[Buddha-l] Re: fundamentalism

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 16:59 -0400, Bshmr at aol.com wrote:

> Because I see socialization as primary in USAn schooling, I expect all
> Buddhist parents to supplement institutional training with personal
> instruction and example -- ie. quality time. A certain hubris and
> repulsion govern those who do home-school, IMO.

The only couple I know who have schooled their children at home are in
Canada. The father is a Christian, but far from a fundamentalist. The
wife is an atheist. The father is politically conservative but socially
liberal--what they call in Canada a "red Tory". The wife has leftist
leanings politically but is a cultural elitist. The couple kept their
children out of school because they didn't want their kids to grow up
with other kids who watch television, play video games, go to violent
movies and so forth. The parents felt that socialization is good only
when one is socialized to a sane society, but they feel mainstream North
American society is quite unhealthy. It's difficult to say whether
feeling that we live in a sick and dysfunctional society is hubris or
perspicacity. Maybe a little of both.

> Another thought comes to mind. Post-election in the USA, there was talk of an 
> extra-suburban elite which tended to home-school. The values of that group 
> would clash with most here, I summize.

Most of the home-schooling I have personally known about has been done
by conservative Christians who regard mainstream society as essentially
evil and corrupt. (This, I think, could be somewhat different from
seeing mainstream society as sick and dysfunctional, but I'm not sure I
would want to try to say in what way it is different.)

Most forms of Buddhism tend to see mainstream society as dominated by
greed, hatred and delusion. Given this predominantly negative attitude
toward human society in Buddhism, and given the long history in North
America of religious societies trying to separate and protect themselves
from the corrupting influences of mainstream culture (the Amish, the
Hutterites, the Doukobors, some Quakers, David Koresh's outfit, various
survivalists etc.), one would not be surprised to see some Buddhists
following this pattern. Maybe they have done so. I just don't happen to
know of any. 

> IMNSHO, The home-schooling thing epitomizes a great flaw in the modern USA -- 
> the myth and encouragement of 'extreme individualism'. 

If you read Thomas Tweed's book on Buddhism in America in the 18th
century, you'll see that one of the four broad groups of people who
found Buddhism to their liking were people who endorsed a philosophy of
self-reliance and individualism. Naturally, they loved such Buddhist
writings as the Rhinoceros-horn Sutta, where family and friends are
depicted as terrible burdens that impede one's progress to nirvana. 

I have to confess, my own exposure to Buddhism came at a time in my life
when I was what I would now call an extreme misanthrope with strongly
isolationist leanings and contempt for urbanization. (My favorite book
at that time was a collection of essays entitled "The Intellectual
Versus the City"--it was full of the writings of people such as Thomas
Jefferson and Henry David Thoreau and other early Americans who were
convinced that the fragile American experiment with democracy would fail
if people began to live in cities---a city then was a place with a
population of more than 20,000 or so. And my favorite sutta was the
Rhinoceros Horn. My attitudes have changed somewhat since then. I am now
a moderate misanthrope, and I have learned to have as much contempt for
rural people as for urbanites. If I had young children in today's
society, my compassion would probably be about as likely to drive me to
drown them as to home-school them.

-- 
Richard Hayes