The principle ideology of American society is Christianity, and Christianity permeates western culture and philosophy to the very core. Even the parts that are supposed to be secular or atheistic in name. Even those in the west who hate religion often have a very Christian outlook on life. Many like Richard Dawkins are quite honest about this, in rejecting Christian metaphysics but still adopting pther parts of Christian philosophy.
The stuff about “Christ” and “Judasism” on the pyramid is basically a zionist dogwhistle. The “Judeo-Christian values” people like Ben shapiro and this one annoying friend of mine (who is thankfully no longer a zionist, but still believes in the judeo-christian “values”).
There are also strains of fascism in the west which see Christianity as the main weakness of western imperialism, as something whose “slave morality” (aka, care for the weak and sick) hold back the west from greatness. I’ve seen some or these mfs go so far as to think that the west is doomed and should be destroyed since it is irredeemably Christian and weak (this last type is a very funny type of guy). Then they turn towards eastern philosophies and come up insane shit like fascist Buddhism (add 7 kalpas of repentence in hell for these mfs)
And there are also strains of fascism which are Christian nationalism but with judeophobia as well. So just nazis.
Christian philosophy is whatever it needs to be to fit the society that birthed it. I really don’t see American Christian evangelism as comparable to something like say South American catholic liberation theology. It’s going to twist itself to ensure a comfortable foundation for whatever purpose it needs to serve. Evangelical Christianity in America for instance is more like a white supremacist money religion with Christian vocabulary and ritual painted on top.
There are extremely few Americans who ever took Christianity seriously to its logical extent, namely people like Dr. MLK Jr. and John Brown. It’s incredibly rare for that aspect of Christian theology, namely care for the oppressed and self-sacrifice, to present itself among Americans. That’s because the circumstances of America as a genocidal empire means that the more negative aspects of Christian philosophy will get emphasized, like patriarchy or dominionism or whatever young earth creationists are talking about.
What you’re talking about, how Richard Dawkins claims cultural Christianity, I would say could be more easily explained as a racist imperialist mindset. That guy hates Muslims from the viewpoint of a snooty ivory tower professor. I just can’t agree that Christianity is at the core of something like that, since you’d have to somehow claim the naked racism of Dawkins somehow has a similar origin to the Christian abolitionist groups of the American south pre-civil war, when there are vastly different circumstances there
I typed out a lot of shit. As I typed it out, I understood that ideological systems as widely spread out as Christianity are so complex that I don’t have a proper framework for analyzing it. Imma still leave the comment I typed out in case you care.
Christian philosophy is whatever it needs to be to fit the society that birthed it.
You ain’t going to see me argue against the base-superstructure model. But Christianity is not “homegrown” in much of the world. It spread internationally and was imposed in many parts of the world. Thus, names, myths, ethics, metaphysics, legal theory, culture and many characteristics of Christianity carry across multiple societies, classes and mode of productions.
This can come in the form of concrete policy criminalisation of LGBTQ people in post-colonial nations, or more subtle philosophy such as the christian outlook on things like “sin” and “virtue”, or on “purity”, “martyrdom”, or the essentialism, or eternal spirits and so on. Not all that is unique to Christianity, but Christianity does have its own take on those things.
I would say could be more easily explained as a racist imperialist mindset
It is both. The “civilizing mission” style of justifying imperialism started with the justification of spreading Christianity first.
since you’d have to somehow claim the naked racism of Dawkins somehow has a similar origin to the Christian abolitionist groups of the American south pre-civil war
The ideology of the ruling class also becomes the ideology of the underclass through indoctrination. This creates a class divide/tension in that ideology, even though it is technically the same ideology. So it is not unusual for ideological similarities to appear in vastly different class circumstances*. It’s part of what makes politics so frustrating and confusing if you look at only ideology
*that’s not to say that those groups believe in literally the same things, although it’s not as if Richard Dawkins claims to be against abolition.
The principle ideology of American society is Christianity, and Christianity permeates western culture and philosophy to the very core. Even the parts that are supposed to be secular or atheistic in name. Even those in the west who hate religion often have a very Christian outlook on life. Many like Richard Dawkins are quite honest about this, in rejecting Christian metaphysics but still adopting pther parts of Christian philosophy.
The stuff about “Christ” and “Judasism” on the pyramid is basically a zionist dogwhistle. The “Judeo-Christian values” people like Ben shapiro and this one annoying friend of mine (who is thankfully no longer a zionist, but still believes in the judeo-christian “values”).
There are also strains of fascism in the west which see Christianity as the main weakness of western imperialism, as something whose “slave morality” (aka, care for the weak and sick) hold back the west from greatness. I’ve seen some or these mfs go so far as to think that the west is doomed and should be destroyed since it is irredeemably Christian and weak (this last type is a very funny type of guy). Then they turn towards eastern philosophies and come up insane shit like fascist Buddhism (add 7 kalpas of repentence in hell for these mfs)
And there are also strains of fascism which are Christian nationalism but with judeophobia as well. So just nazis.
I think about this all the time.
You can see it in what passes for politics – people are only interested in judging who is Good and who is Bad.
It’s part of the reason I’ve been using the internet a lot less; it is overrun with Puritan hordes.
Yeah, puritanism and “good” and “evil” thinking even runs through western leftism quite deeply. I’m quite guilty of it myself.
Christian philosophy is whatever it needs to be to fit the society that birthed it. I really don’t see American Christian evangelism as comparable to something like say South American catholic liberation theology. It’s going to twist itself to ensure a comfortable foundation for whatever purpose it needs to serve. Evangelical Christianity in America for instance is more like a white supremacist money religion with Christian vocabulary and ritual painted on top.
There are extremely few Americans who ever took Christianity seriously to its logical extent, namely people like Dr. MLK Jr. and John Brown. It’s incredibly rare for that aspect of Christian theology, namely care for the oppressed and self-sacrifice, to present itself among Americans. That’s because the circumstances of America as a genocidal empire means that the more negative aspects of Christian philosophy will get emphasized, like patriarchy or dominionism or whatever young earth creationists are talking about.
What you’re talking about, how Richard Dawkins claims cultural Christianity, I would say could be more easily explained as a racist imperialist mindset. That guy hates Muslims from the viewpoint of a snooty ivory tower professor. I just can’t agree that Christianity is at the core of something like that, since you’d have to somehow claim the naked racism of Dawkins somehow has a similar origin to the Christian abolitionist groups of the American south pre-civil war, when there are vastly different circumstances there
I typed out a lot of shit. As I typed it out, I understood that ideological systems as widely spread out as Christianity are so complex that I don’t have a proper framework for analyzing it. Imma still leave the comment I typed out in case you care.
You ain’t going to see me argue against the base-superstructure model. But Christianity is not “homegrown” in much of the world. It spread internationally and was imposed in many parts of the world. Thus, names, myths, ethics, metaphysics, legal theory, culture and many characteristics of Christianity carry across multiple societies, classes and mode of productions.
This can come in the form of concrete policy criminalisation of LGBTQ people in post-colonial nations, or more subtle philosophy such as the christian outlook on things like “sin” and “virtue”, or on “purity”, “martyrdom”, or the essentialism, or eternal spirits and so on. Not all that is unique to Christianity, but Christianity does have its own take on those things.
It is both. The “civilizing mission” style of justifying imperialism started with the justification of spreading Christianity first.
The ideology of the ruling class also becomes the ideology of the underclass through indoctrination. This creates a class divide/tension in that ideology, even though it is technically the same ideology. So it is not unusual for ideological similarities to appear in vastly different class circumstances*. It’s part of what makes politics so frustrating and confusing if you look at only ideology
*that’s not to say that those groups believe in literally the same things, although it’s not as if Richard Dawkins claims to be against abolition.