Thomas_More
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The Christians, who held and hold a belief-based religion, were called atheists by the Romans. The Roman ruling class was what we would term today atheist, but only used the word to describe the Christian cult. This was because, for the Romans and others in the Roman world, religion meant the social etiquette of the rites. The Christians alone refused to participate in these. They also were intent on converting others, which meant discouraging others from participation in the principal forms of social etiquette and behaviour. Hence, the Christians were “atheists.”
The Jews were known, likewise, for rejecting the rites in favour of their Unknown God, but in their case it was an ethnicity phenomenon and was therefore tolerated, except in times of revolt. But the Christians were seducing good Romans and others away from the rites, so could not be tolerated. The Jews were leaving others alone. The Christians were not.
Looked them up. Just confirms what I was saying: lives distorted by the emptiness and frustrations engendered by life under modern capitalism; life without structure and worth.
Classic work on the social consciousness film in the silent era: Behind the Mask of Innocence by Kevin Brownlow.
Religion had nothing to do with belief in ancient Rome, nor does it in Hinduism, Buddhism etc. Religion meant social performance, or ritual, and represented social cohesion. In Hinduism it was interlaced with the stages of life: childhood, parenthood, vocation and old age. It could be argued that the lack of attention to the stages of life is why so many under modern capitalism are so obsessed with sex, into old age even. They have no trajectory, their lives frittered away by the wages system or by social exclusion.
The monotheistic big three are the belief-oriented cults, where one’s belief in a deity is paramount. This also explains their historical intolerance.
I always say hello to magpies, and ravens, crows, chuffs, foxes etc. Not out of superstition, but respect. So did the Japanese of old.
It’s the same delusion as the self/soul. The fact that we think etc. creates the illusion that there is an “I” that “inhabits” our “bodies” – so that the fact that it is a part of the body thinking etc. is blurred, but also fiercely resisted.
Wish it were the same with nationalism. Patriotism is the most dangerous religion of all, is more prevalent than ever, and its gods are national flags.
BD – “Do you think that Hitler, Churchill, Stalin, Tojo, Saddam or Roosevelt would have accepted complete defeat without going for the final option?”
And Putin is already being pushed toward that. And NATO isn’t backing off.
How can Putin even resign or face an election again, unless his own party wins, without fear of arrest? He can only resign if replaced by another of his own party, or at least an anti-NATOist.
Would he not opt for nuclear war, thinking he and his family have a bunker, if the alternative is to lose the presidency and be arrested?
BD – “if a conventional war broke out between NATO and Russia (which won’t happen for lots of reasons, but mainly because it would escalate to a nuclear conflict very quickly.”
Are you saying both sides will forever back down from it through fear of nuclear war?
But what if Putin continues to be denied a way out and NATO keeps backing him into a corner?
