>>> Max Sawicky writes:
>>>What's really in question is bigotry towards non-left religious folk (especially white) founded on ignorance of religion. Bigotry in this context means a belief that religious faith is testament to a person's ignorance, prejudice, or negative social role. The fact that we single out the religious left for approval is no less prejudiced: it simply says we accept you if you buy our political views, even though we still think your personal faith is a crock.>>>
Charles; I think there is more of a problem of bigotry of believers against non-believers than vice versa. That is my empirical experience. The believers have the power over the atheists, and their prejudice is thereby more actualized.
I wouldn't say emphasize that god is a crock, but , again, there is much more of an actual lack of assertion of the atheist position among masses and than somekind of harmful bigotry against believers by the tiny minority of atheists. Your portrayal reverses victim with victimizer. We atheists are the victims in the censorship of public expression of belief,not the theists of all types.
The slave owners' dilemma - whether or not to convert slaves to Christianity. Failure to do so would permit the continuation of non-Christian religion, viewed as Satanic by the colonizers, and possibly promote rebellion. On the other hand, conversion would raise a difficult question for the devout colonist: the fundamental humanity of the slave, his or her equality in the eyes of God. Rebellion--an enterprise fraught with practical difficulties, to say the least--is not the initial issue so much as elementary social organization, political enfranchisement, and social integration. Black Christianity afforded its followers a language and an institution to pursue these goals. Black Christianity clearly had a major impact in politics later on, and of course abolitionism was heavily grounded in religious faith from the beginning.
Charles said Also, Christianity is a slaves' religion. The mode of production in the Bible is slavery, old and new testaments. Christianity was a religion that over threw the Roman Empire, which was based on the slave mode. African slaves in America could identify with this central feature of the Bible, perhaps more than the white yeomen and women.
Max said I've noticed a few times people criticize religion on the grounds that it focuses people on the next life and encourages resignation to this one. This fails to recognize some basic differences within Christianity, including its most conservative currents. I mentioned this before, and let me repeat I'm no theological expert, but the religious folks you hear most about in politics DO NOT put off all hopes for salvation to some removed scenario of the Second Coming, Armageddon, etc. Those who do are not political. The preoccupations of the active people, whether conservative or liberal, black or white, are very much on this world. Ultimately, we'll be better off for it.
Charles says: Perhaps a bigger problem than contemplating the afterlife is unquestioning respect for authority first of God and then transferred to the state and much official authority. Not only must workers question authority if we are to have socialism. They must be ready to take authority and be confident in their self-authority. This is the key to real democracy too, which is the same thing as the working class taking state power. American workers are more , aw shucks, gosh , immature and fearful of taking authority than the workers who have seized state power. This is the downside of the American anti-statism, Levellism, as expressed in the colonial aphorism " the least government is the best government." The American individualist hates the state so much he (and she) doesn't take the responsibilty of self-governance and taking over the state. Take the state ! This will never happen with the externalization of authority from the individual which is the stock in trade of Chrisitianity and the major religions.
Max said:
mainline religions are ALWAYS in decline. The upstart, insurgent groups (which have their own evolution over time) are the dynamic forces. With time these groups become better established and organized, accumulate resources, get bureaucratized, develop habits of laxity and corruption, and provoke rebellion among followers who perceive that "first things" are being short-changed. And the process starts again. The organized groups have resources, but the upstarts have mobilized, highly- motivated people. You can decide which you think is more important. I go for Door Number 2.
Charles asks: Is door number 2 organize the religious neophytes left politically ?
Charles Brown