The Zen of Quakerism (2016)

There is considerable cherry picking along with cultural appropriation going on here. Buddhism has flavors that are worlds apart from what is described in the post.

A spicy example is discussed in the book "Zen at War"[1]. Myanamar and Sri Lanka[2] have their own ultra nationalistic Buddhists movements.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_at_War

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinhalese_Buddhist_nationalism

Quoting examples without an effort to show that it is representative of Buddhist teachings is basically a smear. Like starting a discussion on liberalism, not with principles of individual freedom, but instead saying that the attempt to bring democracy to Iraq is the representative example of liberalism.

(Some on the left who oppose liberalism actually do some versions of this, quoting Mills on colonialism - but that is a genetic fallacy.)

It makes much more sense to say that anytime some teaching/philosophy becomes popular at a continental scale, the people who are involved in conflicts will try to appropriate it to justify their position.

If you want to evaluate the role of the teaching itself, one would have to compare it to alternatives and whether they would be more easily appropriated.

> Like starting a discussion on liberalism, not with principles of individual freedom, but instead saying that the attempt to bring democracy to Iraq is the representative example of liberalism.

Some prefer to discuss what a purported ideology or its adherents does out in the real world.

Sure, as long as your real world examination is careful about getting the causation right as practically any idea can be appropriated. For instance, someone makes false charge to lock up someone innocent in the name of 'reducing crime', is the issue the goal of justice and low crime or is it the problem with the standards of evidence used to lock up the criminal?