economical prosperity or freedom of mind | INFJ Forum

economical prosperity or freedom of mind

economical prosperity or freedom of mind?

  • economical prosperity, the more money the better, even if I had to think and do what they tell me to

    Votes: 1 6.3%
  • freedom of mind, even if I have to live in a tent in the middle of the desert with not enough money

    Votes: 15 93.8%

  • Total voters


defective wisdom
Aug 20, 2009
INFJ again
ok this is a long story for a simple question.

I went tonight to a photo reportage about Tibet given by someone who has lived in China for many years and had made several trips to Tibet. since I have been in Tibet the year before him, I have seen 80% of his journey with my own eyes.

It dashled me that his view on the country and the political problems are so completely different then mine. He has a very chinese and economical vision. For him Tibet was a backland country under the power of rivaling monasteries who used the modan people for there own enrichment. Tibetan people are durty, poor and have a stupid simple religion and the good motherland China has bring only economical prosperity to these poor fellows. Tibet has always been a part of China, even in the period that it was independently gouverment (by these selfish rivaling monks) it was still theoreticaly a part of China so it was only normal that China took it back.

Although I can agree that the country is very poor and China has brought economical prosperity in the region, when I was in Tibet I felt a lot of sadness and melancholy in the air. They are so very deep entagled with there religion and traditions. Although I'm not a fan of Tibetan boedhism, which is so much more folkloristic than the sober Japanese zenboedhism, I respect there religion. It is there soul! And China is killing it year by year with there "everyone has to be exactly the same" mentality. Children has to learn Chinese at school instead of Tibetan and people (monks) that speak out there opinion (even in a peaceful way) are arrested and locked up in concentration (!!!!!!) camps, tortured for years without a trail.

For me saying that China has the right to do this because Tibet as always been theres, to me is the same as saying that Germany had the right to take over Belgium and unite the "German tribes" again, making the "aryan race (han chinese)" the elite and all other races as lesser people, locking up everyone who has an other opinion or who doesn't work "for the greater good of the nation".

I don't know, maybe I'm missing something. It is indeed the fact that these people has gained some more economical wealth than before, but they payed with there freedom of mind. What would for you be most important? Would you give up your economical wealth if your freedom was treatened?
Last edited:
From what I have seen it goes both ways. We had a whole bunch of tibetan monks renting the apartment under us when I was staying in China and they seemed really grateful to be in the city with so much "luxury".

I don't feel the US has any real authority to tell China is cant reclaim one of its tracts of land again, the federal government here decimated the South when the south wanted more freedom. So we cant say shit.

I am all too familiar with your friends opinion though its very typical of most Chinese, my ex gf is Chinese she basically said the same thing.

All I could think during the Olympics was that Tibetans are fucking stupid, I wouldn't have embarrassed China so badly on the international news like that, you know what happened the second those cameras went off, the tanks rolled in. No doubt.

I think in the long run being a part of China would be beneficial for the tibetan people, not so good for the Dali Lama or any of the people who had the power taken from them though.

We shouldn't be so quick to judge the Chinese, in terms of modern society and civilization they were very stunted and they are coming a looooooong way to get up to par with the rest of us. They just need more time to get their human rights in order and that will come with affluence.

Do you think anyone gave a shit about child welfare, women's rights or minorities in the US or Europe during the Industrial revolution? Hell no.
  • Like
Reactions: Krumplenump
I see how your opening spurred this idea, but I am going to disregard that for a second.

The way I see it, there can be freedom of thought and prosperity. Of course, we will never have the pure form of this. That would in essence be anarchy, which can not work on this planet (simply by the nature of people). Still, we can aceive this in a relative sense. Many countries around the world have this. The US has a pretty high degree of freedom of mind, and prosperity, many european countries do, and others throughout the world. None of these are perfect, but still work.

I would not want to live in a world without economic prosperity. Call me a product of western socieity, but I would not be happy without a clean, confortable home, access to the internet, and good food. Some people can do without this, but I can not, and many many people in this world can not either. Everyone is different, and this is why having a middle ground is best. Having either extreme in effect "locks" people into that region even if they want no part of it. Tibet and china are good examples of these extremes. The people in each country are in essence "locked", either by their government and or socieity. To deviate is hugely taboo. This makes neither of them correct in what they are doing. However I do feel much more sympathy to tibet due to the fact that china's government is very cruel with this.
  • Like
Reactions: Trifoilum
Economic Posterity is having a strong passive income so that you can retire without anyone else telling you what to do.

It is by its very nature, Freedom of mind.
Cancelled i was unable to explain my opinion.
Last edited:
Economic Posterity is having a strong passive income so that you can retire without anyone else telling you what to do.

It is by its very nature, Freedom of mind.

yeah I was also thinking in this way. with economical prosperaty comes more money, less surveival and more time to spend on spiritual and mental enrichment.

roger, I really don't know what you mean by your post :D
freedom of mind and cultural preservation is much more important than economic prosperity, and I think there is not much to justify china's political and industrial intrusion into tibet. tibet should be a sovereign nation by now and it would be were it not for its close geographical proximity to china.
Oh this is an interesting subject. I find it interesting that Tibet is splattered all over the place but the other, even larger area of Western China that belonged to the Uighur tribespeople is practically ignored. Not that I am a particularly avid supporter of either.

Sure, certain methods of the Han chinese are far from ethical, there has been a lot of nuclear testing in the western half of China, esp. in the 50's, that caused severe birth defects with the Uighur locals.

I abhor persecution by the Chinese but I do not like the Dalai llama or the radical islamic heads of Uighur factions. Let's not forget the Dalai Llama's a guy that thinks he's divine and who accepted a huge sum of donation money from a japanese terrorist cult that attacked the Tokyo subways (most probably donated to spite the Chinese, a classic 'an enemy of my enemy is my friend'). He also advocates the banning of oral or anal sex, masturbation and has pointers on the proper way to pay for prostitution, apparently. He's a nepotist and levies an 'independence tax' on his subjects. In short, he shouldn't be supported on the basic fact that he is the spiritual head of an oppressed minority.
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 54192&#cmy
When has the Dalai Llama done all that? Please provide references to go with your accusations.
When has the Dalai Llama done all that? Please provide references to go with your accusations.
Of course.

This site is rather interesting:

Sydney Herald, April 27, 1996
Cult gave Dalai Lama $2m
By RUSSELL SKELTON, Herald Correspondent in Tokyo

Shoko Asahara, the leader of the Aum Shrinrikyo doomsday cult, maintained personal and financial links with Tibet's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama.

Asahara donated over $2 million to the Nobel prize-winner for the preservation of Tibetan Buddhism and culture in an apparent attempt to win his favour and endorsement.

According to the Japan-based representative of the Tibetan leader, Karma Gelek Yuthok, who released details of the relationship this week, Asahara began making contributions to the Dalai Lama from 1988, soon after the two met.

Asahara, 41, has repeatedly claimed the Dalai Lama gave him a divine mission to spread "real Buddhism" in Japan. He said the Tibetan leader had told him he was ideal for the mission because he had the "mind of a Buddha".

The Aum cult exploited the connection with the Dalai Lama to recruit new members and to pass itself off as a legitimate Buddhist organisation. Posters depicting Asahara and the Dalai Lama and carrying the Tibetan leader's endorsement were used extensively in cult promotions.

Asahara is standing trial for masterminding the sarin nerve gas attack in a Tokyo subway which left 11 commuters dead and nearly 4,000 suffering the effects of poison gas. The cult leader faces 17 further charges of murder, attempted murder, abduction and the production of illegal chemical and biological weapons.

Prosecutors told the Tokyo District Court this week that Asahara had ordered the subway attack after he learned from a secret source that the police were about to raid his cult headquarters.

Mr Karma Gelek Yuthok said he had decided to disclose details of the Asahara-Dalai Lama relationship and the extent of their financial links to dispel negative publicity and baseless rumours.

He said Asahara and the Dalai Lama first met in India in 1987 and on another six occasions, the last being in 1992. Asahara was always accompanied by his 37-year-old wife Tomoko and more than 20 other cult members on his trips to India.

Mr Yuthok said Asahara suspended the meetings in July 1992 after he gave a big donation to the Dalai Lama for the preservation of Tibetan culture. He said the relationship had soured after the Tokyo Metropolitan Government failed to grant Aum the status of an authentic Buddhist organisation.
Another interesting link focusing on murky finances and whatnot from a 'free Tibet' site:

On sexuality and stuff:

Dalai Lama urges 'respect, compassion, and full human rights for all,' including gays

by Dennis Conkin
Bay Area Reporter, June 19th, 1997

The Dalai Lama, world-revered leader of millions of Buddhists and leader of the Tibetan people, spoke out strongly against discrimination and violence against lesbians and gays during an extraordinary Wednesday, June 11 meeting in San Francisco with lesbian and gay Buddhists, clergy, and human rights activists.
The religious leader said at the press conference that he had previously been asked his views on gay marriage, and said that such social sanction of gay relationships "has to be judged in the context of the society itself and the laws and social norms."
During the 45-minute meeting, the Nobel peace laureate and Buddhist religious leader voiced his support for the full recognition of human rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation.
Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual sexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand. Buddhist proscriptions also forbid sex at certain times - such as during full and half moon days, the daytime, and during a wife's menstrual period or pregnancy - or near shrines or temples. Adultery is considered sexual misconduct, but the hiring of a female prostitute for penile-vaginal sex is not, unless one pays a third party to procure the person.
From a "Buddhist point of view," lesbian and gay sex "is generally considered sexual misconduct," the Dalai Lama told reporters at a press conference a day earlier.
However, such proscriptions are for members of the Buddhist faith - and from "society's viewpoint," homosexual sexual relations can be "of mutual benefit, enjoyable, and harmless," according to the Dalai Lama.
"His Holiness was greatly concerned by reports made available to him regarding violence and discrimination against gay and lesbian people. His Holiness opposes violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation. He urges respect, tolerance, compassion, and the full recognition of human rights for all," said Office of Tibet spokesman Dawa Tsering in a statement issued within an hour of the meeting.
Photographs of the historic event were taken, but were available only on the condition that participants' quotes be reviewed prior to publication.
That condition violates journalistic canons regarding the freedom of the press. The Bay Area Reporter declined any conditions for the release of the photographs and has lodged a protest with the National Gay and Lesbian Journalism Association over their embargo.
I suggest you also look into the past doing of previous Dalai Lamas, who are of course all one and the same reincarnation...

People really shouldn't support him by default. It's an all too common misconception that he's on a crusade of righteousness; people love nothing better than to venerate some distant 'warrior of morality'. But, yet again, another religiously motivated man has plently of evidence to expose him as a charlatan and hippocritical meddler in murky dealings and subversive politics.

Last edited:
The first link said a lot about what the japanese dude claimed, but nothing about the dalai llama.
The second link said a lot of stuff about what buddists should not do, without forcing it on non buddists.
The final bit, what you said, is no less stupid than morons thinking Jesus was divine, or that there is a god.

This guy thinks he is the reincarnation of a particular fellow. He also thinks that all people are reincarnations of other fellows.
So what?

Nothing incriminating has been said about the dalai llama thus far, however you want to compare him to some genocidal political party in beijing.
Nothing incriminating has been said about the dalai llama thus far
? If you take that very certain stance it's evident you're already biased and predisposed to refute everything hurled at him. I could draw a parallel with how when someone doesn't want to believe something, they'll remain sceptical until the most blatant of facts are shoved down their throats - but if someone wants to believe something they'll do so at the mention of a mere rumour of it's validity.

, however you want to compare him to some genocidal political party in beijing.
Who said I'm comparing the two? I am simply not supporting the Dalai Lama. He's achieved the same 'untouchable' status as mother Theresa, who was also, incidentally, a figure who had some quite questionable practices.
I don't know, people claim a lot

I have seen him in real life (although he was like 5 inches tall from where I stood :D). I don't have a hinch that he is not sincere, not at all and I have a good sense of who is bull shiting and who not. Although his regards my not be as clean as it should be, he is only human after all. He doesn't state that he is divine, he is very humble and compassionate, I'm very sure of that.
I don't know, people claim a lot

I have seen him in real life (although he was like 5 inches tall from where I stood :D). I don't have a hinch that he is not sincere, not at all and I have a good sense of who is bull shiting and who not. Although his regards my not be as clean as it should be, he is only human after all. He doesn't state that he is divine, he is very humble and compassionate, I'm very sure of that.
I can't comment on how genuine you felt he was cause that's a personal feeling. But I also don't really question his genuineness in regards to his goal of Tibetan independence. In fact his demand for independence from Beijing is a very realistic and perfectly good demand in my view, but doesn't he claim he is a hereditary King and has been appointed by heaven himself..? Shai would say 'so what' to that, but you have to question the convenience of how his social position and his goals run parallel to each other.

I mean it's all very well to praise the presence, aura and charm of a man in his position, but that does not invalidate evidence of far-fetched preachings on sexuality or of shady financial dealings.

I'm sure the Queen has quite a presence and is very polite, but some say she got Diana killed! (extreme example)
I'm not predisposed to believe nothing bad about him. I'm predisposed to believe nothing bad about anyone unless there's some proof.

The Sydney Morning Herald is a very biased newspaper in favour of economic trading, and the economy in this country is tilted towards China. The PM didn't even meet with the DL because he didn't want to offend china.

SMH is owned by Fox news.

They can claim anything they want, but without actual proof, or the dalai saying it, hell, i'd settle for a quote from the DL saying he backed that guy as evidence against him. But not even the SMH would go so far as to lie about what someone said.
Okay Shai, I'll set about finding other sources for you, from books if I have to that i'll type up.
My view might be overly idealistic but I strongly believe in freedom of mind. Arguments that Tibet was in poor shape when chinese "liberated" them are not valid - China was in no better state itself at that time. If tibetians were allowed to remain free they might have developed a prosperous economy on their own.

When you think about it - such claim even insults humanity. It basically means that tibetians are second-rate humans who are mentally unable to be prosperous on their own - therefore it gives China a moral right to occupy them.

My own country was a victim of such an oppression for a long time. I would never give in for such propaganda.
I'm not going to comment on China/Tibet ... only about the principle in the thread title and poll.

To be frank, I think most people in Western society already do the first option, and I'm not much different.

I'll take the money, please. Thank you.
you are right Tama,

Saying that it is good that China dominates Tibet is the same as saying that Europe has done a great job colonizing half of the world. They have brought prosperity and luxery to those countries even though there freedom is taken away...