[Sakos]

I mean, we know why. It's been co-opted by toxic male communities and is being bastardized by people who twist it to justify them being assholes.

It is interesting though that Stoicism has this problem but Buddhism doesn't, even though they have similar ideals and concepts.

[ilrwbwrkhv]

Because Buddhism is strongly non violent

[whythre]

That’s largely just the brand of Buddhism that’s gotten the most bandwidth in the west. Historically some variants were exceptionally violent. Feudal Japan had entire sects of Buddhist warrior-monks they accepted and even celebrated violence. A modern example of followers of Buddhism engaged in violent conflict is myanmar’s 969.

[ilrwbwrkhv]

That is the exception not the norm though. Non violence is one of the strongest tenets of Buddhism.

    Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handled saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching.

— Kakacūpama Sutta, Majjhima-Nikāya 28 at MN i 128-29

So it is quite hard for the red pill movement to co opt Buddhism and thank goodness for that.

[nullindividual]

If the individual accepts the “Western” brand of Buddhism which is non-violent, they are absolutely correct in their statement. Buddhism, historically or actively in other sects do not impact how a Western individual practices their form of Buddhism.

If we can accept the sects of Christianity and they have different viewpoints, etc. without the whataboutism, we need to do the same and stop this with “Western” Buddhism, as well.