Buddhism and Modern Capitalist Development in Thailand Essay

Introduction

Buddhism establishment was by Gotama the Buddha, and since its existence, it seems to have completed its 2500th year. Buddhist tradition now prevails in Thailand, and worldwide Buddhists commemorate the occasion through many activities like exhibitions, meetings, symposiums and Buddhist texts literature and publications. Establishment Buddhism does not seem to be in opposition to modern capitalist development in Thailand because Buddhism today has one of its Buddhism lasting strengths as being able to adapt to conditions changing and to different cultures. Philosophically Buddhism did seem to run in conflict to materialism it could be of Marxist-Communist variety or the Western. However, a point to note is that Buddhism did not acknowledge the conflict between modern science that resulted in the contemporary capitalist development or even itself. On the other hand, it dominated that Buddha used experimental strategies to the questioning of ultimate truth. The establishment Buddhism in Thailand did remain stable and not in opposition with modern capitalist development by in turn also having its influence slowly growing in the West thus commencing to endure acculturation process by adjusting to its new environs (Taylor, 2016). Modern developments did, however, cause concern amongst traditional Buddhists; like some Buddhist countries were put through to the western rule, and the few that did avoid direct subjection were put through pressures of western economic, political, religious and cultural influences. The modern developments ranged from the Buddhists adapting to the western Christian missionaries act of Christian practices like having Sunday schools establishments to the establishment of temples comprising worship areas that resemble Congregations of the Protestants.

Hindu Fundamentalism

Some scholars have made an argument on the term "Hindu fundamentalism" as in fact being a contradiction in terms, but what actually does it mean. The advocates of this claim merely argue that Hinduism is not a religion of a book unlike Islam and Christianity but a religion with no fundamentals, thus the notion of a literal interpretation of the fundamental basis of life not arising on one book. Some scholars, in turn, claim that Hinduism is in itself with many different viewpoints on the diverse faith, thus stressing that fundamentalism with Hinduism is incompatible. From both claims, there is some sense to it however limitations exist in that the argument would be that also Christianity is a fairly distinct religion in practice and creed, but Hindus do not perceive of the idea of "Christian fundamentalism." A point to note is that diversity in a religion does not assure against fundamentalism because it is a contradiction in terms. As a matter of fact, in looking at the definition of fundamentalism, it means literal and strict abidance to a set of fundamental doctrines (Llewellyn, 2017). It, therefore, discerns Hindu fundamentalism as not only a possibility but existing around all of us. In support of these claims is an example from Quran and Bible literal interpreters, whereby Hindu fundamentalists' demand that beliefs of that particular tradition adhered to strictly notwithstanding negative influence on 21st-century society. Today such practice is seen in Hinduism from the demand there is on strictly adhering to temple customs as it is for millennia even if it calls for deprivation of some Hindus for their freedom to worship in public.

Violent Extremism and Radicalization

Wintrobe theorizes that a high level of social cohesion could partially account for a "rational" suicide bomber. However, there are reasons why he believes social connectedness is not wholly sufficient to trigger violent extremism, of which in my opinion I agree. The idea is that we are in a progressively connected world where both political and social views face no limits following geographical boundaries and in a region, radicalization can happen following events or movements occurring in another region (Wintrobe, 2006). My reason to also agree on Wintrobe theory to partially accept on social cohesion as a factor to radicalization is that even social alienation and religious ideology can also attribute to youth becoming radicalized. Social cohesion partially accounts for radicalization, as violent extremism root causes tend to be intertwined, multifaceted and complex most at times linked to structural surroundings to which possible radicalization can begin to take control. Violent extremism is evident from the impact of also global or regional power politics that has since seen the growth of inequalities like poverty due to unemployment thus incite extremism. The other push factors to radicalization can be from instances like human rights violations, injustices perceptions or social-political exclusion, whereby when these horizontal inequalities are merged for a specific group then the eruption of radical movements ought to happen (Back, Back, Altermark & Knapton, 2018). For example, from a study done by researchers, it shows the Somali communities who have the perception that it has hugely been excluded from the society of Canadians. From such instances together with low social connectedness within the Somalis it has since seen some people defenseless to radicalization.

Conclusion

The paper has addressed on how establishment Buddhism does not seem to conflict with modern capitalist development in Thailand by standing firm to their doctrine even despite the contemporary developments that have since caused concern to the traditional Buddhists. The essay has also given meaning to arguments there is from scholars on the term 'Hindu fundamentalism' as in fact being a contradiction in terms as their claims seem to be that Hinduism is not a religion of a book like the case of Islam or Christianity. On closure, is an explanation of reasons agreeing with Wintrobe theory that high level of social cohesion partially accounts for radicalization and that there are still other attributing factors following examples and pieces of evidence stated to act as the basis for my opinion.

References

Back, E. A., Back, H., Altermark, N., & Knapton, H. (2018). The quest for significance: Attitude adaption to a radical group following social exclusion. International Journal of Developmental Science, (Preprint), 1-12. 10.3233/DEV-170230

Lara-Cabrera, R., Pardo, A. G., Benouaret, K., Faci, N., Benslimane, D., & Camacho, D. (2017). Measuring the radicalisation risk in social networks. IEEE Access, 5, 10892-10900. 10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2706018

Llewellyn, J. E. (2017). Defining Hinduism: A Reader. Routledge. 10.1558/rosa.v1i2.239

Marty, M. E., & Appleby, R. S. (Eds.). (1996). Fundamentalisms and the state: Remaking polities, economies, and militance (Vol. 3). University of Chicago Press. 10.2307/2623839Taylor, J. (2016). Buddhism and postmodern imaginings in Thailand: The religiosity of urban space. Routledge. 10.2307/23011407

Wintrobe, R. (2006). Rational extremism: the political economy of radicalism. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511511028