Political Narratives about Religion Short summaries of the basic views as found in the United States Contemporary "Liberal" -viz the view of the leadership of the Democratic Party, the New York Times, the major TV networks, etc. All religions are "good" even if a minority of malcontents sometimes acts wrongly in the name of their religion. But all religions are peaceful and can easily co-exist in the world. However, all forms of traditional (orthodox, lower case) Christianity and Judaism (upper case Orthodoxy) are basically retrograde and deserve ridicule and should be relegated to the social periphery except for some ceremonial occasions. European / Left-wing Democratic Party variant: Islam is basically good and Jews are basically evil (except when they vote Democratic). This view can also be characterized as "petro-theology," viz, a narrative that follows from oil interests. Basically it is militant appeasement and is closely associated with the rise of Leftist anti-Semitism and even moreso, with anti-Zionism. --------------------------------------- Classical Liberal - The view that all religions should be tolerated even if, on principle, we should question the real world value of religion per se. The principle spokesmen for this outlook are (were) Thomas Jefferson and John Stuart Mill. Typically the base of actual knowledge of religion of Classical Liberals is shallow, rests far more on reference to enlightenment political philosophy and its implications than actual study of any religion at all, and has a "kumbaya" objective." Its motto is: "Why can't we all just get along? Besides, many things are far more important than religion, anyway." About evil committed in the name of religion, Classical Liberals often have a "head in the sand" attitude. They are uninterested in religion, hate to study it, and wish that all evil inspired by religion would just go away. However, there is a major variant which derives from the Classical Liberal outlook, namely, the perspective shared by everyone who is interested in religion and respects faith traditions for their own reasons. Well known names here are Hannah Adams, Walter Rauschenbusch, Albert Schweitzer, Alan Watts and Joseph Campbell. This often takes the form of serious interest in Comparative Religion. The trouble is that precisely because this may well be a product of Classical Liberal inspiration, what is missed is the absolute necessity to be honest about every religion one studies. This means the necessity of being critical about religions in all cases where honesty demands it. Regrettably, what Comparative Religion far too often is these days is a secular version of Baha'i teachings about the oneness of all faiths, a view that it utterly indefensible if you are remotely objective on the subject -which took me a long time to learn since, for 13 years, I was a member of the Baha'i Faith. But learn this basic truth I did. All religions are not the same; there are a number of profound differences, with some religions just about completely out of sync with all others, notably, Satanism, Scientology, an assortment of rather sick cults (think Jonestown, etc) and Islam. In any case, the Classical Liberal pro-religion / Comparative Religion narrative is at odds with Classical Liberal indifference to religion on the part of politics-centered Classical Liberals. ---------------------------------------- Libertarian -While not all Libertarians are Atheists, most surely are, and libertarian values generally follow from this fact. Libertarians take the view that religion should be relegated to the private sphere, hence it is opposed to all missionary religions -viz., Christianity, Buddhism, various forms of Hinduism, etc., and especially Islam. Indeed, in contrast to most other types of political people, libertarians tend to be strongly anti-Islam. Indeed, given libertarian emphasis on Free Speech, they may well be outspoken in opposition to Islam, a notable example being Pamela Geller. She is an Objectivist (Ayn Rand) but I regard Randians as simply one version of libertarianism The trouble is that libertarians are, for the most part, also anti-Christian. If this was Hawaii, they would be anti-Buddhist, and so forth. This results in anti-religious bigotry of the worst kinds, or at a minimum snide remarks and demeaning value judgements. Libertarians are also moral relativists and are opposed, on principle, to almost all forms of traditional morality. Hence their disparagement of scriptures of all faiths for the moral content of those texts. About religion, it is hard to find any people who are more ignorant of the scholarship of religion than libertarians; most of the time they simply don't know what in the hell they are talking about. Pamela Geller, for instance, despite her professed Orthodox Jewish faith, doesn't seem to know much of anything about what Orthodox Judaism is actually all about. For her, from every indication, religion consists of rituals, shared identity, and a repertoire of common myths -and forget all of its moral imperatives, theological distinctions, and social values. Ignorance is bliss, in other words, as she advocates a number of political beliefs that follow directly from her favored form of libertarianism and in total opposition to the Bible. ----------------------------- Conservatives -There are several varieties, of course, but the foundation for all of these variants is the view that Biblical faiths are and should be privileged religions. That is, Christianity is the one True Religion, Judaism is true in principle but has been superceded, and all other religions are false and should be rejected on principle. In the modern world you would be hard pressed to find this view expressed so starkly among most Republicans, some of whom take a far more nuanced view than this, but -regardless- it is there to be found lurking beneath the surface., Some versions of "conservatism" are little better than caricatures of conservatism, for instance, George W. Bush and his "Compassionate Conservatism." His view of Islam was little or no different than contemporary political liberal Leftism -or akin to European petro-theology. The virtue of conservatism when it comes to study of "other religions" is that there is a tendency to be truthful about what they find. Still, the operative word is tendency. There are also value judgements of many kinds almost always intended to "prove" some sectarian version of Christian faith right and other religions wrong. However, there is one major exception to this description of conservatism. A large part of the Republican Party consists of "Mammonists," people who de facto even if not de jure, worship money. Indeed, in parts of the United States this faction constitutes the majority of the Republican Party. As far as these Republicans are concerned, religious people can all go to hell, they don't understand the real world, and basically are an impediment to success in the free market. Note: Not to be confused with "Wall Street Democrats" ----------------------------------------- Radical Centrism -There are different forms of Radical Centrist philosophy but this is to discuss what may be called the "Oregon variant." Basically this says that there is a "family of faiths" that share pretty much a common set of moral principles. You may belong to one of these faiths, feel very strongly about its "ultimate truths," but also fell very strongly that it is crucial to find ways to live with each other and form bases for mutual respect and a shared future in which we all benefit. The theologies of these religions may be very different, the stories they cherish may be strange to others, but they basically follow a system of social values that have been traditional in Christian societies in the past, including the recent past, and traditional in places like Japan, India, China (before the Communists), and much of Europe until well into the post war era. This outlook is very pro-science, and is accepting of many changes in society during the last 25 or 30 years, but seeks to be critical about it all, and is decidedly anti-Nihilistic. It rejects, on principle, the view that "anything goes" should guide us in any way. We need good values, good ideas, and good intentions. And only what is good -by definition if it is not objectively good it is worthless or downright evil. That is, while admittedly this generalization presents some problems, there exists among the traditions of Christian faith, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shinto, Jainism, even Sikhs, etc, a great deal of moral commonality that can and should serve as a model for future morality for human civilization. This specifically excludes Islam and other religions that promote values that are indefensible from a democratic, liberal (lower case), and humane perspective. And kindly don't give me any bull about how Islam "really" isn't as bad as it may seem. Actually it is worse. What this is about is an interfaith philosophy at the basis of a paradigm in which brotherhood is made the most of, and all of the classical virtues, including fairness, compassion, justice, honesty, and all the rest. What it manifestly does not include is the perverted view that any sexual pathology can justifiably be reclassified as "normal" in any way. On the contrary, traditional moralities on this subject have always been right and can be justified today on scientific grounds. The Radical Centrist narrative about religion also says that it is essential and a positive good to be well informed about religion -all religions as much as you have time for- and that there is no substitute for education about religion just as education is essential for just about everything else. The basis of this viewpoint can be summarized in four Bible verses, sort of a "four gospels" of Radical Centrism: Proverbs 8 : 1 - 11 1Does not wisdom call, does not understanding raise her voice? 2On the heights beside the way, in the paths she takes her stand; 3beside the gates in front of the town, at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud: 4"To you, O men, I call, and my cry is to the sons of men. 5O simple ones, learn prudence; O foolish men, pay attention. 6Hear, for I will speak noble things, and from my lips will come what is right; 7for my mouth will utter truth; wickedness is an abomination to my lips. 8All the words of my mouth are righteous; there is nothing twisted or crooked in them. 9They are all straight to him who understands and right to those who find knowledge. 10Take my instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold; 11for wisdom is better than jewels, and all that you may desire cannot compare with her...
Malachi 1 : 11 11For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts. ( In case you missed it, this says that in Malachi's time there were a number of blessed religions in the world about which the Almighty is well pleased. This includes just about all of the religions identified here as part of a family of faiths. ) I Corinthians 6: 12 12 'I am free to do anything', you say. Yes, but not everything is for my good. No doubt I am free to do anything, but I for one will not let anything make free with me. ( In case you missed it, this verse is as anti-libertarian, anti-Nihilist, anti-Marxist, anti-Fascist, anti-other indefensible views as possible) Philippians 4 : 8 8 And now, my friends, all that is true, all that is noble, all that is just and pure, all that is lovable and gracious, whatever is excellent and admirable fill all your thoughts with these things. -There are other values to faith than this, but you can say, nonetheless, that the whole point in true religion is to bring beauty into the world, to cherish the beautiful when you find it, and to make your life as beautiful in meaning as circumstances permit. -------------------------------------------- Which is your preferred narrative? I made my choice years ago. Indeed, I now regard all other choices as ridiculously stupid. I really don't give a damn if anyone disagrees. What I do give a damn about it what is right. Sincerely Billy R Eugene, Oregon -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
