Okay, Retro, I've read it now.
As I guessed (above) it has a lot in common with Harrison's Naked Buddha
- he even quotes Harrison - but Dhammika is mostly concerned with Theravada in Theravadin countries, while Harrison is mostly concerned with Buddhism in the West.
My response to The Broken Buddha
(1) It's very, very negative - too negative for enjoyable reading and surely too negative to be accurate: any system with that much against it would have fallen in a heap long ago.
(2) Regretfully, I think there is a lot of truth in it. I think all these flaws do exist, though I doubt that they are as pervasive as claimed.
I was lucky enough to visit Thailand and Cambodia for a few weeks late last year. It was my first real visit to a Theravadin country, and I was struck by the parallels between Buddhism as practised there and Christianity in mediaeval and renaissance Europe. (That is not a comparison that might come automatically to many people but in my day job I have specialised in very old music, so I have a better-than-usual knowledge of the culture of that period.)
Once you get out of Bangkok, you see hundreds of poor, basically subsistence-farming, villages each supporting a Wat - ditto Europe around 1400.
The religious language is not the local language, so ordinary people do not understand the liturgy - ditto Europe around 1400.
The Church/Wat is a (or the only) centre of education and learning, and maybe healing - ditto Europe around 1400.
The Wat is usually the largest and richest building in the village - ditto Europe around 1400.
Villagers spend an inordinate amount of their money supporting it - ditto Europe around 1400.
The monastery is all-male - ditto Europe around 1400.
The culture is male-dominated - ditto Europe around 1400.
Boys enter the monasteries as novices before they are old enough to make an informed commitment - ditto Europe around 1400.
...and so on.
With all that in mind, the distortions and abuses that Dhammika itemises come as no surprise because they are exactly the same distortions and abuses that one religious reformer after another attacked in Europe. I feel that monasticism per se has structural imperatives of its own, regardless of the religious doctrine on which it is centred.
So perhaps the fate of monasticism in Europe can give us some pointers to what is likely to happen to it in Theravadin countries - though the process is, IMO, likely to be much quicker this time because of the pressures from our post-monastic, post-feudal, post-authoritarian, almost-post-masculinist society. Local people can see a well-developed alternative, which wasn't true in Europe at the end of feudal times.
Two final comments:
I don't particularly like Dhammika's vision for a 'Buddhayana': I think it is fatally corrupted by reliance on the old model.
I did enjoy my time in Thailand and Cambodia, and I did like and respect almost all the people I met there. My feeling was that Buddhism has produced a fundamentally nicer
society than Christianity, in spite of any failings of the monastic system.