Got to agree and this is going to sound trite I know but this is my reality. I am shit at DIY, and no matter how much i have tried, I just don't get it! I don't have the whatever capacity it is to understand how to do it. I will never be a fixer up'er. And I am reconciled to that, and also I don't want to be. I am happy in my ignorance!

@brentan, @irascible That International HR law includes religion as a right was I suspect only included in order to keep the Catholic, Hindu, Muslim and Budhist countries on side.
IMO religions and believing in them is not a human right it is contrary to the right to not be enslaved.

@irascible As in "we are 1 billion citizens undivisible under Communism which is our only right!"

During the Peterson V Zizek debate recently, Zizek surprised me by saying he thought the Chinese government didn't really see itself as communist but more in the sense of the guardian of Buddhism where its job is to keep the people together as a homogenous spiritual entity. If true, so much for atheism as the national default. I must admit I don't know enough about the country or Buddhism to really understand his point.

@brentan I don't think China has ever been Buddhist.Confucianism which used to be quite popular fits quite nicely into communism because it is keen on order and authoriy, but my impression is that most Chinese who go in for 'native' religion are animists and ancestor worshippers, as is also the case in Vietnam.

@CeliaVL It looks like Zizek is correct nonetheless, at least going by Wikipedia:

[simple.wikipedia.org]

@seekingtruth your first question seems rather odd, making it difficult for me to answer. As to the second question, the article was about the state destroying “speech” that the state did not agree with. Regardless of how you or I think about the control religion exerts on an individual or group, it is a freedom issue. Freedom to think, to speak, and to associate.

True! That’s always true with most Christians!

When the US were in Vietnam they backed a Catholic tyrant which was the cause of riots and much unhappiness and persecution of the Buddhists.

@chazwin Originally the US was helping the French. A large part of the problems was the inability of the south to form a stable government. Actually, the problems started after WWI. Ho Chi Minh went to Paris in 1919 to try and get a settlement from the French on his country. His request was not met as the winning countries only wanted to maintain their holdings and punish the Germans. [barnesandnoble.com]

@JackPedigo The USA was a victim of its own propaganda. Ho Chi Minh was educated in the USA and was inspired by the American Revolution. When he declared independence from France he fully expected the USA to support his cause against his imperialist oppressors. As a moderate left the USA could have immediately built good relations with Vietnam and other countries that suffered from US aggression. But rather than trading with Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, the US military lobby saw an opportunity to fill their pockets with US tax dollars whilst condemning an entire generation of young American boys to death, dismemberment and psychological trauma.
As soon as American bombs and bullets fell on Vietnam Ho was forced my more extreme elements in his cabinet to pursue independence at great cost.

@chazwin While in Viet Nam I heard a lot of propaganda and stories about the 'American War'. (my sister-in-law is Vietnamese and escaped in 75 after having endured bombing in her home of Saigon). It, like so many other wars is a complicated story and we always seem to go after countries with short-sighted goals. My late partner was Iranian and I continually heard of the US helping to topple the elected shah in the years just after WWII. [en.wikipedia.org]
Right now, here in our idyllic part of the country we are battling the Navy over their practices preparing for some nebulous future enemy. [sounddefensealliance.org]

@JackPedigo about Iran, you have it wrong.The Shah was not elected.He was imposed to replace the elected government that wanted to take back their oil from B British\American Oil. The US and UK conspired to overthrow the left wing elected government. That was in The 1950s. The Shah was a western backed despot. His tyrrany radicalized the people which led to the Islamic revolution in 1978/9. This was another missed opportunity since we could have backed the moderates then, but the US thought that they were too left. There are few places the USA has not interferred with,usually leading from an elected left leaning government in favour of despotism. Chill is another example where, Allende was overthrown and the murdering despot Pinochet became the president with no further elections till he died.

@chazwin The elected shah is the one I was referring to not the western puppet. However, even he was much better than what replaced him, Khomeni. Iran has been the loser since the revolution.

@JackPedigo A Shah is Persian for monarch. Monarchs are not elected.What you might be talking about is the 1953 coup in which president Moseddegh was overthrown by Shah Rezi Pahlavi the unelected leader.

@chazwin This seems to be splitting hairs. No, I did not know that but my late partner and all her family always referred to him as the legitimate Shah.

@JackPedigo Do you call the POTUS King of America? Or the legitimate King.

That is something to think about! My idea there is, they just go into the mosque to pray. But there may be preaching too...and that may have been where some people were radicalized?

Only idiots who carry water for Saudi Arabia care about the Muslims.

Blowing up Mosques? I'd cheer that too. Indeed, China is reeducating and deprogramming Muslims. Some denounce this but Islam is so utterly without merit. Sadly, the Communist ideology is its own screwball cult relying on Marx's ignorant and simplistic rants. Really, our species has not got a clue.