Members banned from this thread: Standing Wolf and jet57


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 78

Thread: Leftism Isn’t a Religion, It’s Something Worse

  1. #11
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433315
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,904x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Let's consider an ideology shared left and right in modern times and one that has had profound influence on the West, namely, individualism. Its basic, axiomatic belief is the individual is the basic unit of society, rather than the family. This belief forces the illogical postulation of a social contract to account for man's existence in society. Hobbes, for instance, saw the individual in nature as solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short, and invented leviathan to unite individuals in society. Rousseau and Locke saw it in terms of individuals giving up certain rights to join in civil society. These theories, in short, have no anthropological basis. They are mere inventions created to support an ideology. But these theories undermine the existing ordered liberty of man by nature joined in society in a hierarchy of family, religion, and community.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Mister D (11-20-2019)

  3. #12
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,707, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416529
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,707
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,300
    Thanked 53,474x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Green Arrow View Post
    Quick thoughts to subscribe and I can go a little more in-depth tomorrow:

    I think the relationship between the political spectrum and the religious spectrum is a lot different than it appears. It certainly does seem like the Republicans/conservatives are the inherently religious party, and Democrats/liberals are anti-religion, but I’ve personally (and this is anecdote territory here) noticed what is, to me at least, an interesting shift. Over the last ten years, I’ve started encountering more liberals/leftists who adhered to some religion or another, and more conservatives/rightists embracing atheism.

    As I said, this is anecdotal for me, I only cite it because I consume news from a variety of different POVs and deliberately place myself in positions to interact with people of all different backgrounds. Overall, I think it may just be a combination of factors: that religion on the whole is declining in the U.S. and the world at large, and that Christians tend to make up the larger religious demographic of the GOP while other various religions take up some of that space on the Democratic side (thus making atheists in the GOP more noticeable, while the decline of religion wouldn’t be felt as much on the Democratic side because there are overall just more religious backgrounds to encounter).

    I don’t know, I guess I’m mostly just thinking out loud here. It’s an interesting discussion for sure.
    Atheism or agnosticism isn't that rare on the political right generally speaking. One of my favorite columnists at National Review was John Derbyshire who is an atheist. His termination was the final straw. I cancelled my subscription. Anyway, there is actually a significant atheist element on the radical right and it has a long history. Charles Marraus, for example, was a French monarchist, nationalist and atheist.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Mister D For This Useful Post:

    Green Arrow (11-27-2019)

  5. #13
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,707, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416529
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,707
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,300
    Thanked 53,474x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Let's consider an ideology shared left and right in modern times and one that has had profound influence on the West, namely, individualism. Its basic, axiomatic belief is the individual is the basic unit of society, rather than the family. This belief forces the illogical postulation of a social contract to account for man's existence in society. Hobbes, for instance, saw the individual in nature as solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short, and invented leviathan to unite individuals in society. Rousseau and Locke saw it in terms of individuals giving up certain rights to join in civil society. These theories, in short, have no anthropological basis. They are mere inventions created to support an ideology. But these theories undermine the existing ordered liberty of man by nature joined in society in a hierarchy of family, religion, and community.
    Succinct and I agree. The only thing I would suggest is that men like Hobbes and Rousseau genuinely held what I guess we could call liberal anthropology. I think social contract theory was the result of their struggle to make sense out of society and social bonds. So, yes, such theories were constructed to support an ideology but it was an ideology whose truth was apparent to them.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Mister D For This Useful Post:

    Chris (11-20-2019)

  7. #14
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433315
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,904x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister D View Post
    Succinct and I agree. The only thing I would suggest is that men like Hobbes and Rousseau genuinely held what I guess we could call liberal anthropology. I think social contract theory was the result of their struggle to make sense out of society and social bonds. So, yes, such theories were constructed to support an ideology but it was an ideology whose truth was apparent to them.
    OK, right. I guess what I was trying to say by saying individualism has no anthropological basis is there is nothing in the science of anthropology or even the ancient history of human beings to support a primitive existence of individuals. Man is social by nature, even eusocial. Liberal anthropology, deriving from individualism, is forced to invent the social construct of social contract.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  8. #15
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,707, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416529
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,707
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,300
    Thanked 53,474x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    OK, right. I guess what I was trying to say by saying individualism has no anthropological basis is there is nothing in the science of anthropology or even the ancient history of human beings to support a primitive existence of individuals. Man is social by nature, even eusocial. Liberal anthropology, deriving from individualism, is forced to invent the social construct of social contract.
    Agreed. I just thought there was a cynical note there. The word ideology can do that I guess.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  9. #16
    Points: 174,784, Level: 99
    Level completed: 29%, Points required for next Level: 2,866
    Overall activity: 22.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870670
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,098
    Points
    174,784
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,829
    Thanked 12,933x in 8,811 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The problem lays in the false assumption that the left is somehow monolithic in its views when the reality is that the left, like the right is far more nuanced. Not only do both fall within a broad range across the left/right spectrum but all so-called progressive ideals do not appeal to all leftists any more than all conservative ideals appeal to all conservatives. For instance, there are a great many dedicated Christians who also support the social safety net i.e. welfare, subsidized education and single payer healthcare as well as environmentalism, but may not support abortion. The notion that being a Christian precludes having political views that are seen as leftist is nonsense. Look at Latin America, Italy, Spain and Germany. If anything it is Anglo Saxon style Protestantism that is losing non-immigrant parishioners rapidly and has been the traditional base for the Christian right. It is also the segment of Christianity that has been infiltrated by charlatans and con men who prey upon the old, the ignorant and the disenfranchised. A veritable wild west of sects, many with little to no formal training, organizational authority or doctrine, that liberally mix politics with religion. That is not to say that the RCC isn't losing non-immigrant parishioners, but many leave the church but not the faith i.e. they are less likely to become atheists.

    The bottom line is that the politically extremist crowd tend to be young, emotional, idealistic, vocal, impatient and often easily led to support causes that they don't fully understand. It has always been thus. The reality is that most people on the left are far less volatile than the vocal activist crowd and all that OP's such as the one in this thread do is throw everyone left of center into a single monolithic bucket that has no bearing on reality.

    What does have a bearing on reality is that all of this political polarization, histrionics really, can result in reactionary behavior. It happened in the last election and it could happen again if the anti-leftist rhetoric is not toned down. For many it might come down to voting for an extremist candidate out of pure spite.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Who For This Useful Post:

    Green Arrow (11-27-2019),Standing Wolf (12-08-2019)

  11. #17
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433315
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,904x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    The problem lays in the false assumption that the left is somehow monolithic in its views when the reality is that the left, like the right is far more nuanced. Not only do both fall within a broad range across the left/right spectrum but all so-called progressive ideals do not appeal to all leftists any more than all conservative ideals appeal to all conservatives. For instance, there are a great many dedicated Christians who also support the social safety net i.e. welfare, subsidized education and single payer healthcare as well as environmentalism, but may not support abortion. The notion that being a Christian precludes having political views that are seen as leftist is nonsense. Look at Latin America, Italy, Spain and Germany. If anything it is Anglo Saxon style Protestantism that is losing non-immigrant parishioners rapidly and has been the traditional base for the Christian right. It is also the segment of Christianity that has been infiltrated by charlatans and con men who prey upon the old, the ignorant and the disenfranchised. A veritable wild west of sects, many with little to no formal training, organizational authority or doctrine, that liberally mix politics with religion. That is not to say that the RCC isn't losing non-immigrant parishioners, but many leave the church but not the faith i.e. they are less likely to become atheists.

    The bottom line is that the politically extremist crowd tend to be young, emotional, idealistic, vocal, impatient and often easily led to support causes that they don't fully understand. It has always been thus. The reality is that most people on the left are far less volatile than the vocal activist crowd and all that OP's such as the one in this thread do is throw everyone left of center into a single monolithic bucket that has no bearing on reality.

    What does have a bearing on reality is that all of this political polarization, histrionics really, can result in reactionary behavior. It happened in the last election and it could happen again if the anti-leftist rhetoric is not toned down. For many it might come down to voting for an extremist candidate out of pure spite.

    There is no assumption the left is monolithic in its views. It can of course adopt multiple ideologies. And that is where the left starts to contradict itself. The right, too, does that when it embraces ideologies. The problem isn't with extremes either. Or polarity.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  12. #18
    Points: 174,784, Level: 99
    Level completed: 29%, Points required for next Level: 2,866
    Overall activity: 22.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    870670
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    69,098
    Points
    174,784
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    12,829
    Thanked 12,933x in 8,811 Posts
    Mentioned
    206 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    There is no assumption the left is monolithic in its views. It can of course adopt multiple ideologies. And that is where the left starts to contradict itself. The right, too, does that when it embraces ideologies. The problem isn't with extremes either. Or polarity.
    If one were to accept the jaded news, editorials and blogs on both sides of the political equation, one would have to assume that America is so fundamentally politically bifurcated that nothing short of bloodshed would resolve the impasse. Instead of constantly reiterating that the left has no purpose other than to destroy America or that the right are all completely self-centered psychopaths, perhaps it's time for a reality check, not only for the general public, but for the politicians.
    In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.



    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Who For This Useful Post:

    Green Arrow (11-27-2019),Standing Wolf (12-08-2019)

  14. #19
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433315
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,904x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    If one were to accept the jaded news, editorials and blogs on both sides of the political equation, one would have to assume that America is so fundamentally politically bifurcated that nothing short of bloodshed would resolve the impasse. Instead of constantly reiterating that the left has no purpose other than to destroy America or that the right are all completely self-centered psychopaths, perhaps it's time for a reality check, not only for the general public, but for the politicians.
    Who, read the OP. It's not about right v left but about religious belief vs religious-like ideological belief. The example I gave just above included for left and right belief in individualism.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  15. #20
    Points: 5,426, Level: 17
    Level completed: 46%, Points required for next Level: 324
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassSocialVeteran5000 Experience Points
    EvilCat Breath's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    975
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    1,372
    Points
    5,426
    Level
    17
    Thanks Given
    38
    Thanked 965x in 637 Posts
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Leftism certainly has a religion and the United States is rapidly becoming a theocracy in service of the Religion of Woke.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts