoc on civilizations.
[*] Second, respect civilizations of all countries and nations. Civilization, ideology and culture in particular, is the soul of a nation. If a country or nation does not cherish its own ideology and culture, if it loses its soul, no matter which country or which nation, it will not be able to stand on its own. A country or nation must recognize and respect others' ideology and culture while valuing and preserving its own.

Different modes of thought of different countries and nations are peculiar in their own ways, and there is no ideology or culture that is superior to others. Irrespective of its size and strength, each country's ideology and culture deserve to be recognized and respected.

All countries and nations should modestly learn and draw on the strength and quintessence of other civilizations. This is an important condition to upgrading its own cultural self-esteem, self-confidence and independence.
[*] Third, correctly conduct mutual learning and reference between civilizations. Civilizations become colorful thanks to exchanges, and rich because of mutual learning and reference. Any civilization, no matter which country or nation it originated from, is fluid and open.

This is an important rule for the spread and development of civilizations. Throughout its protracted evolution, Chinese civilization has assimilated rich nutrition through exchanges with others, and in return made great contributions to the progress of human civilizations.

The opening of the ancient Silk Road, the foreign envoys sent to China in the Sui and Tang dynasties, Fa Xian and Xuan Zang's westward pilgrimages for Buddhist scriptures, and Zheng He's seven sea-faring trips were all vivid examples of exchanges between Chinese and foreign civilizations.

Confucianism originated from China. But it has long spread to the rest of the world, becoming a part of human civilizations. "He who studies alone in the absence of peers ends up being poorly informed."

We should be ready to learn and borrow from all civilizations humanity has created, be they ancient Chinese, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Mesopotamian or Indian civilizations, or today's Asian, African, European, American, or Oceania civilizations, and actively absorb their beneficial elements.

We should make the fine cultural genes of all human civilizations adapt to and coordinate with contemporary cultures and present-day contexts, and advance and enrich the fine cultural spirit that transcends time and space and reaches across national boundaries.

Mutual learning and reference between civilizations should proceed from the reality of one's own country or nation, and be open and inclusive. However, such openness and inclusiveness doesn't mean to lap up information without digesting it, or to confuse right with wrong, but to discard the dross and retain the fine essence, to sift the true from the false.
[*] Fourth, treat cultural traditions scientifically. We can only open up the future when we keep history in mind. We can only innovate when we are good at inheriting. Traditional culture is the fountainhead of a country or nation's inheritance and development. Losing it will cut off the country or nation's spiritual lifeline.[/list]

WHERE DOES THE MARXISM FIT IN?

The ideals and struggles as well as the values and spiritual world of the Chinese people have always been deeply rooted in the fertile soil of Chinese traditional culture, and have constantly advanced and been renewed in step with the times.

Members of the Communist Party of China are Marxists, who uphold the scientific theories of Marxism, and adhere to and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics. But Chinese communists are neither historical nihilists, nor cultural nihilists. We always believe that the basic principles of Marxism must be closely married to the concrete reality of China, and that we should approach traditional native culture and cultures of all countries in a scientific manner and arm ourselves with all outstanding cultural achievements humanity has created.

 

[Mal7]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

What if the CCP's ideologically-founded atheism, like the USSR's, has been rounded-out over time - through internal power struggles - towards a more nuanced understanding of people's spiritual needs? Whatever about the official status of religious or spiritual beliefs in China, the very fact that there's a relatively stable cohesion of 1.3 billion people speaks to there being common understanding among the Chinese of a national-cultural ethos.

Xi Launches Cultural Counter-Revolution To Restore Confucianism As China's Ideology

History has repeatedly proven that any attempt to resolve differences among civilizations by compulsory means is doomed to fail and wreck havoc on civilizations.

History has repeatedly proven that any attempt to resolve differences among civilizations by compulsory means is doomed to fail and wreak havoc on civilizations

• Second, respect civilizations of all countries and nations. Civilization, ideology and culture in particular, is the soul of a nation. If a country or nation does not cherish its own ideology and culture, if it loses its soul, no matter which country or which nation, it will not be able to stand on its own. A country or nation must recognize and respect others' ideology and culture while valuing and preserving its own.

• 
  
  Thank you Niall, that is an excellent address by Xi Jinping.
  
  Last night I watched some videos about the Dorje Shugden controversy among Tibetan Buddhists. The Dorje Shugden form of Buddhist practice was condemned by the Dalai Lama in 1996. My conclusions after watching the videos are that this condemnation has caused large amounts of genuine distress and divisiveness among the Tibetan community. It is like a microcosm within Tibetan Buddhism of the same kind of religious persecution Tibetan Buddhism received from China in earlier decades. Although avowing democracy, the Dalai Lama's firm line on condemning Dorje Shugden, which has been taken up and rigidly adhered to by the Central Tibetan Administration (aka Tibetan government-in-exile), is an example of religious autocracy and intolerance, maintained by propaganda (e.g. that Dorje Shugden is promoted by China to attack the Dalai Lama).
  
  The Buddha and the C's have both said to question everything. Yet the Dalai Lama's position is such that when he decides something, many will feel they must not question his decision and must act accordingly, due to Buddhist vows (samaya) about never thinking badly of or doubting one's guru. . . so this element gives potential for easily causing much harm.
  
  This was a 2 hour discussion on the controversy held at the London School of Oriental and African Studies in 2014:
  
  _https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba-pdha1noE
  
  And this was a question-and-answer session held by the Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamsala in 2014:
  _https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYXVNFhvOVk
  
  Finally this is the Dalai Lama telling Tibetans in Varanasi, India to not practice Dorje Shugden:
  _https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhWRSFCtKhY
  
  I think the Chinese government's allegations that the Dalai Lama is a promoter and instigator of the violent protests and self-immolations by some Tibetans are not true. But perhaps it is karmic justice that he receives these allegations, after his Gelugpa sect come to political dominance within Tibet in the 16th century with the aid of the military power of the Mongols.
  
  

  We should be ready to learn and borrow from all civilizations humanity has created, be they ancient Chinese, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Mesopotamian or Indian civilizations, or today's Asian, African, European, American, or Oceania civilizations, and actively absorb their beneficial elements.
  
  We should make the fine cultural genes of all human civilizations adapt to and coordinate with contemporary cultures and present-day contexts, and advance and enrich the fine cultural spirit that transcends time and space and reaches across national boundaries.
  
  Mutual learning and reference between civilizations should proceed from the reality of one's own country or nation, and be open and inclusive. However, such openness and inclusiveness doesn't mean to lap up information without digesting it, or to confuse right with wrong, but to discard the dross and retain the fine essence, to sift the true from the false.
  
  4. Fourth, treat cultural traditions scientifically. We can only open up the future when we keep history in mind. We can only innovate when we are good at inheriting. Traditional culture is the fountainhead of a country or nation's inheritance and development. Losing it will cut off the country or nation's spiritual lifeline.
  
  [. . .] we should approach traditional native culture and cultures of all countries in a scientific manner and arm ourselves with all outstanding cultural achievements humanity has created.

  - Xi Jinping.
  
  Putting personality politics concerning the Dalai Lama as an individual aside, I think Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism make important cultural contributions to understanding the world and the inner workings of the mind. These should be explored in an objective and scientific manner. Buddhist theories shouldn't be treated as sacrosanct and unquestionable, but things that can be studied and explored by psychologists and scientists, as exemplified in the approach taken by e.g. Daniel Goleman and others at the 2000 "Mind and Life" meeting, published in Destructive Emotions and How We Can Overcome Them: A Dialogue with the Dalai Lama Narrated by Daniel Goleman.

 

[obyvatel]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

• [quote author=Mal7]
  Putting personality politics concerning the Dalai Lama as an individual aside, I think Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism make important cultural contributions to understanding the world and the inner workings of the mind. These should be explored in an objective and scientific manner. Buddhist theories shouldn't be treated as sacrosanct and unquestionable, but things that can be studied and explored by psychologists and scientists, as exemplified in the approach taken by e.g. Daniel Goleman and others at the 2000 "Mind and Life" meeting, published in Destructive Emotions and How We Can Overcome Them: A Dialogue with the Dalai Lama Narrated by Daniel Goleman.

[/quote]

Tibetan Buddhism is the most studied and commented on religious tradition from a western scientific standpoint. Tibetan meditators have been put under MRI scanners and the tenets of their faith have been assiduously studied for psychotherapeutic applications. To see the number of books published on these lines - one can go to amazon.com and put "Buddhism Psychology" in the search string.

Your point about "putting the personality politics" of the Dalai Lama aside and then suggesting "Destructive Emotions and How We Can Overcome Them: A Dialogue with the Dalai Lama Narrated by Daniel Goleman", is interesting. From generally available data, one may perhaps come to the tentative rational conclusion that the Dalai Lama himself, through his lifetime practice, has overcome destructive emotions. Good for him. But what has that done to his instrument of reading reality? What does his public comments on the perpetrators of the Iraq war as well as the Israeli-Palestinian "conflict" suggest? Do you think that the man and his teachings should be treated separately? I do not think that I am "demanding perfection" from a teacher here. If he with all his compassion, inner knowledge and inner peace is unable to see or accept what is obvious to a large number of common people of the planet, then it raises the question- how useful is the type of training and approach advocated by him for the purpose of understanding the world?

Buddhism, like other religions, developed in a certain age and environment and has gone through many twists and turns. To me what is important is not an abstract idealized image of Buddhism which shines untainted ever brightly in a cloudless sky while human teachers with their human flaws and foibles come and go. What is important is the living tradition that is practiced today, embodied by the teachers and practitioners. In other words, using "by their fruits you will know them" is an useful idea to keep in mind - osit.

Personally I have benefited from some ideas coming from Buddhist perspective - specifically related to paying attention. When you say that "Buddhist theories shouldn't be treated as sacrosanct and unquestionable" I would agree wholeheartedly.

You may find the discussion in this thread relevant in this context.

 

[Siberia]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

Yesterday My Planet website published a new article in Russian about Tibet. The website has nothing to do with politics and is fully devoted to travelling reports, so the author mostly described the natural beauty of Tibet and the hardships of mount tourism. But he also mentioned China a little:

In the recent years, intensive landscaping efforts have been made in Tibet: entire groves of trees are being planted along the roads. China invests enormous amounts of money into this territory, raising the level of living, building roads and restoring temples. As compared to my previous visit here, when the rail road was yet under construction, the contrast is huge.

 

[Mal7]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

Your point about "putting the personality politics" of the Dalai Lama aside and then suggesting "Destructive Emotions and How We Can Overcome Them: A Dialogue with the Dalai Lama Narrated by Daniel Goleman", is interesting. From generally available data, one may perhaps come to the tentative rational conclusion that the Dalai Lama himself, through his lifetime practice, has overcome destructive emotions. Good for him. But what has that done to his instrument of reading reality? What does his public comments on the perpetrators of the Iraq war as well as the Israeli-Palestinian "conflict" suggest? Do you think that the man and his teachings should be treated separately? I do not think that I am "demanding perfection" from a teacher here. If he with all his compassion, inner knowledge and inner peace is unable to see or accept what is obvious to a large number of common people of the planet, then it raises the question- how useful is the type of training and approach advocated by him for the purpose of understanding the world?

From the Dalai Lama's suggestion that the Israelis are doing a wonderful job of keeping their lands green and irrigated, and that the Palestinians with their dry brown lands have much to learn from him in that regard, I would say his instrument of reading reality has definitely become obscured. Speaking more generally of people in the West who have taken up some form of Buddhism, it does often seem to present a similar syndrome to that produced by those New Age teachings of Peace and Love that promote creating your own reality, and not thinking of bad stuff lest you attract it. That is to say, while followers may achieve self-calming (not necessarily a good thing), or experience a "blissful" state, odds are they are also becoming blissfully ignorant.

Buddhism, like other religions, developed in a certain age and environment and has gone through many twists and turns. To me what is important is not an abstract idealized image of Buddhism which shines untainted ever brightly in a cloudless sky while human teachers with their human flaws and foibles come and go. What is important is the living tradition that is practiced today, embodied by the teachers and practitioners. In other words, using "by their fruits you will know them" is an useful idea to keep in mind - osit.

I somewhat disagree that Buddhism, considered as what I have called a "cultural contribution", should be evaluated principally by the fruits it has produced in terms of living teachers and practitioners. Tibetan Buddhism is I think a religion that looks back very much backwards to its origins in Mahayana Buddhism as it developed in India during the time of the Buddhist universities like Nalanda and Vikramasila during the 10th to 12 centuries AD, and also backwards to the writings of early Tibetan commentators from earlier centuries, like e.g. Tsongkhapa of the the 14-15th centuries AD. So while modern psychology has a concept of progress and development, e.g. in 10 years time we will know more than we do today about how this or that aspect of how the mind works, in Tibetan Buddhism it is often OSIT the opposite way of thinking, e.g. we had great expositors of our doctrine many centuries ago, and while there have been new commentaries and analyses with each passing century in our living tradition, we are principally concerned with preserving that heritage from the past. (I think the Dalai Lama is an exception to this trend, in that he is often saying Buddhism should be updated where it conflicts with modern scientific discoveries.)

One book of Tibetan Buddhism I have found interesting for example is Mind Training: The Great Collection, compiled by Shonu Gyalchok and Konchok Gyaltsen, translated and edited by Thupten Jinpa(Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2005). Shonu Gyalchok and Konchok Gyaltsen compiled the book in the 15th century AD, from texts produced from the 11th to 15th centuries AD. Some of the ideas in it about ways to avoid "self-cherishing" and to increase "thinking-of-others" I find similar to ideas of being internally or externally considerate. The book is in a series "Library of Tibetan Classics", which is predominantly made up works from centuries preceding the 20th, and only recently translated into English. I think these can be studied for ideas of merit or intrinsic interest in the same way one might find ideas of merit in the works of the Stoics or Cynics, regardless of whether the Stoic tradition has survived as an intact lineage to the present day.

It is not necessary for our present purpose to reiterate the history of the rise of Mahayana Buddhism in India. Still it is necessary for us to remember that its departure from the older form of Buddhism was a radical one.
[. . .]
As is only to be expected, to explain and defend this new form of faith there came into being an extensive literature which in general is referred to as the Mahayana-sutras [. . .]
Another important characteristic of the Mahayana-sutras is the glorification of the texts themselves, the 'enumeration of the merits and advantages which one gains by propagating and honouring' these. This 'bibliotary . . . conspicuous in the texts themselves' accounts for the ceremonial worship of the books in Nepal and Tibet.

Thus it was Buddhism in its new form and as embodied in these highly mythological texts with bibliotary inherent in them that reached Tibet. The Tibetan historians, being above all ardent Buddhists, take everything about this new religion with utmost seriousness. The cosmology etc. with which they usually open the history of Tibet, far from being manufactured by the Tibetans themselves or being borrowed from Bon mythology, are only evidences of how much Tibetan historiography is saturated with a veneration for Mahayana Buddhism.

- from the chapter "How the Tibetans tell their own History", in Atisa and Tibet: Life and Works of Dipamkara Srijnana in relation to the History and Religion of Tibet by Alaka Chattopadhyaya (Calcutta: Indian Studies - Past & Present, 1967).

My apologies for straying from the topic of the original thread title.

 

[luc]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

I wonder if there is some archetypal desire or wish to believe in a "strong leader", who rules over the people in the best way possible given the imperfect and factional world we live in. This leader might perform actions that seem morally questionable, but really they are the best option possible, because the leader can see deep into the dynamics of the situation and is able to realize the best path to take.

Maybe it's because those who responded know better about social/crowd psychology than the average people? Do you know anything about authoritarian followers who make up of 50% of the population? Have you read "The Crowd; study of the popular mind"?

I second Bobo08's advice: Please read "The Crowd". The thing is, democracy is an illusion and a farce, but it has been brainwashed into us Westerners to such an extend that most people are literally unable to consider any different idea on how people could organize themselves. And so they mechanically think of the "brutal dictatorship" as the only alternative to their beloved "democracy", when in fact, democracy IS a brutal dictatorship. fwiw.

 

[Mal7]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

I second Bobo08's advice: Please read "The Crowd". The thing is, democracy is an illusion and a farce, but it has been brainwashed into us Westerners to such an extend that most people are literally unable to consider any different idea on how people could organize themselves. And so they mechanically think of the "brutal dictatorship" as the only alternative to their beloved "democracy", when in fact, democracy IS a brutal dictatorship. fwiw.

I don't think Gustave Le Bon's The Crowd particularly advocates dictatorship as being a better form of government than democracy. Rather it points out that whatever the form of government, the same dynamics of leaders and crowds are in play. A democracy is not made up of many individuals rationally calculating in their own or their country's best self-interest, but rather is made up of a crowd that will follow a popular leader because of their prestige and ability to sway the crowd-mind on a sub-rational, somewhat hypnotic level using slogans and simple ideas.

The leader is not necessarily the most intelligent or far-sighted person:

A leader is seldom in advance of public opinion; almost always all he does is to follow it and to espouse all its errors.
[. . .]
On occasion, the leader may be intelligent and highly educated, but the possession of these qualities does him, as a rule, more harm than good. By showing how complex things are, by allowing of explanation and promoting comprehension, intelligence always renders is owner indulgent, and blunts, in a large measure, that intensity and violence of conviction needful for apostles. The great leaders of crowds of all ages, and those of the Revolution in particular, have been of lamentably narrow intellect; while it is precisely those whose intelligence has been the most restricted who have exercised the greatest influence.

Although Le Bon's view of human civilizations seems to be that they will inevitably go through a cyclic process of rising and then decaying, he does also seem to think a parliamentary assembly (of elected officials) is the least bad form of government:

In spite of all the difficulties attending their working, parliamentary assemblies are the best form of government mankind has discovered as yet, and more especially the best means it has found to escape the yoke of personal tyrannies. They constitute assuredly the ideal government at any rate for philosophers, thinkers, writers, artists, and learned men [. . .]

Le Bon writes that the parliamentary assembly when it meets would itself operate as a crowd, and the best laws it passes would be the product of individual effort, rather than the group effort of the assembly in session. He also would seem to favour smaller government and fewer laws restricting personal liberties.

Moreover, in reality they [parliamentary assemblies] only present two serious dangers, one being inevitable financial waste, and the other the progressive restriction of the liberty of the individual.

- quotations all from The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind by Gustave Le Bon.

 

[luc]

Re: Pro-China bias on SOTT?

Hi Mal7,

thanks for pointing out some details of Le Bon's take on all this.

I don't think Gustave Le Bon's The Crowd particularly advocates dictatorship as being a better form of government than democracy. Rather it points out that whatever the form of government, the same dynamics of leaders and crowds are in play. A democracy is not made up of many individuals rationally calculating in their own or their country's best self-interest, but rather is made up of a crowd that will follow a popular leader because of their prestige and ability to sway the crowd-mind on a sub-rational, somewhat hypnotic level using slogans and simple ideas.

I don't think that Le Bon favors a dictatorship either. The point I was trying to make is that a "western democracy" is really just a rule of the mob, brainwashed by the elite. I think Le Bon's book can help to understand these dynamics in light of what is happening today, and I cannot help but come to the conclusion that democracy as a concept is fundamentally flawed. And the problem I think is, as I said, that people usually cannot see an alternative - we've been brainwashed into thinking that democracy is the best system and everything else is brutal tyranny. All the while it's so obvious that we live in a world of horror, dominated by "democracies"!

Or take Russia for example. One could argue that it is more "autocratic" than some of the western democracies. After all, the government has some direct control over the media, there are restraints in business etc., and Putin certainly has a lot of power. But isn't this a good thing? To control the media means that the western pathocrats don't take over the media and use it to brainwash the "mob". To control business means to withstand the western oligarchies. To have real power means that you can do those things, rather than take orders from some far-away elite. Of course, it all depends on what you do with that power!

Or take this forum. What would happen if every member had equal voting rights, could elect moderators, assemblies, ambassadors and presidents etc.? Of course, it would never work.

Again, my point is that as always, the devil is in the details and there is no black and white - meaning there are alternatives to democracy, and "not-a-democracy" doesn't necessarily mean "brutal dictatorship". But that seems to be the dominant thinking when it comes to Russia, China, Cuba etc.

The leader is not necessarily the most intelligent or far-sighted person:

A leader is seldom in advance of public opinion; almost always all he does is to follow it and to espouse all its errors.
[. . .]
On occasion, the leader may be intelligent and highly educated, but the possession of these qualities does him, as a rule, more harm than good. By showing how complex things are, by allowing of explanation and promoting comprehension, intelligence always renders is owner indulgent, and blunts, in a large measure, that intensity and violence of conviction needful for apostles. The great leaders of crowds of all ages, and those of the Revolution in particular, have been of lamentably narrow intellect; while it is precisely those whose intelligence has been the most restricted who have exercised the greatest influence.

Yeah, I remember that bit - I think Le Bon is spot on in that usually, the "mob leaders" are not that intelligent and that a rational approach can indeed hinder the process of "hypnotizing" a mob. However, I don't think it's impossible to have great leaders - think Putin or Cesar. Rather, I think it would be interesting to think about how a system would look like that would strongly favor great leaders. Quite obviously, western democracy doesn't produce great leaders, to say the least.