And while I'm a nontheist myself, I don't think that politics should depend on metaphysics, so apart from casual chitchat with friends, I don't talk about it in politics. Do you think it's a good idea to make a point of attacking people's deepest beliefs on relatively peripheral matters, rather than trying to make common cause with them on points where you can agree? As long as others have a real commitment to progressive change based on conviction, does it matter if their convictions differ from yours?
I agree with W that religion is not why this country is so backwards. That is a Voltairian prejudice. It is not materialist. Marx, also a nontheist, diagnosed the problem correctly, and having done so did not bother to make religion a target. If it really is the soul of soulless conditions, it may dissipate when conditions are better. That may account in part for the relative irreligiousity of the European social democracies.
jks
> > Spare me the Frank Capra-style sentimentality
> about numinous lefties
> > you've known, jks, and wake up and smell the
> Middle Ages! Who cares
> > what effete Unitarians or Quakers think about
> anything -- they're
> > yesterday's Good News, so to speak. The ascendant
> New Age
> > Christianity is quite a different beast -- deeply
> antirational,
> > nationalistic, pro-military, all manner of evil
> things.
> >
> > I think the US, in particular, will never have
> decent social services
> > -- and, more distantly, that there will never be
> any prospect of
> > socialism here -- so long as so many continue to
> look skywards for
> > guidance and solutions to social injustices and
> other real problems of
> > life.
> >
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools