Monday, November 23, 2009

Spiritual Oppression

Related posts:
Multiculturalism and the Enlightenment

We had a recent discussion about the sexes, our roles in society and how it all went wrong, in Vanilla Ice's post called Male Oppression. I am the first to acknowledge that women have ganged up against men under the guise of the feminism movement and I made a comment along those lines at the end of the post. As women we need to own up to our part in creating some of the problems in our Western culture. The post only presented a view from the male perspective though. Males also need to own up to their part in the problem.

Viking explained the term 'liberalism' in his post
A Brief History of Liberalism:

"The term Liberal is so inflammatory that is can be hard to understand its true meaning........But the term, like all words, has a history, and the term liberal has its roots in the Enlightenment."

He describes the philosophical basis of Liberalism, which had its roots in Enlightenment, as

"..all men are equal, in the sense that there is a universal sense of morality and human nature that unites all people..."

I first came across the term of 'Enlightenment' when I did a post called Understanding the German Mindset During World War 2. Some religious leaders believe The Age of Enlightenment has been the cause of the arrogance prevalent in the white race we find today. For example we presume that we are above committing atrocities like those that were committed by the Germans in WW2. But some religious leaders believe that Enlightenment has fuelled cognitive dissonance within the white race. Or alternatively, created white guilt. In the post the author described an

"uneasy conclusion that all humans are complicit in evil at some level"

when observing another author's mindset while investigating the atrocities committed by German soldiers during WW2. Then he continued,

"His thirst for justice points back to his own heart, which frightens him as well."

Wikipedia explains about the Age of Enlightenment that,

"....those who claim intellectual enlightenment often reject spiritual concepts altogether."

Liberals are in denial (allocating blame wrongfully, amongst others) about white guilt and I believe it is because of a combination of the cognitive dissonance created by the Enlightenment philosophy and their lack of spirituality, which may be manifested in religion. I've come across a few studies in America that show that men are more likely to claim no religious affiliation, compared to women. That does not necessarily mean that all the traditionally white countries will reflect the same statistics. It would be very useful to find out more about it though.

Stephanie McDaniel explains in her paper,
Levine religion and Democracy, that the future of religion is unknown but,

"history tells us that....free GOVERNMENT has prospered among religious peoples."

We have a culture that has embraced the liberalism cult and rejected spirituality, at the expense of our own freedom. In Viking's words,

"Today, liberalism is almost synonymous with socialism and this is sad. It could almost be said that socialists adopted the term to avoid negative connotations associated with Communism and there's much truth in this I believe, particularly in the United States............liberalism is Marx's bastard child."

12 Opinion(s):

Viking said...

good post.

I don't believe the Enlightenment is the cause of our modern day woes at all - although it did lead to the rise of Reason as the defining concept of political, economic and social discourse. Few of the Enlightenment figures were irreligious, but rather the Enlightenment made religion a personal rather than social matter and gave birth to the idea of subjective spirituality.

'Modernism', which grew out of Liberal ideas, says that all people must be judged by the same standard, whereas postmodernism, leads to cultural relativism, which would argue that cultures must be judged on their own merits. Which is another way of saying, it's ok for them to rape their grandmothers, because that's just their culture ...

Dachshund said...

Hi FE, I think the reason most men claim no religious affiliation is because the church is effeminate. I certainly wouldn't insist on my husband going to any church with me or without me because it bores the hell out of him. Come to think of it, it bores the hell out of me too.

Most of the congregation in your typical Catholic Church are women, a lot of them old. The hymns are effeminate, the flowers and the altar are effeminate, the goddam priests are effeminate. Wake up and smell the oestrogen!

What really irks is that these limp wristed men are financially supported by women while insisting on their subordinate role to men. They're pimping off women which is why no self respecting man wants anything to do with this set up.

Do you really want or need a faggoty man in witch's robes to act as a middleman between yourself and God? Because that's where priests get the tradition of wearing robes, from the female midwives whose arses they burnt at the stake for easing the pain of childbirth.

So much for spirituality within organised religion.

Do women really "oppress" men? Probably. Do men "oppress" women? Probably.

Men and women naturally exploit each other. It's only since women gained control over reproduction that they could become financially independent. If you're not at risk of falling pregnant and needing a man to provide for you and protect you from the advances of other men who want to knock you up, you are not going to play up to a man as if your life literally depended on it.

WHITEADDER said...

If one looks at the non- capabilities of many young white females in South Africa to even
manage to iron a shirt well , to cook a basic meal or to comprehend the washing instructions on a clothing label the question of costs / benefit rears its head in the final consequence. It is rather expensive to maintain a wife in a way a conservative male would find it appropriate . In order to do so a man must excell in his profession or business and it is not unreasonable that such a man requests a similar performance from his wife as a mother and homemaker. For a male able to perform it is totally irrelevant why some females do not make the grade. What is relevant is to pick the right one and this takes a lot of effort and sampling. I totally understand that from a females perspective the same criteria should apply. If one manages to let the brain override the hormones one sure has a better chance.

Viking said...

Dachshund

funny, I've most often heard it said that the churches alienate women, not men. Particularly the Catholic Church. In european countries, so-called "new age" bullshit religions attract overwhelmingly more women than men.
There are a lot of reasons for this but one, I suspect, is that Paganism, tree-huggery, Wicca and the like seem more women-friendly, under the illusion that pre-christian peoples were some kind of egalitarian hippies.

But now I think about it, evangelical churches have much more women that men, and in that environment most are looking for a husband...

FishEagle said...

@Viking, responding to your first comment I'm going to copy the same response I gave you on your blog post -

I'm sure a lot of good came out of Enlightenment, as there is always two sides to everything. Some of their philosophies were brilliant. I think the problem came in when the balance between reason and faith was shifted from the one extreme to the other extreme - from faith to reason.

There are many references on the web to the uncompromising attitude that they had towards religion so I don't doubt that they went overboard - all along these lines :

"Enlightenment's uncompromising hostility towards organized religion and established monarchy reflected a disdain for the past and an inclination to favor utopian reform schemes. Most of its thinkers believed passionately in human progress through education. They thought society would become perfect if people were free to use their reason." (http://history-world.org/age_of_enlightenment.htm)

There are also of course other forms of spirituality, not just religion, that I'd be interested to find out about, like arts, psychology, etc. These must have also been impacted on.

Regarding your second comment - like I said, men in touch with their emotions are sexy. Granted, not all guys that go church are in touch with their emotions, but there's an assumption that there is that general trend.

@ Dachshund. Lol.

There's some irony here in the fact that I've probably never been to a church service more than 10 times in my entire life. Still, I believe there are some good churches that provide a spiritual foundation for communities.

Personally, I've found my spiritual support from a psychologist.

@ Whiteadder, I agree that the brain needs to over ride the hormones. If the emotional side in the relationship is right then there shouldn't be any conflict though. And with a good emotional foundation the hormones and brains will last in the relationship.

Dachshund said...

@Viking: Be careful of looking for women in evangelical churches. You could be heading for big problems if they're born-again Christians.

OK, I've deleted 2 posts already, I know I can't be PC about religion either, so I'll tell you the worst. I lost a very good friend because she went over the top for Jesus. She went insane, she was throwing R10k a pop into the collection plate because some charmismatic sleazebag told her she would get seven times as much in return.

Stay away from Wiccans if you're a really serious dude because you'll run into chicks that have bumper stickers on their cars saying, "Vex me and I'll hex you." There are loads of those in Cape Town. Wiccans can be kind of fun though they aren't likely to be into discussions on modernism and postmodernism. Subjective spirituality is quite cool by Wiccans. You'll have a great time dancing naked under the moon, especially at this time of the year.

Viking said...

@Dachshund

you make it sound like I go trolling there...!

My biggest problem is wiccans, apart from the daftness, is the lack of proper hygiene. yik.

Dachshund said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dachshund said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FishEagle said...

@ Dach, I think people are ok when they have a balance in the three components that make us human - the cognitive, emotional and will power parts. When that balance is lost through trauma, we find ourselves in trouble and we end up repeatedly bouncing from one extreme to another. It is possible to get the balance back though and I'm sorry that your friend didn't find it.

FishEagle said...

Here's an interesting comment from the related post - Multiculturism and the Enlightenment:

"Gibbon blamed the downfall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century on the advances of Christianity in the 4th century and before. But the collapse of civil society in Western Europe in the 21st century has been preceded by the retreat of Christianity in the 20th century and earlier. There is a strange kind of irony in this historical symmetry that might have surprised Mr. Gibbon."

Fjordman is observing the shift in the balance between reason and spirituality. This ties in with the comment that Viking made on the origional post that -

"the idea that Rome fell because of its immorality or decadence is a false (but popular) one; it was all about technology.

The question is whether men and women had different roles that may have influenced the process of change.

Dachshund said...

@FE: Tell me about it. I was doing counselling work in Joburg and went through so many traumas of other people that I had a protracted bout of major reactive depression. I've pulled through. Medication for depression makes you fat which in itself is enough to want to shoot yourself if someone else doesn't do it first. So I took myself off that. I would rather go to hell than back to Joburg.