Wow! A discussion has (almost) taken place. Elements of Os's post I think are absolutely fair, and an excellent riposte from Loading too. Would it be too much to ask for Os to now say "I get what you're saying, but the types of controls I think would work would be x....but yes, good manners and decency are critical too, though not at the expense of y..." etc etc.
For what it is worth, i think Christianity is irrelevent in 21st Century. I love Roman history and think that if you are aware of whst was happening in 1st Century Palestine , Jesus was just one part of thr many factions involved in trying to balsnce Judaism with Roman polythesism. We have a great deal of information from contemporary sources which explains what was really happening. The Gospels are not reliable and those gospels which do not fit the picture were shelved by late antiquity. It is about time that the West ditched the last vestiges of Christianity. The values might be worthwhile defending but the religious aspect is not rooted in historical fact and is morally ambiguous in 21st century.
I am fascinated by Trump's efforts to impose sanctions of Canada by ising the threat of soveriegnty. It is difficult to understand his shear brass neck and lack of understanding. However, despite being a cultural train wreck and a massive abuse of the rights of Canadians along the lines of whst Russia is doing with Ukraine , i do wonder if it would make economic sense from a Capitalist perspective albeit the main beneficaries would be Trump and his allies. I am not sure if this is actually a wind up because the US has sought this greater union in the past. If US got away with this, their ambitions will becime greater. It will never happen in my opinion.
No, Ian. Regardless of the logic and rights/wrongs of Christianity or any religion (Islam has far more inconsistencies to its origin story than Christianity, so you may as well just have said that religion is irrelevant in the 21st Century), it still has a place within modern society. Now whether you think it should do or not is another (and quite interesting) question. But to claim it's "irrelevant" is just plain wrong.
I believe that Jesus existed but the version that exist within the 4 gospels were written long after the event and i am sceptical that they represent the thoughts of the 'true' Jesus. The 1st century AD is fascinating but it is necessary for Christianity to take a historic perspective and put things in context. I am.not religous , btw.
I am an atheist but definitely a Jesus fan. The ultimate socialist with a really important message about sharing and love.
That’s a different discussion though, Ian (and I don’t know why it’s just focussing on Christianity). Whether you like it or not, and whether you think it should be or not, it (along with all the major religions) are of relevance to us as a society still.
The thing is, people on here want to pretend it’s not a valid concern. Even now people say “woke” is a good thing - it’s not. Look at this in an American text book: Is it really healthy to be teaching children this stuff? This is the same educational playbook that is slowly coming across the pond to the UK (just like a lot of things culturally follow the US). It’s SO damaging to teach people to hate their own country. And it’s also damaging to pretend that it isn’t happening and that anyone that points it out is evil. There is a middle ground where we can be a tolerant, safe society that welcomes people and also treats everyone fairly. We just need to make it happen. At the moment, things are still moving in the wrong direction.
First up, that appears to be a page from a book on ethnic studies. As such, it does appear appropriate to debate the position of language as a colonising force. It also doesn’t look like something children would be studying. Self-awareness is not self-hatred. Understanding your cultural background is also to understand its flaws. I would like you to explain where this textbook fits in to the US curriculum and what grade it would be taught at. Otherwise your point is more strawman than legitimate. Also, where is your response to my last argument?
I would argue that the reason opposing views such as atheism are allowed to flourish in the west is largely BECAUSE it was founded on Christian values. The idea of treating everyone equally despite their backgrounds is a Christian moral value. It’s an extremely rare thing in human history to have the tolerant society we have enjoyed in Europe in the last century. Other religions and belief systems are a lot less tolerant and would not be so kind to non-believers. The left are teaching the core ideas that: - capitalism is evil - westerners are evil - we are killing the climate - there is nothing to be proud of about being British Literally being told to hate the core fundamentals of our society. It’s crazy.
I don't disagree at all with your general point here, Os. I would question the validity of the text book and whether it's being taught to children though (and of course, were it being so, it's appalling). Not sure anyone would disagree with that.
Agreed (although the whole "the left" and "the right" binary thing is tiresome and intellectually lazy).
All this is projection. Where is it being "taught" that capitalism is evil? Where is it being "taught" the westerners are evil? Why are you so obviously ignoring 99% of science on the climate just because it suits you? Who said there is nothing to be proud of about being British? None of these things are true - except for the one which is pretty true. They are insecure projections about the world that simply do not match reality.
I'm sure everyone, whether 'left' or 'right' or simply adult, will congratulate Starmer for this? You will, right? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70w17dj258o
Yeah, when I say "agreed" I was agreeing that these things are generally a bad idea. The whole 'being taught' thing is a bit of a stretch.
I think the whole post was intellectually lazy. There is no agenda to teach capitalism is evil. There is, however, a culture of questioning and review in the West that means these things are debated. There is no anti-western agenda in the West. There is, however, a rebalancing going on in how we look at history. Awareness of fault does not demean value. Undermining science is absolutely one of the worst things going on, and leaving this planet worse off would be a disaster. British pride comes up all the time, and is celebrated all the time. What Os wants is the Americanisation of the UK - and that is not British at all. And finally Christianity is not what fostered independent thought and research. People were burned alive for doing "science" and questioning things. Eastern spiritual religions are far less repressive. Everything in the post you agreed is certifiably, provably, nonsense.
Tolerance and acceptance is a Christian value. The West has largely been built on Christian values. Other belief systems and religions are less tolerant (whilst some of course are more tolerant). Those are facts, and shouldn't be dismissed just because Os injects a little bit of his usual hysteria into things.
Those aren't facts, LTL. I am sorry, but you are wrong. Taoism and Buddhism do not have the insecurities of Christianity. They do not demand obeisance to a book with a pre-written narrative. Hinduism and Sikhism do not demand you follow their God but allow you to find a place for your God in their system. All these systems have allowed their followers to explore ideas and concepts with far more freedom than the organised Churches of Europe. It isn't until Zwingli and Luther in Europe that any kind of Christian freedom exists. I agree that Christ himself represents freedom - but the organised religions of Christianity have rarely done more than restrict humanity and monetise faith.
As I said, of course there are some that are more tolerant, as you've listed. Of course the history of Christianity has had it's issues, but the point is that modern Western values are based upon the tenets of Christianity.
Or are Western values built upon the tenets of Greek civilisation that pre-dates Christianity and includes thorough explorations of ethics and morality that feed into the way the Bible was constructed?
