Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Idiot Compassion
American Thinker ^ | June 06, 2007 | Ralph Alter

Posted on 06/06/2007 1:17:58 AM PDT by neverdem

The term "bleeding-heart liberal" has been bandied about for years, in an effort to illustrate the faux or at least hyperbolic sense of compassion attributed to those on the left.  The lefties in America and Europe would like to be known as those who care, unless you happen to be a Bible-following Christian, a conservative or a fetus.

The information age has facilitated the dissemination of all things cultural, spiritual and intellectual.  One of the most important developments in the West has been the study and practice of Eastern religions and "ways."  Zen Buddhism, for instance, is thought of by those who practice it, as a way rather than a religion.  These religions and ways, particularly Buddhism, are thought of as the fonts of compassion.   Buddhists are thought to be unwilling to harm even a mosquito.  Hence the occasional story about a temple over-run with rats or monkeys because the attendant monks are unwilling to harm these creatures.  They believe that the rodents or simians have as much right to their sacred spaces as any other being.

The most intriguing and brilliant analyst of the world history of spiritual practice and the melding of East and West today is undoubtedly Ken Wilber.  Wilber`s insight into Buddhism in general and compassion in particular is unmatched in the West.  ( Read A Brief History of Everything, for instance.) In One Taste, Wilber responds to a student's question about compassion with an illuminating view: 
"[Most] confusion... in spiritual circles ....comes from confusing compassion with idiot compassion." 
This term was first used by Chogyam Trungpa, a Tibetan Rinpoche who helped bring Buddhism to the West in the 70`s.  Wilber continues:
"Idiot compassion" thinks it is being kind, but it's really being cruel.  If you have an alcoholic friend and you know that one more drink might kill him, and yet he begs you for a drink, does real compassion say that you should give it to him?  After all, to be kind you should give him what he wants, right?  Giving him the drink would therefore show compassion, yes?  No. Absolutely not.

"Real compassion includes wisdom and so it makes judgments of care and concern; it says some things are good, and some things are bad, and I will choose to act only on those things that are informed by wisdom and care."
Of course, here Wilber illuminates the missing ingredient in liberal "compassion."  The world, viewed through the liberal's gray colored, politically-correct glasses, makes no discerning judgments, or at least incorrect ones.  Hence, we get addle-brained protesters picketing to save the lives of serial killers on death row or human shields willing to give up their lives to protect suicide bomber cults and Islamic terrorists.   Since all killing is bad, it must be bad to kill Islamic terrorists or convicted murderers.  This idiot view, foregoes the greater good and lapses into solipsism.

The biographies of the Buddha reveal that in one of his early incarnations, he met a murderer of 1000's of men.  Acting correctly and with compassion for all sentient beings, the Buddha's incarnation killed the murderer to prevent additional suffering.  That  is true compassion!

The "compassionate" left would rather have us believe that the detainees at Guantanamo, the murderers and rapists in our prisons, the violent Palestinians and other Islamo-fascists are the rightful and primary objects of our care and concern.  
It's time we revealed this sham pretension of compassion for what it is:  a reckless disregard for reason and judgment, disguised in the touchy-feely cover of political correctness.  When you spot liberals pretending compassion under the guise of idiot compassion, out them! 

True compassion offers help even for the idiots!

Ralph Alter is a real estate broker and student of Buddhism from Carmel, Indiana.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: buddha; buddhism; buddhist; compassion; doctrineofdemons; faith; liberalism; moralabsolutes; moraljudgment; moralrelativism; paganism; pagans; welfare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

1 posted on 06/06/2007 1:18:00 AM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Wanna bet we will see this column printed in the “Faith & Religion” section of any west coast newspapers?


2 posted on 06/06/2007 1:25:02 AM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rainbow sprinkles

Buddhism ping.


3 posted on 06/06/2007 1:31:16 AM PDT by Slings and Arrows ("I AM A SEXY SHOELESS GOD OF WAR!!!" --http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0439.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Idiot compassion is really a love of evil or at best a tolerance for it. Nothing much has changed since the Hebrew prophets decried moral relativism thousands of years ago. An informed mind recognizes the necessity of making a moral judgment. Its necessary to the good order and continued health of civilization itself. Otherwise it simply disintegrates if no standards exist to hold it up. We keep having to relearn, at times painfully, the lessons of ancient wisdom. They are there for our benefit.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

4 posted on 06/06/2007 1:45:11 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem


VIET NAM - This car is associated with one of the most enduring images of the war. In June of 1963, Buddhist monk, Thich Quang Duc,
drove this particular car into Saigon, got out, poured gasoline all over himself and burned himself to death to protest the government of
South Viet Nam. Photos of this human bonfire blazed across television screens and newspapers around the world. Quang Duc's act also
affected leftist Americans who later immolated themselves to protest the war. On May 31, 1966, a group of students and Buddhist youths
burned down the U.S. consulate in Hue, Viet Nam.

5 posted on 06/06/2007 1:47:39 AM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Idiot Compassion..... Allowing the mentally ill/criminally insane to hold office.

And I’ll bet at least 3 to 5 names just filled your head! :-)


6 posted on 06/06/2007 1:59:18 AM PDT by JoeSixPack1 (Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. Tomorrow is always the busiest day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I need to print and frame this.


7 posted on 06/06/2007 2:22:14 AM PDT by Marie (Unintended consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The article read, “Hence, we get addle-brained protesters picketing to save the lives of serial killers on death row or human shields willing to give up their lives to protect suicide bomber cults and Islamic terrorists. Since all killing is bad, it must be bad to kill Islamic terrorists or convicted murderers.”

The logic doesn’t follow. While I support capital punishment, I respect the point-of-view of those who do not. The last time I debated an opponent of capital punishment, her reasoning was solid and her argument compelling--and had nothing whatsoever to do with 'since all killing is bad, it must be bad to kill Islamic terrorists or convicted murderers'. The author created a straw man when he wrote that, and--since he is an attorney as well as a 'student of Buddhism'--knew he was committing a fallacy. Further, I don’t view opponents of capital punishment as ‘addle-brained protesters’, nor do I lump them in with human shields vacuously unable to draw even the most rudimentary moral distinctions. The author, it seems, is as guilty of lack of discernment as those he so roundly condemns. Didn't the Buddha preach 'Right Thinking'? Doesn't law school teach the fundamentals of reasoned argument?

8 posted on 06/06/2007 2:25:13 AM PDT by Rembrandt_fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
A few weeks ago I was listening to a radio show and the host referred to liberals as "compassionate" and conservatives as "mean".

Well, I went off. I cornered my kids and made them listen to the idiot then gave them a little lecture. In the example I gave, I recalled an issue I'd had with my son at the beginning of the school year. He'd forgotten his homework, called home and begged me to bring it to him. I told him, "This is your *ONE* freebie for the year. I will only do this for you one time, after that, you're on your own. Are you sure you want to use it right now?" He assured me that this assignment was *that* important and I took his homework up to the school for him.

Later that *same* week, he called again in a total panic. He'd forgotten his homework and *this* assignment was *SO* much more important than the last!

I told him, "tough cookies," and hung up. He hasn't forgotten another assignment.

I told the kids that I *did* hurt for him at that moment. I was tempted to help him. But I knew, if I did, that he'd never learn responsibility and I'd be handicapping him for life. I told them that *this* is the difference between the left and right. The left feels compassion for the moment, the right looks down the road and sees that it's sometimes better to allow someone to suffer a little now so they don't suffer forever.

Over and over I've seen this example played out in real life. I see the young woman who's parents never gave her a break and pushed her to be smart and do her best and I see the young woman who had (at least one) parent who enabled her to get away with murder out of a displaced feeling of "compassion". And I see the end results.

NO. Compassion does NOT mean giving and enabling and sheltering people from the natural consequences of their own actions. Compassion allows us to help people who've genuinely been screwed by life or other people, not by themselves.

9 posted on 06/06/2007 2:37:45 AM PDT by Marie (Unintended consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

This is the difference between those who ‘feel’ and those who ‘think’.


10 posted on 06/06/2007 2:44:25 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (I would rather vote for Lindsay Lohan than Lindsey Graham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marie
I need to print and frame this.

Thanks for the compliment, and putting up with my choices in articles for a ping, aka teaching. Docs are supposed to do it. A well informed electorate won't hurt.

11 posted on 06/06/2007 2:52:20 AM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: XR7

Or even any midwest newspaper.


12 posted on 06/06/2007 3:06:18 AM PDT by gotribe ( I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution... - Grover Cleveland.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt_fan
Doesn't law school teach the fundamentals of reasoned argument?

I didn't go to law school. For terrorism and civil cases, I'll use the preponderance of evidence standard, not beyond the reasonable evidence of doubt standard for criminal cases.

13 posted on 06/06/2007 3:15:19 AM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: XR7
Wanna bet we will see this column printed in the “Faith & Religion” section of any west coast newspapers?

Did you read the article? Or, does the fact that it was written by a Bhuddist bother you?

14 posted on 06/06/2007 4:09:09 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Marie

“The host referred to liberals as “compassionate” and conservatives as “mean”.

My theory (maybe lame brained)is that the driving force behind radical liberal ideas is Narcissism - that is, an unhealthy preoccupation with your own feelings, and how you feel a need to project those feelings with the aim of public approval. Narcissism clouds the mind, so for example, when faced with a choice or dilemma, you or me would put some thought into your decision, make a choice and that would be it. With a Narcissist, however, their first reaction is “what is the right way of describing this situation ?” or “how will I look in the eyes of others” ; their secondary reaction will be that any disadvantaged person is in difficulty because someone, or something, is to blame.
Another symptom of this is the person’s obsession with levelling ie. every single human being is equal. Taken to extreme the tribesman running through the New Guinea jungle is equal to the Wall St fund manager living on Park Avenue.
Modern Narcissism really took off on America’s West coast in the mid 60s (sorry some of you freepers!) but it has spread out all over the Western World. However, of all the first world , developed societies Liberal Narcissism will have the least success in the United States.I say this from visiting and speaking to people over there, and it strikes me that you Yanks, unlike Europeans, are an obstinate bunch - decent and honest - but will not allow noisy minority interest groups to tell you what to say and think.
I mean, Free Republic is proof of this.

Of course this is only a theory, after all I am I am only a commercial real estate agent not an anthropologist; so it goes without saying reply if you think this is wrong.


15 posted on 06/06/2007 4:43:14 AM PDT by jabbermog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Marie

“I cornered my kids”

meanie

;-)


16 posted on 06/06/2007 5:18:58 AM PDT by kenth (I got tired of my last tagline...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows
Institutions provide paradigmatic templates the individual can adopt, and through which he can look so as to see as little as is possible and acceptable.

[I'm at work ... and you want me to think too?] Cad!

17 posted on 06/06/2007 6:24:11 AM PDT by Daffynition (Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jabbermog
My theory (maybe lame brained)is that the driving force behind radical liberal ideas is Narcissism - that is, an unhealthy preoccupation with your own feelings, and how you feel a need to project those feelings with the aim of public approval

I've studied narcissism intimately and I definitely agree. Do I need mention I was once a liberal...

18 posted on 06/06/2007 7:42:44 AM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Boots

Were you liberal ?
Theres nothing wrong with it - in theory, I think Fr Rep people are liberal in the sense that they believe in live and let live.
A lot of lefties fret about such things as imbalance of wealth, pollution, racism, war etc. and funnily enough , in theory I agree with some of what they have to say.BUT, and this is a very important caveat, here we are, in this particular world, in this particular time, and it is easier and more practical to just roll your sleeves up and make the best of life.


19 posted on 06/06/2007 8:07:29 AM PDT by jabbermog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kenth

You know it! ;-)


20 posted on 06/06/2007 8:38:55 AM PDT by Marie (Unintended consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson