BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


War on religion

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Solaris
13:54 / 26.09.01
Following on from the thread in 'buddha bomb', where the debate on the coming conflict has veered into one about relgion and metaphysics (as usual...) and the sparks is flyin'. New debate: what if America was truly a secular state, Christianity had died out long ago (as it is doing, painfully slowly). Would this be a war on religion, rather than terrorism?

After all, if the planes were the bullets, then religion was the gun.

Check out http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4257777,00.html

for Richard Dawkins' perspective. As he says:

'I am trying to call attention to the elephant in the room that everybody is too polite - or too devout - to notice: religion, and specifically the devaluing effect that religion has on human life.'

Barbelith is an interesting place to discuss this, because of our rock n roll interest in mysticism, magick, the irrational, chaos etc. As has been jokily said before, 'is Barbelith a religion?'. From some of the vague arguments and statements about reason and rationality on previous threads, it's beginning to sound like it's becoming one. And I don't think that's a good thing.
I don't know about you, but the horror of watching what's happening to the world is driving me back to the arms of pure reason at great speed, and leaving a lot of my interests kinda foul tasting.

So; what about it?

Let's hear what you mystic kids have to say... Maybe you can define what you mean by reason, as opposed to my understanding? Or justify the mind sets of those hijackers?

(Puts helmet on and crouches a la Rodney King...)
 
 
deletia
14:03 / 26.09.01
It's worth mentioning that the elevation of reason to a status as the supreme tool for reasoning is a characteristic of humanism, which is a fairly antiquated belief system in itself.

It's also worth considering that, if you wish to make clear in the strongest terms possible that you object to America for any one or more of a number of possible reasons, knocking down the World Trade Centre is, by some arguments, an entirely rational way to achieve that goal.

Or, to put it another way, I don;t think it makes sense to antithesize "reason" and "religion" as you do.
 
 
grant
14:09 / 26.09.01
In a related project, define "religion," define "reason."
 
 
Jack Fear
14:09 / 26.09.01
I dispute your central thesis, that "if the planes were bullets, then religion was the gun."

I don't think religion is the core motivation here, I honestly don't. Religion has been used to cloak to grant urgency and respectability to what are essentially sociopolitical goals--just as it was in ancient Rome, just as it was in the Crusades, just as it is in Northern Ireland. Religion is a flag of convenience, nothing more--and if there were no religion, then something else would serve as a flag.

The irrationality that needs to be wiped out is not religion--which speaks to the best part of us--but rather xenophobia, which speaks to the worst. Because the essential problem isn't religion per se, but sectarianism--which is xenophobia by another name.

[ 26-09-2001: Message edited by: Jack Fear ]
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:15 / 26.09.01
First up: it is hopelessly oversimplistic to see "religion" as the primary motivating factor behind the events of 9/11. Not only because you run the risk of joining in with the general false representation of Islam that is going on in the media (wrong for all kinds of reasons, the Koran's condemnation of murder and the vast divide between mainstream Islam and the alleged beliefs of the alleged hijackers being just two of them). But also because, as Jack says, it ignores the political (plus social and geographical) motivations behind the attacks, the events that led up to them, etc. Basically, you're falling into line with the general consensus that this was an attack by strange, uncivilised, weirdy beardy fanatics whose primitive heathen mindsets we advanced, civilised (decode: white) people cannot fathom since we have advanced far beyond it.

The ways in which religious/spritual belief systems interact with any other social factors, and have done for centuries across the world, is bound to include many, many instances in which religion or 'supernatural' beliefs led in part to a harmful result. But I'm sure that this is also true of science, however you want to define it. God, or one's faith, is after all not the only thing below which one can place the sanctity of human life. Indeed, many religions emphasise the sanctity of human life.

Then there's the fact that you're setting up what looks from here like a glaringly obvious false dichotomy, with (WLFHL) very little in the way of objective rationale behind it, for all your talk of 'pure reason'. (Incidentally, since you're starting this thread, you might want to define your own terms rather than asking others to do so first.)

Oh, and Dawkins' article is just... ick. Reminds me why I can't stand the guy.

quote:Yes, testosterone-sodden young men too unattractive to get a woman in this world might be desperate enough to go for 72 private virgins in the next.

Ridiculing the motives of people who hold a belief system different to your own (and again, it has not been established exactly what the belief systems of the people directly responsible for 9/11 were) cannot lead to any constructive understanding.

[ 26-09-2001: Message edited by: Flyboy ]
 
 
deletia
14:16 / 26.09.01
Interesting - "xenos" means a foreigner, but also a guest-friend, which is precisely what bin Laden is to the Taliban. Hadn't thought of that.

But. Woudl it not make sense to forcibly spread Christianity (or the otherreligion of your choice) across the globe, in ordere to ensure that there are no other religions to persecute or be persecuted by, if religion is the gun?
 
 
sleazenation
14:19 / 26.09.01
this idea has already been presented without a hint of irony in the mainstream media, haus...
 
 
deletia
14:23 / 26.09.01
What I see as farce, the world sees as fact. What can I tell you?

But. I think the problem with Solaris' contention rests on its own jihad, with Pure Reason, a creature as nebulous, mysterious and open to argument as any god, making war against religion.
 
 
The Natural Way
14:31 / 26.09.01
What they said.

And the this idea that you guys (Five, Solaris et al) seem to be into: that religion is this vast, static, monolithic thing; that a wide range of different belief systems can be reduced to one concept (which you have yet to define, except in the vaguest terms as "unreason") that can be taken apart under the magnifying glass and exposed as the irrational rambling that (you believe) it is .

No, like other people here I don't recognize your original premise/"argument", so how am I meant to engage with it?
 
 
The Natural Way
14:34 / 26.09.01
What they said.

And this idea that you guys (Five, Solaris et al) seem to be into - that religion is this vast, static, monolithic thing; that a wide range of different belief systems can be reduced to one concept (which you have yet to define, except in the vaguest terms as "unreason") that can be taken apart under the magnifying glass and exposed as the irrational rambling that it is - I don't buy it.

No, like other people here I don't recognize your original premise/"argument", so how am I meant to engage with it?
 
 
Ethan Hawke
14:35 / 26.09.01
The opposition here might not be between religion and reason (or fundamentalist Islam and Western Humanism, to be more specific, but to say that focusing on the alleged religion of the alleged hijackers is missing the sociopolitical rationale behind their actions is missing the point.

In the middle east, how do you separate the "sociopolitical" factors from the religious factors? From the Taliban to Israel, none of these states are in any way, shape or form secular. Religion, be it Islam or Judaism, is part and parcel the sociopolitical climate that everyone in this region is exposed to.

Fundamentalist Islam produces suicide bombers the same way western Capitalism produces stockbrokers. The attackers were a product of a sociopolitical situation shaped in a large part by their (alleged) religion. How is it more radical to say this than it would be to say that, for instance 1st and 2nd century Christianity caused many of its adherents to die for their beliefs because of the glorification of the uber-martyr Jesus?
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
14:36 / 26.09.01
Christianity is not well-known for bringing peace and tolerance to areas under its sway, particularly where the conversion has been 'by the sword'. Unlike Islam in some of its earlier incarnations, actually.

Ideologies of reason, such as Marxism-Leninism, do not have a great track record in this respect, either.

And 'War On Religion'?

Can you really think of no better solution than another 'war' paradigm?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
14:36 / 26.09.01
Let's not forget that (according to Adorno and Horkheimer at any rate) the Enlightenment project ultimately led to totalitarianism... 'pure reason' can be a very deceptive mistress. Also, secular societies are frequently prey to all kinds of tedious bunkum - Swedenborg, theosophy, etc etc.
 
 
deletia
14:41 / 26.09.01
Oh, indeed - concentration camps can be seen as the extensive application of reason to a problem. Ultimately, rationalism is just another "ism" - a religion of ideology the fundamentalist worship of which is just as dangerous as any other unfounded belief on how the world works.
 
 
deletia
14:41 / 26.09.01
Oh, indeed - concentration camps can be seen as the extensive application of reason to a problem. Ultimately, rationalism is just another "ism" - a religion of ideology the fundamentalist worship of which is just as dangerous as any other unfounded belief on how the world works.
 
 
The Damned Yankee
14:46 / 26.09.01
quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Willow:

It's also worth considering that, if you wish to make clear in the strongest terms possible that you object to America for any one or more of a number of possible reasons, knocking down the World Trade Centre is, by some arguments, an entirely rational way to achieve that goal.


Bombing the WTC would be the act of a "rational" enemy. Driving the plane into the side of the building is anything but. It implies a fanatic's zeal which precludes anything resembling rational thought.
 
 
deletia
14:55 / 26.09.01
You need to make a series of highly rational plans and decisions to organise either. The effect (massive loss of innocent life and property damage) is the same. Rationally, since somebody has already tried to blow it up with a bomb, it will be more prepared to prevent that. The inevitable death of the perpetrators is a factor, but considered rationally must be weighed against the benefits of success, i.e the greatest loss of life in a single attack on American soil ever.

It's horrible. But I don't see what makes it less rational than a bombing.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
14:55 / 26.09.01
But, but... assuming (which I think is fair in this case) that the perpetrators did actually have a fair amount of zeal - which does not equal muddle-headedness... what could imply a greater application of reason and better problem-solving than using a plane? No tricky bomb, so suspicious loitering, an unexpected angle of attack, enormous potential for destruction both physical and psychological. What's scary about the use of planes to crash into the WTC is the fact that it was a really effective plan, constructed by clever people who weren't bothered about the damage they caused. It was entirely rational.
 
 
Jack Fear
17:53 / 26.09.01
quote:Originally posted by todd:
Fundamentalist Islam produces suicide bombers the same way western Capitalism produces stockbrokers.

Oh, for fuck's sake...

Might as well say "Roman Catholicism produces child molestors..." or "Wicca produces irritating flakes..."

Religion is not the cause. Religion is the vehicle.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
18:09 / 26.09.01
That's not quite true. Religion is the justification, though Islam in genesis is against (though far from incapable of) violence.

But yeah, todd, you need to read 'Islam - a short history' by Karen Armstrong. Brief, nicely written, unbiased, in so far as that's possible.
 
 
Ethan Hawke
18:26 / 26.09.01
Admittedly, I was purposefully being inflammatory, but my larger point is that the sociopolitical situation in the Middle East is largely a creation of religion and not something else entirely. To call it purely a question of $PROFIT$ and capitalist exploitation is to be as myopic as to say the attack on the WTC was about the US support of Israel.

For instance, a prime motivating factor in Osama bin Laden's fatwa against the US is the presence of US military equipment and personnel in Saudi Arabia, home and custodians of Mecca and Medina etc. The mere presence of the US profanes those holy shrines. It is like putting an abortion clinic in Vatican City.

[ 26-09-2001: Message edited by: todd ]
 
 
Fiction Suit Five
18:32 / 26.09.01
'It is like putting an abortion clinic in Vatican City.'

What an excellent idea. Now, there's a fight worth fighting.
 
 
Fiction Suit Five
18:42 / 26.09.01
'uncivilised, weirdy beardy fanatics whose primitive heathen mindsets we advanced, civilised (decode: white) people cannot fathom since we have advanced far beyond it.'

America is one of the most gloriously multicultural societies on the planet Earth. How does recognising its' comparative cultural enlightenment (freedom of speech, freedom of religion) 'decode' as 'white'?

Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran; not particularly multicultural, I've noticed. Not big on freedom of speech or religion, either.

'Oh, and Dawkins' article is just... ick. Reminds me why I can't stand the guy.'

Thanks for your thoughtful contribution to the debate.
 
 
Fiction Suit Five
18:49 / 26.09.01
'I don't think religion is the core motivation here, I honestly don't. Religion has been used to cloak to grant urgency and respectability to what are essentially sociopolitical goals'

Haven't you felt some of your liberal socioanthropological assumptions getting shaken up over the last few weeks? Was it James Lovelock who said that a great mind is able to cope with having its belief systems turned on their head once in a while? Its certainly been happening to me these past two weeks. That old 'sociopolitical'/'economic causes' argument just doesn't seem to wash any more. Let's settle it once and for all by flying to Afghanistan and asking some Taliban face to face why they're prepared to die fighting us. 'Is it sociopolitical forces? ...Or is it because you honestly believe you will be shagging 70 virgins in heaven?' Meet you down the airport.
 
 
Frances Farmer
19:30 / 26.09.01
Wait a minute... Didn't you just infer that you had a great mind?

 
 
Fiction Suit Five
20:26 / 26.09.01
Whoops, sorry, bad sentence; I meant to imply that my head's gettin' all mussed up, not declare my intellectual greatness. Although, obviously that's a given...
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
07:07 / 27.09.01
[channelling Whisky P.]

Imply godammit, imply.

"I think you know my wife very well"

I imply you are sleeping with my wife.

You infer from my words that I think you are sleeping with my wife. You resent the implication, so you say nothing, leaving me to infer that you have not heard, or don't care what I think.

[/cwp]

Sorry. That gets up my nose.
 
 
deletia
07:25 / 27.09.01
And mine. Excellent...

Oh, and opinions rather differ as to whether you get to shag the virgins, IIRC.
 
 
Solaris
07:58 / 27.09.01
This guilty cultural self-flaggelation is so historically and factually messed up.

Christianity does have a better human rights track record than Islam; sorry. where would you rather live, Amsterdam or Baghdad?

Not that I'm promoting Christianity.

Re: 'Can you really think of no better solution than another 'war' paradigm?'

I'm not offering solutions, brother. If I had solutions I'd be a very happy giant robot sun. I started this thread to explore why our perceptions are of a war on terrorism, rather than religion, as I hoped I'd made clear at the start. My own attempts at avoiding ethnocentricity have been rather shaken up over the last fortnight, and I'd like to talk about it, is all, is all.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
08:01 / 27.09.01
Wouldn't be a discussion on religion without a little Jack Chick commentary. Not a comic-book one, unfortunately, but it does feature a link to his "Islam information centre" which features such sections as "Scientific Errors In The Qur'an". Not that he's looked at biblical inconsistencies in the same way, you understand.

Then again, elswhere he's trying to convince people that evolution's a sham (I particularly love the line "teens love it!") and that Halloween would make a great night for evangelism.
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
08:23 / 27.09.01
quote:Christianity does have a better human rights track record than Islam

Examples, please. I suspect you're taking the fragment of time which supports your case, rather than the whole.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
08:54 / 27.09.01
quote:where would you rather live, Amsterdam or Baghdad?

Ah, Amsterdam, famous fundamentalist Christian mecca.
 
 
grant
14:05 / 27.09.01
Amsterdam is actually one of the greatest centers of Islam in Europe. No lie.
Huge Indonesian population.

Baghdad, on the other hand, is the capital of a secular state. One that many even fundamentalist Muslims aren't in support of (witness many years of war between the Ayatollah and President Hussein).
There's an immense cultural difference between the two, yeah, but I think it's more to do with where they are and what they eat than which church people go to.
(Aside: frankly, I'd rather stay in Yogyakarta, but that's just me.)

A great many human rights abuses have been allowed under the banner of just about all of the world's religions - think of the Inquisition, think of the handless thieves of Baghdad. On the other hand, think of hospitals (the Crusades), think of mathematics (Moorish occupation of Europe).
(Ever wonder why "zero" is such a weird word? Or why almost all the stars have Arabic names?)

Religion doesn't cause civilization; it's an expression of it. Not even that - it's a pervasive part of it. One more ideology...

[ 27-09-2001: Message edited by: grant ]
 
 
Jack Fear
14:57 / 27.09.01
Ah, yes, Indonesia. The world's largest and most populous Muslim nation, IIRC. Hmmm. And yet, the last I heard, Indonesia is not overrun with suicide bombers--even though "Islam breeds suicide bombers."

Nor, AFAIK, have there been massive protests in Indonesia over US occupation of Saudi Arabia--even though, as we've been told, that occupation is prime motivator for Muslims hating the US.

Nor are such things endemic to sub-Saharan Africa, which is also overwhelmingly Muslim.

What you do see, however--in Africa and in Indonesia--is all manner of Muslim-on-Muslim violence, motivated by politics, territory, and ethnicity. Curious, that.

And on the other side, the alleged Islamists of the al-Quaida organization have been deafeningly silent regarding oppressive government policies in Indonesia--which suggests that they don't give a shit about Indonesia. Which is odd, you know, since al-Quaida are (as we've been told) primarily motivated by the tenets of Islam... and Indonesia is, IIRC, the largest and most populous Muslim nation in the world. Doubly curious.

Cos it's all Muslims together, right? Right?

Or is this no longer true, now that Islam is a world religion? In other words, might it not be that the primary motivator for these attacks is not religion, but ethnicity--of which religion is a signifier, but not the thing itself?

quote:Originally posted by todd:
...a prime motivating factor in Osama bin Laden's fatwa against the US is the presence of US military equipment and personnel in Saudi Arabia, home and custodians of Mecca and Medina etc. The mere presence of the US profanes those holy shrines. It is like putting an abortion clinic in Vatican City.
Should such a thing happen, Italian Catholics might be horrified, and American bishops would fume, but the rank and file of American Catholics would get on with their lives.

Why? Because Rome's a long way away, and we've got more immediate problems, like paying the heating bill for the parish hall.
quote:Originally posted by Fiction Suit Five:
Haven't you felt some of your liberal socioanthropological assumptions getting shaken up over the last few weeks?
Nope. quote: Was it James Lovelock who said that a great mind is able to cope with having its belief systems turned on their head once in a while?Very well may have been: but the fact remains that, although many of my prior assumptions about the world have indeed been shaken over the last two weeks, my conviction that social and economic justice for all is the only way to achieve lasting peace has not been one of them. quote:Let's settle it once and for all by flying to Afghanistan and asking some Taliban face to face why they're prepared to die fighting us. 'Is it sociopolitical forces? ...Or is it because you honestly believe you will be shagging 70 virgins in heaven?' Meet you down the airport.See, right there you (and Mr. Dawkins) lost your credibility as the voice of "rationality"--when you resorted to the cheap-shot cartoon stereotyping. "Testosterone-sodden young men too unattractive to get a woman in this world might be desperate enough to go for 72 private virgins in the next..." Again, I repeat: for fuck's sake. Sure, these guys just want to get their rocks off in Paradise. Because no cause could be worth dying for, for its own sake--certainly there's no good sociopolitical reasons to be pissed off at first the Soviet puppet government and then the United States. Nope. It's all just sexual frustration.

And religion, of course, is designed primarily to appeal to that sexual frustration and the pathetic need for reassurance and comfort, I suppose--not to challenge us to be better than we can be, not to challenge us to overcome our fear of the alien and to reach out to others in a spirit of brotherhood? Is that what you believe?

Well, I've got a newsflash for you, Sunshine--in the last couple of weeks, the only place where I've been hearing a consistently reasonable message--a message of making the tough choice to accepting responsibility for our actions, a message of combating hatred and xenophobia by pursuing a policy of aid and compassion, a message of justice in the broader context--not the payment of blood debt, but a broader socioeconomic justice that makes terrorism unthinkable by making it unnecessary--has been my local church.

[ 27-09-2001: Message edited by: Jack Fear ]
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
15:13 / 27.09.01
Key word 'local'.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply