Religion as political autocracy

[Dennis Campbell]

Recommend highly the link below.

This video illustrates with no need for interpretation or being “taken out of context” that Islam as this man expresses it has nothing at all to do with the “rule of Allah,” or any god, but everything to do with authoritarian rule of people by a small cabal of self-appointed men. Religion, at least here, is clearly portrayed as nothing more than a transparent rationale for autocracy. It perhaps less usefully considered as a “delusion” than it is an excuse or ploy for autocratic civil governance. All religion does here is serve as a sweet frosting on a poisonous cake offered by self-serving men.

What makes it so dangerous is that so many people apparently are persuaded by that frosting, while I’m convinced that behind closed doors, the bakers are gloating with anticipation.

Most, perhaps all religions posit some external eternal sentient authority (EESA) that has a special relationship with humankind, which is remarkable considering the known size of the physical universe, but nevertheless that EESA is the claimed source of creation itself, moral rules, and in many cases the landlord of some afterlife. All of these also require allegiance, obedience, and a close adherence to differing sets of moral rules, depending on the particular EESA posited. None of them are observable nor questionable, and therein lies the premise of this thread: that religion in fact exists as a rationale for autocratic political rule, and that’s why it has been created, endorsed and advocated by power seeking humans for most of human history.

To be sure, the idea of a caring god is of some considerable reassurance to a great many people whose influence on their world is minimal, and who anticipate and fear death. Those emotional needs make it far easier for those promulgating religions to play to the masses. But the real point of formal religions is to not “save” humanity, it is to control them. The excellent video listed in the first post here on this thread illustrates that as clearly as I’ve ever seen it, unless you’re a true believer or intellectually impaired.

All religions are vertically structured, with of course the EESA at the top, but with differing ranks of mortal humans who purport to represent and/or speak for the EESA, and in so doing they claim authority over other humans in governing their lives and wealth. For a large part of human history, it was these “sainted” or otherwise sanctified humans controlled most of the world’s political functioning, and a great deal of its wealth. In current times, that control is less evident and decreasing in parts of the world, but we need only to look to the Mideast among Islamic fundamentalist peoples to see efforts being made to reassert control over political functioning and financial wealth.

I think some of these Islamic leaders are getting a little desperate, as they see erosion real or threatened to their influences, so we see more blatant and lethal measures taken or proposed against “unbelievers.” Much the same thing seemed to have happened in Christianity in the middle ages, so it is not just an Islamic characteristic.

Religions all seem to have a conflicted relationship with science. The various followers and religious leaders almost all seek and enjoy the fruits of scientific thinking, they’re after all not stupid. But the foundations of science such as, skepticism; free and open speech, objective verifications of propositions and questioning of authority are viewed rightfully as threats to their own premises, which includes obedience, acceptance of authority; not challenging beliefs and claims; and a vertical political hierarchy.

I’m not here saying that all theists are power seeking political autocrats, most are just like all of us, muddling our way through life as best we can with as much enjoyment as possible and the least pain. But I am saying that most religious leaders are political autocrats, and for them the issue is not “God,” but justifying human rule over other humans, and access to what passes for wealth and strategic access to necessary resources.


http://bit.ly/aAX1go

Dennis

[ Edited: 06 April 2010 04:00 PM by Dennis Campbell ]
Signature
Truth, especially “moral truth,” is that elusive human creation whose exclusive apprehension is claimed by many, who then sanctimoniously condemn anyone else who does not agree with their particular apprehension, while denying that any question can be posed about their own apprehension. I will try to avoid that tendency. DEC

[Bruce Burleson]

The video is frightening. The British are sitting back (or bending over) and taking it in the arse. Londonistan, unfortunately, looks like an inevitability. It was such a great city, too. Fortunately, Islam is still relatively weak in the US.

[Dennis Campbell]

Bruce,

Check out the following link as well. This has IMO less to do with the endless god debates than it does a political ideology that is autocratic in the extreme, clothed in soothing and condescending platitudes as articulated on this link. I think it is almost inevitable that a lot of violent conflict between cultures will occur, in which the "academic" debates about theism vs atheism will pale when put against the perhaps looming prospect of political, social or civil governing structures. It is not just England, but all of Europe and as well North America. You and I, friend. may be long gone by then, but not most of those here.

I've zero glib "answers," besides the too-late and obvious one of "screw around" more, but like it or not, this appears plausibly an issue that we're all going to face and it may not be pretty. I must admit that my age is an advantage, as I can reasonably be assured that it won't matter all that much to me; but it might well to my kids, as well as a lot of people here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTzHDoZv ... re=related

Dennis

[Feck]

The video is frightening. The British are sitting back (or bending over) and taking it in the arse. Londonistan, unfortunately, looks like an inevitability. It was such a great city, too. Fortunately, Islam is still relatively weak in the US.

Well it is our own fault for letting the Christians break us in first.We are now so used to being fucked by religion we hardly feel it .

[Dennis Campbell]

It is NOT the case that we need to spend our energies and efforts in debating the existence or not of some EESA or “god.” It IS the case that we may be faced, in less than 20 years, with an influx of people whose idea of social governance does not include “free speech,” “civil rights,” “due process of (secular) law,” equal treatment of people regardless of gender, or the idea that competent adults in a society have equal powers in voting for their own representatives.

“God,” or in this case “Allah,” is the flag being flown, BUT IT IS ONLY A “FLAG,” not a reality apart from what leaders and some followers assert. The REALITY is that what most of us value as freedoms to die for, may be subverted and changed. Regret the capped words, that may be too dramatic. But, look at the videos, do some research, and decide for yourselves.

How to counter this possible looming problem is not something for which I have any answers. I’m about out of this life, that’s your job.

Dennis

[Bruce Burleson]

Well it is our own fault for letting the Christians break us in first.We are now so used to being fucked by religion we hardly feel it .

Don't you want to do something about it? Can you imagine Sharia law being applied at Shepherd's Market in Mayfair?

[Feck]

Well it is our own fault for letting the Christians break us in first.We are now so used to being fucked by religion we hardly feel it .

Don't you want to do something about it? Can you imagine Sharia law being applied at Shepherd's Market in Mayfair?

I will Pray about it ........ God will help us .. Yes ?

[AshtonBlack]

As I commented on the RDF showing of this vid:

"Over my stinking corpse"

[Bruce Burleson]

I will Pray about it ........ God will help us .. Yes ?

Of course, I know that you won't, and therefore he won't. We pray more over here - a prayer a day keeps Sharia away.

[Dennis Campbell]

Nice to see the responses here so far are of no better deliberated quality than what I get on the RP site.

Dennis

[AshtonBlack]

Nice to see the responses here so far are of no better deliberated quality than what I get on the RP site.

Dennis

What did you expect us to say?

I can't fault your logic in the OP and Anjem Choudary is a Islamist, self-promoting, media whore.

[Bruce Burleson]

Well, here is a serious response. When one faith institution crumbles, it creates a void for another one to establish itself. Christianity is crumbling in Europe, and Islam is taking root. Atheism is not a faith institution, so it by itself cannot stand against the invading faith tradition. Reason and humanistic materialism provide a possible alternative, but they do not generate the level of emotion that faith, with it's absolutes and promises, is capable of doing. So it stands off to the side, providing an objective commentary about the barbarians at the gate. It is very much like the "Famous Historian" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail - lecturing right up until the knight cuts his throat. Once Christianity crumbled in England, it was only a matter of time before the alien faith took over. I am afraid that England is doomed.

[Dennis Campbell]

Bruce,

You miss the point. It is not "Atheism," which is as you note, an absence of a belief, it is secularism which is not an absence of a belief system that is at stake here, Our alternative is NOT to hew to your particular expressions of some god, but to consider what many of us do subscribe to in terms of secular values. It would be an error to argue that, what, we need to "find god" as you define that? I do not think so.

Dennis

[Bruce Burleson]

Bruce,

You miss the point. It is not "Atheism," which is as you note, an absence of a belief, it is secularism which is not an absence of a belief system that is at stake here, Our alternative is NOT to hew to your particular expressions of some god, but to consider what many of us do subscribe to in terms of secular values. It would be an error to argue that, what, we need to "find god" as you define that? I do not think so.

I'm really not talking about finding God. I'm talking about a particular institution that formed part of a particular society. If you start destroying some of the foundation stones, you weaken the whole wall. Christianity and Europe grew up together, so to speak. Whether Christianity is true or not, its institutional presence as a social force forms part of the fabric of European civilization. Humans are innately religious, and if you remove a religious "stone" from the social wall, you create a void. Islam, the new kid on the block, is more than willing to substitute its own stones, and change the makeup of the wall. Secularism does not have the psychological power to fight it. (We will see how well it works in France) You need a socio/religious national myth to ward off the foreign god.

[JimC]

Going back to a more general view of the power of religion, as suggested in the OP...

I suspect that the power of religion does not derive from a single factor, but the way in which it manages to tick many boxes in our nature. I agree that one of those is how it lends itself to the operation of an authoritarian hierarchy, so that the self-interest of powerful men will help to develop and maintain it. However, it also fits well into many other of our hominid quirks, such as:

* our tendency to find patterns, to actually need to see patterns...

* the fear of death

* tribal solidarity, particularly an us vs them scenario

* a fondness for ritual, dance and music