AsiaInstituteforSocialPoliticalandEconomicResearch

Over the last few weeks I have been surveying some recent trends in Buddhist political engagement and reflecting on an apparent misdirections of Buddhist thought.  Sulak Sivaraksa, a Thai political activist, has been interpreting Buddhist teachings as warranting political action.  He has focused largely on how big governmental development projects such as the Pak Moon Dam have destroyed the livelihoods of local people.  His complaints revolve around how indigenous people's interests are neglected as big business and big government work hand in hand to advance their economic interests.  His solution to this problem has been to negotiate with these interests through methods of non-violent protest.  
 
Buddhism has historically denied the existence of a self and insists upon the interrelatedness of all sentient beings. Practically, Buddhism has focused on liberating the individual from pain and suffering through a disciplined path that will awaken the individual to this interrelated state.  In Southeast Asia, Buddhism has insisted that the monastic life is the surest if not the only path to liberation from suffering.  Monasticism can be realized in many ways.  One, monasteries can become self-sustaining economic communities; two, monasteries can seek voluntary contributions from lay followers, or three, monasteries can seek state subsidies.  Wealth of some sort is necessary to support the meditative activities associated with enlightenment.
 
It would seem Buddhist purposes could be best served by activities that would generate wealth.  Non-violent protests and seeking concessions from the government on particular issues would not be as effective at generating wealth as negotiating for long run institutional changes that would secure property rights to indigenous peoples.  Hernando DeSoto"s The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else makes the case that an appropriate legal infrastructure including property rights can be the source of economic growth. If these peoples were given property rights for lands that they have long occupied, they would be able to generate wealth by raising capital for entrepreneurial undertakings.  Empowering people through recognizing individual rights would make the possibility of Buddhist liberation available to more persons.
 
A stronger regime of property right protection would serve as a limit on what could be achieved through government lobbying.  The state with its monopoly on violence would be restrained from taking resources from the population, and powerful interests would utilize their resources to generate goods and services for the society instead of trying to take resources from the politically impotent.  It is an interesting irony that Western individualism and its tradition of rights is part of the skillful means necessary to bring about Eastern enlightenment.