That’s it! This time they’ve gone too far! So, now the Dalai Lama is the face of intolerance and sexism? Oh lord! Just like His Holiness, I’m a man without a country.
Have I said liberals suck?
In a recent BBC interview in which the sole purpose seemed to be “gotcha” journalism, the Dalai Lama said some things that have my purist progressive compatriots up in arms. The problem, of course, is that most folks fail to understand His Holiness harbors a wonderful sense of humor and they have no clue what Zen Buddhism is really all about.
When asked about the possibility of a female Dalai Lama, His Holiness laughingly replied, “If female Dalai Lama comes, then [she] should be more attractive.” When further pressed, he did admit that statement could be construed as an objectification of women.
First, he was having a little fun at his own expense, and second, given the centuries old male dominated Dalai Lama field, he was making the point that a female successor would need every possible advantage to succeed in that role.
I know liberals like to take offense and fear the truth, but that doesn’t change the fact that males tend to respond better to attractive females.
But the comment that really got His Holiness in hot water were those regarding the tide of African refugees flooding into Europe.
He said that while Europe should certainly take in these migrants, it should be only to offer them education and training so that they can better succeed upon returning to “their own land.” He added that only “a limited number” should be allowed to stay on the continent.
“The whole Europe [will] eventually become Muslim country? Impossible. Or African country? Also impossible,” the Dalai Lama said, “It’s better to keep Europe for Europeans.”
As you might imagine, European liberals’ heads collective exploded after he made those statements, but while the U.S., a nation of immigrants, is more than disingenuous when it comes to immigration policy, Europe is under no such karmic obligation.
Perhaps those countries that colonized Africa should shoulder some responsibility for the mess they created, but that’s about as far as it goes. That Statue of Liberty plaque notwithstanding, no country, no matter how prosperous, can simply fling open their doors and let everyone in.
So, His Holiness is right, short of the moral imperative to shelter war and genocide victims, the only way stability will come to Africa if good people stay home and work to change the system from within.
And his “keep Europe for Europeans” declaration demonstrated a clear understanding of the European “culture.”
Americans tend to forget that, by any chronological standard, our country is a young one with a generally homogeneous population. Our similarly homogeneous culture, which is globally dominant, is also incredibly fluid. To its credit, the U.S., has rapidly assimilated every immigrant group from the Irish, to the Chinese, to the Central Americans.
But the same cannot be said about Europe where the cultural underpinnings have existed for millennia – not just a scant two centuries.
We Midwesterners may have occasional trouble understanding our southern brothers and sisters, but during a two week stay in Italy, a nation of just 60 million, I discovered it’s actually three separate countries. There’s the Milanese in the north, the Romans in the center, and the Neapolitans in the south. They generally despise each other and barely speak the same language.
There are separatist movements in Spain, the French are demonstrably xenophobic, England revolves around tradition, the eastern European countries continue to recover from communism, and the Greeks date back to pre-biblical times.
So, after sparsely populated and lily-white Sweden admitted 1.3 million Middle Eastern and African asylum seekers, it turned into an unmitigated disaster. A ’60 Minutes’ film crew was assaulted while covering the story, the immigrants have become a massive drain on the generous Swedish social safety net, and perhaps because of religious differences and an underlying Scandinavian bigotry, there’s no effort by either side to assimilate these new citizens, which means the situation is only going to get worse.
Meanwhile, France is having real difficulty dealing with their primarily Muslim immigrant population who’ve shown no willingness to adapt to their new homeland. That country went as far as banning overtly religious symbols in an effort to rein in the widening schism.
So, His Holiness was dead on in his short analysis of the European migrant situation.
But taking a cue from their conservative counterparts – and always on the prowl to take offense – liberals excoriated the Dalai Lama because it’s so much easier than taking the time to truly understand the issues he correctly addressed.
The bottom line is, if in their pursuit of ideological purity and shaming anyone who isn’t, progressives insist on attacking folks like the Dalai Lama, not only does that bode poorly for our 2020 elections, but, just like a black hole, the liberal movement will eventually collapse under its own weight.