Despite many permanently resettling in the cities, and abandoning their farm land, it is estimated that around 130 million migrant workers make the trip into the cities, whilst older and younger members of their families stay on the farm land and look after the home. This army of migrant workers spend 50 weeks of the year working in factories that provide living quarters and regular food to their workers. It is only during the two-week holiday of Chinese New Year that the factories shut-down and the employees are allowed home.
Any attack upon Israel, or Israeli interests, is automatically interpreted by the Israeli state as being motivated by ‘anti-Semitic’ sentiment, and no distinction is made between these acts, and those that are genuinely ‘revolutionary’ in nature. This is how the propaganda of the Israeli state deliberately conflates and confuses genuine anti-Semitism with genuine revolution.
The simple fact of the matter is that nothing of any real relevance happened in Tiananmen Square on June 4th, 1989. The Western media was present at a minor demonstration that was eventually dispersed by the Chinese authorities. Contrary to Western misrepresentation, people are allowed to protest in China, and exercise this right all the time. There have been many such protests both before and after Tiananmen in China, many of which could be construed as far more significant for various reasons as that which occurred in Tiananmen in 1989, but which the Western press have completely ignored.
The Christian monastic tradition, as manifest through Western Christianity, has generally combined a stringent discipline with voluntary poverty and celibacy. The idealised image of the Buddhist monk, as it has entered the Western psyche, is one of a man who has abandoned what is here (real material life), for what is over there (imagined religious realms). Of course, as what is over there, by definition, is never here and now, its presence can never be empirically confirmed. The Buddhist rules followed by monastics and the laity take the place of Christian piety in the West, but are adhered to by most Westerners with a similar fanatic attitude that completely misses the point the rule is assumed to be designed to achieve. The physical practice of Buddhist meditation is of course the act of Christian prayer wrapped in saffron robes. Western converts meditate as if they are praying to a divine being, but with the added titillation that the divine being in question is their own imagined self-essence – or god removed from his heaven and relocated into their own head. Chanting mantras – the holy syllables of the East – replaces the singing of hymns and the chanting of monks, and sutra reading is bible study by other means. Just as god in heaven can never be logically verified, enlightenment in the head can not be seen in the environment or known to exist.
Theistic religion was once suitable to the emerging intellect of humanity, but is no longer suitable for an advancing species. Modern humanity benefits from science, technology, medicine and the internet, and no amount of praying will save the life of a relative, or produce space travel, or the latest breakthrough in the fight against human disease. The Buddha denied the validity of theistic belief and advocated mental development and discipline (behavioural modification) as a means of over-coming alienation. The Buddha taught non-identification with thought (i.e. non-attachment), and can not be considered ‘idealistic’, and he criticised certain types of materialist thinking prevalent in his day, and can not be called a ‘materialist’. Karl Marx advocated the study of the physical circumstances humanity finds itself within, (i.e. historical materialism), but as he fully acknowledges the existence and functioning of human consciousness, he can not be termed a gross materialist. Marx wrote often about human consciousness, and stated that when consciousness is inverted, (i.e. deluded), it can not perceive things as they actually are, and falls into the error of religiosity. However, as Marx denied the validity of philosophies that limit the interpretation of the world to a set of thoughts, or thought constructs, (i.e. attachment to thought), he can not be called an ‘idealist’, or ‘ideologue’.
‘The label of ‘invalidity’ is as unjust, as it is immoral. It has no basis in fact, and is the Bourgeois expression of immense ignorance, developed through greed and avarice. Disabled workers, although subject to the immense pressures of social constraints, should, where possible, educate themselves beyond the Bourgeois cul-de-sac of illogicality that defines their life situation.’