While looking into the story of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan situation, I noticed an interesting piece on Salon.com by Christopher Hitchens linked to from the Wikipedia entry.

This piece is quite critical of the Dalai Lama, having read it and few other pieces by Christopher I’m becoming convinced that he’s performing us all a great service. I find that he is critical of media and public figures, I think that given the way we tend to build up and idolise public figures we need someone playing Devils Advocate to drag them back down off the pedestal.

The problem with building up a person (public figure or not) to huge adoration is that when the things about them that we didn’t previously know become known the adoration swings the other way and people start to feel just as strongly, but negatively.

It’s as if we forget that they are simply human beings with the same imperfections and flaws and foibles as us. I know there’s a sentiment that seems to think that because they’re in the public eye they should somehow be perfect; well sorry, get real, these people are humans too. Why are we so surprised when we find that out?

The problem I have with the adulation these people receive, is that people would be much better off focussing on their own problems and spiritual practices; mainly because, while the opinions of spiritual leaders and many celebrities and politicians are useful and helpful, ultimately we have to settle on our own answers.  If you’re slavishly following the opinions of another person over your own, who controls your development and ultimately your destiny? Not you, that’s for sure.

Or as the Buddha put it before his death:

“Be a light unto yourself; betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth. Look not for refuge to anyone besides yourselves.”

It seems that the Olympic flame’s journey has been hindered by protesters, see the BBC coverage for more details.

I’m of the opinion that these protests are needed in order to send a message to China about it’s Human Rights record and it’s position with regard to Tibet.  However I don’t agree with the scuffles and people trying to grab the torch, it’s important that we recognise that violence has no place in this protest.

It’s interesting to see that people are more willing to speak out and I think that there is a tendency when faced with situations and places that are not agreeable to us, that we forget that we do have the ability to protest and take appropriate action ourselves, not just rely on the government to do it.  This emphasis on the ability of the individual to take action for themselves is a fundamental part of Buddhism, more on that another time.

I noticed today that the subject of religion in UK schools has hit the news again, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) as suggested that religious figures could visit schools and that schools could have prayer rooms.

From the Times:

“Imams, rabbis, priests and preachers from other faiths could be invited into state schools to provide religious instruction to pupils who want it, under controversial reforms to faith education.

The National Union of Teachers (NUT) is also recommending that schools provide “private prayer space” for pupils of all faiths, recognise the holy days of world religions, allow school uniforms and food to reflect “religious requirements” and turn the daily act of a worship in schools into “inclusive school assemblies”.”

I have to say I don’t agree, my own view is that the trappings of religion have no place whatsoever in state schools.  The education and environment in state schools should be entirely secular and practical in nature, in addition I feel that if children are to be taught about their religion then it should be put in context with other faiths and religious themes should be taught from a wholly neutral standpoint.

Or maybe the real reason that UK religious leaders have been pushing this line with the NUT is that when you do teach religions side by side, objectively, the result might be secularism or a person finding (as I have) that an individual, personalised, approach is more satisfying that precooked dogma.

I was given the heads up on this very interesting short film a little while ago and finally got round to watching it the other day, it’s certainly worth the 20 or so minutes it takes to run.

It covers our consumer culture, the origins and processes and a possible solution to our predicament.  I saw a strong case for ethical shopping in there and this film has started me thinking about the way I shop and the consequences of that.

Take a look at The Story of Stuff, oh if you’re using Firefox and NoScript, you’ll need to enable scripts for the site.

I was wandering Google news recently, when I noticed that our very own Prince Andrew has thrown his hat into the ring over the post war handling of Iraq.  Criticising the way it’s all been allowed to fall apart.

I’m not going to go into the for and againsts of post war Iraq or even whether we should be in there at all, this blog is usually noticeably silent on current affairs these days.  That’s intentional, but I will say that my view tends to be that how we got here is not at present as important as where we go from here.  Or equally in this case how frankly and openly we discuss it, and are allowed to.

That’s why I think Andrew was right to say what he did, the actual content could be taken as being British arrogance and he’s come in for a lot of  flak in some areas of the UK press, I won’t go into that either.  My point is that there is an underlying message there, in between the lines;  It goes like this: “You’ve screwed up.  You’ve ruined a nation and condemned them to suffer years of fear and strife.  Every civilian death in Iraq is on your heads.”  My own additional comment is that this mess is not going to stay nice and confined in the Middle East, it’s going to spread and it already has.

Whatever your view on Andrew himself, the fact remains that it’s about time someone in the establishment gave voice to a deep discontent that the people in charge seem to be happy to ignore.

Does anyone else avoid watching the mainstream news outlets these days? There’s very rarely any good news to be seen, I’ve been looking at some of the more positive news outlets and the smaller services and they seem to be covering a lot of things that the mainstream media don’t touch.

This is something I’d noticed a while ago, but I wasn’t blogging at the time. It’s amazing the stuff that gets ignored by the mainstream media. At the camp for climate change that happened near Heathrow a month or two back, there were incidents of the police using some fairly heavy handed tactics against unarmed protesters, yet this was not even touched on in the mainstream media.  I remember seeing coverage of the event in the press that was in fact hostile to the camp and it’s aims.

That started me thinking, it’s as if the media, at least in some parts, seems to be promoting (or spinning) a particular view of the world. They have a small area of interest, which doesn’t seem to include anything that might challenge the status quo world view, or force people to stop and think.

I think we have to consider the last teaching of The Buddha:

“Therefore, be islands unto yourselves. Be your own refuge. Have recourse to none else for refuge. Hold fast to the Dharma as an island. Hold fast to the Dharma as a refuge. Resort to no other refuge. Whosoever, either now or after I am gone, shall be islands unto themselves, refuges unto themselves, shall seek no external refuge,it is they, among my disciples who shall reach the very topmost height! But they must be keen to progress.”

Essentially we have to judge for ourselves and remember that we, and only we, are the final authority, we decide what is newsworthy. To allow mainstream media to do this for us is to abdicate that responsibility to others, but that in no way absolves us of the responsibility, we chose to give it away. Personally, I find that my RSS feed aggregator is my trusty ally in keeping informed.

I’ve placed a couple of links to positive news sites on my links page, and I’ll update it with links to alternate news sources as soon as I get the time.

I was reading an interesting article by Cory Doctorow and as I know a few folks on Facebook and other such sites, I thought I’d link to the article here.

It’s an interesting read and I have to say I can certainly see his point, though he doesn’t cover the use of Facebook and other social sites for spamming.  I know I had to deal with spam friend requests on MySpace, and I expect to have to do the same with Facebook in the fullness of time.

It makes you question, as I have been, the exact amount of quality Facebook adds to a persons experience in cyberspace.