> In Myanmar, both monks and laypersons twisted the faith into a shield for ethnic violence, targeting the Rohingya minority under the guise of protecting Buddhism from an “Islamic threat.” Driven by historical grievances, xenophobic myths, and a fervent need to guard Myanmar’s “Buddhist identity,” these factions have justified persecution, citizenship denial, and outright brutality—all while draped in saffron robes.
The violence against the Rohingyas is terrible and it's horrible to see Buddhism used as a cover. Japan did a similar thing under WW2 where Zen institutions were "encouraged" to support the war and preach that it was moral and religious.
With that said, the fears are not unjustified. Indonesia was once a bastion of Buddhism and Buddhist thought, now it's a majority Muslim country. In Afghanistan, the Taliban were blowing up ancient Buddhist monuments before 9/11.
Overall this article struck me as maybe well-intentioned but totally unrealistic.
It's a very idealistic way of looking at things. A more materialist analysis would posit cultural trappings are just cover for actions people want to do anyway like you allude to
In retrospect, it seems like it was a bad idea for Western countries to assume that things were going to remain peaceful after the fall of the USSR. Glad to see the threat of war being taken seriously.
Unfortunately it not "just" about war now. The changing climate has also significantly increased the risk for major disruptions on social services such as fresh water supply, electricity, sanitation, and roads/track. We now also need to add those to the list of real risks to prepare for.
This reminds me of Department of Defense Climate Risk Analysis from three years ago where they remind us that there will be increased international conflicts due to the effects of climate change:
Interesting (and very plain, understandable, commonsensical) - but of course some running conflicts are not not strongly related to climate change.
Of course, when Niall Ferguson spoke, it looked at the contingency: he sees a possibility of catastrophic consequences that may come much earlier than the climatic "Armageddon". (Well, in some news peices today they spoke about "before Xmas"... It makes the order of events very definite.)
What "assumption" are you talking about? There has been continuous work (even if some of it mistaken) to reduce the chances of that happening.
Definitely some elements of some western countries are guilty of what you're alleging, but I don't think enough to justify saying the countries themselves did.
I never understood why the west didn’t help more with the legitimate government forces in Russia, even if it meant more spies and what not. It was clearly crumbling and that’s when stuff like crime and corruption breed, even more so than in the old USSR, but we just sat back and patted ourselves on the back instead of seeking out allies in Russia.
The West did prop up Yeltsin and his insane economic plan, because he was a useful idiot, and then at the eleventh hour, he named Putin his successor, just before he resigned due to... Taking a bribe of a few thousand dollars. Apparently (in a society full of grifters), that was enough to burn him, not attacking parliament with artillery and tanks and killing 200 people.
The problem wasn't lack of government power, the problem was that shock therapy was a fucking awful way to handle the transition, that Yeltsin was a shitty autocrat who carried out a successful, bloody coup (Which didn't stop him from enjoying Western support - which would overlook any autocratic power grab, as long as Russia under him underwent shock therapy. Friggin' Bill Clinton campaigned for him), and that NATO turned from a purely defensive alliance to an offensive alliance and started acting unilaterally in what Russia felt was it's sphere of influence. (After a few years of good relations and bilateral collaboration.)
All that turned out to be a great way to rebuild an antagonistic relationship.
If you really want to point fingers at, though, I suppose you could blame Gorbachev for failing to keep the USSR intact and resigning, handing over power to assholes like Yeltsin. Gorbachev was a far better statesman and general human being than his successors were.
And look how bare the arsenals have become to the point where supporting Ukraine has become difficult. European NATO is dependent on a US that starting Jan 20 will sit this one out.
This is awesome. Cool to see the history told this way.
I would also encourage folks to seek out photos/footage of the concentration camps in Europe as well as the aftermath of the atomic bombings in Japan. When you see the unsanitized horror it really gives you pause that people did this to each other. And why war is worth trying to prevent.
I think the most important thing for its survival is it needs young contributors who care and thus can one day take over, which seems difficult to do consistently.
It will keep evolving until it's faced with a situation where it just can't move on the correct direction. Probably because of some social reason, not a technical one.
It's hard to imagine this happening to Linux in particular because it's ridiculously flexible. But things always change.
I can't remember the name of it, but over a decade ago I saw something like this - it was a single Linux server shared by (I think) hundreds of people. Really trying to do the multi-user paradigm. They advertised it as a private kind of social network, it was invite-only and I think you had to pay to help keep the server lights on.
Hopefully by posting something incorrect, A Person On The Internet Who Knows Better will come along and provide the correct details. :)
OK maybe I don't know how to do this right. I do that for automated systems, but do you filter entire conversations? Like, I'm on some random email thread, and dozens of people are replying. Making a rule feels pretty heavyweight and isn't quick (at least in Outlook).
was in greece for three months. the quality of the BASIC fruits and vegetables at the regular local market down the street from where I was staying was on par with wholefoods. It was surreal how cheap it was to eat HEALTHY.
Almost any ethnic grocery store will do since they cater to immigrant communities that are likely to be lower income. Here in SoCal some are cheaper than others but they're all way cheaper than Ralphs/Vons/Trader Joes/Costco/etc (I don't shop at WalMart so I'm not sure how they compare)
There are also native stores that are increasingly entering into low cost produce like Grocery Outlet and then there are the usual like Food4Less but they tend to eventually move upmarket.
The violence against the Rohingyas is terrible and it's horrible to see Buddhism used as a cover. Japan did a similar thing under WW2 where Zen institutions were "encouraged" to support the war and preach that it was moral and religious.
With that said, the fears are not unjustified. Indonesia was once a bastion of Buddhism and Buddhist thought, now it's a majority Muslim country. In Afghanistan, the Taliban were blowing up ancient Buddhist monuments before 9/11.
Overall this article struck me as maybe well-intentioned but totally unrealistic.