not_a_theist
Forum Texan
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 2040
Local time: 4:15 AM
Location: H-town
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:23 am Post subject: Economics and Religion Essay |
  |
|
Nice article on economics and religion.
Let the flames begin.
| Quote: | Karl Marx said "religion is the opiate of the masses."
He may as well have been looking in the mirror.
For it occurred to me that communism or socialism in itself is a religion.
The reason I linked the two together is that I noticed a key trait between two people I know;
One is my buddy Chico who, no matter how much empirical evidence or data is put in front of him, he will always advocate a socialist response or solution (unless of course he's paying taxes). But be it education, health care, the war, terrorism, you name it, the answer lies in increasing people's taxes and forfeiting the sovereignty of the US to appease foreign forces. You could (as I have) show him the correlation between taxes and economic growth, show him the start differences between North and South Korea, East and West Germany, nope, all flukes, all flawed examples, socialism is the best route. And dare you prove him wrong or paint him into a corner, he resorts to non-sequitur accusations that Bush is Hitler and subscribes to conspiracy theories about big oil and Haliburton.
The other is quite an insignificant human who showed me just how extreme people can become when it comes to religion. I pity the person, I genuinely do, as she has more or less subscribed 100% to the religion and in its most literalist form, and has therefore sacrificed her life. No sex, no kissing, no hand holding, unless you are the exact, same precise religion as she is. Because if you're not, not only are you damned to hell, she would be damned to hell as well if she sullied her hands with yours. And no matter how much logic or common sense you try to instill in the girl, no matter how many great and honorable men have asked her out, and no matter how much fun you try to get the girl to have (like having TWO martini's in one evening) it just won't take. It doesn't adhere to the literalist interpretation of the bible and is therefore sin. And should you try to show her the logical conclusion to her decisions and course of action (an old spinster in the classical sense), she merely dismisses it by quoting the fateist's favorite quote;
"God has a plan."
But be it politics or religion, Chico and "Born-Again-Girl" (BAG) displayed something that was odd and goes a long way in explaining most of the political beliefs I would say of leftists and a fair amount of rightists display in this country and that is irrational zealotry.
In both cases, Chico and BAG have already determined that their ideology or religion is the one true and correct religion. That everything else is wrong. And that no matter what, they are right. But when confronted with either empirical evidence that proves they're wrong or irrefutable logic, this does "not compute." Ergo, since they CAN'T be wrong, something else must be, and thus they then resort to more desperate measures to rationalize their beliefs.
With the BAG this is your typical "Jesus has a plan" defeatist fateism I loathe so much. Or perhaps (and we'll test our anime economists here) a quote from The Wings of Honneamise;
Girl - "I thought if we'd pray enough they wouldn't bulldoze the house."
Hero - "YOU PRAYED??? That doesn't stop them from bulldozing your damn house!!!"
But with Chico, it was a symptom very common in leftists and that is conspiracy theories.
This is key to understand because (as I surmise has been most other people's expeirences here) when I get a leftist or a liberal on the run, they don't stand their ground and fight, but resort to conspiracy theories about George Bush and Cheney and big oil and the glass ceiling and whatever else have you. A classic example was when a friend of mine told me he didn't believe the figures I had pulled from the OECD, or when another claimed Case Shiller didn't appropriately measure housing prices.
This again shows the irrational zealotry these people have for their ideology in that when they are confronted with irrefutable proof, they then question the proof or dismiss it on the grounds that "obviously" there's something wrong with it.
And this is why ideologies (be it communist or capitalist) are nothing more than religions. A sane man when confronted with opposing evidence will change his mind. A brainwashed ideologue will then try to construe or dismiss that evidence (ie-reality) so that it still fits within their political beliefs, because their belief system, their political religion is more important than reality and they have no problems being so hypocritical and intellectually dishonest to lie to themselves and others to afford the convenience of continuing to believe what they always have. Thus, this is why you'll have no limit to crazy conspiracy theories on the left (Iraq being fought for oil or how 9-11 was an inside job or how Bush stole the elections, Bush caused Katrina, Cheney and Haliburton gave me indigestion last month) yet not such a frequency of outlandish conspiracy theories on the right, because (and leftists I hope you have your ears plugged) capitalism is the political ideology that is based in reality, not necessitating the need for outlandish conspiracy theories.
What irks me though is an additional level of hypocrisy when it comes to the left and that is in general (because not all leftists are like this) mockery and disdain for Christianity. I personally, loathe any religion. I think they were nothing more than a means by which to apply law and governance over a people. But at the same time I let the facts and science and history determine my beliefs, political, religious or otherwise. That's why I'm a capitalist and agnostic. The left however, picks and chooses.
They'll let facts determine their religion (predominantly Atheism) and then mock Christians for believing the Earth was made in 7 days and is only a couple thousand years old, but then will completely ignore the centuries of data, empirical evidence and history we have showing capitalism and low taxes and freedom is the key to economic success. No, then they become just as zealous as the BAG, and vehemently defend their political religion with unrivaled vigor, yet with no scientific data or evidence to prove it.
An even more outstanding example would be global warming. It is nothing more than a religion. The planet will burn if you don't pay more in taxes.
Need I say more?
Global warming aside, it is the appeal of communism (and its socialist variants) of not having to work for a living that gets so many sheeple followers despite these ideologies' absolutely atrocious track records. To promise the masses more of other people's money and to take care of their every want and need is indeed an opiate. Matter of fact, it's the exact same opiate various religions have been promising to the billions of people on this planet for thousands of years;
'Put us in power, we'll eliminate your problems. Heaven awaits."
There is just one problem, the universal axiom of economics that is just as universal in physics as gravity;
If you don't work, you don't eat.
I don't care how much technology advances.
I don't care how much we move wealth around.
I don't care how much victim classes you set up as a means to "rationalize" the transfer of wealth.
I don't care how you fidget with taxes and how many social programs you set up and how many community initiatives you start.
I don't care if your entire platform is "hope and change and unity and ice cream and kittens."
It still doesn't change that ultimate economic LAW that if you don't work, you don't eat.
And just like the BAG or my buddy Chico, when you present them with this fact or evidence that indirectly points to it, they have been so brainwashed and so addicted to the false promise of communism; infinite wealth without work, that they have not the intellectual aptitude to override their desire to lie to themselves, and will do whatever they can to rationalize that annoying fact of life away.
"The lord has a plan"
"I'm poor because of Bush/Cheney"
"Hope and change."
Communism is indeed the opiate of the masses. |
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/
_________________
A liberal is a conservative who has been arrested. A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.
 |
|
kmisho
Stochastic
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 4603
Local time: 8:15 PM
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
No flaming needed. Part of it I agree with. One of my causes celebres for many years has been against ideology. And he hits the nail on the head as far as why it's a problem. Certainty is something to be guarded against even if you're right. The real-world consequences can be devastating. It can also be a great motivator. But this depends on what it is you feel certain about whether you're right or not.
A simple criticism is that "socialism/capitalism/etc=relgion" is a poison-the-well kind of argument to the irreligious. It can serve no purpose to incite ire. But I'm not one to throw someone under the bus on the basis of a single perceived discrepancy.
Worse is this:
| Quote: | | The reason I linked the two together is that I noticed a key trait between two people I know |
I'd call this a case of generalizing from personal experience. Someone knows a couple people who (supposedly) fit a profile...therefore one's general conclusions are correct.
| Quote: | | It still doesn't change that ultimate economic LAW that if you don't work, you don't eat. |
I simply dispute this as any kind of law. And besides, is this not the meat-and-potatos of HIS OWN ideology?
_________________
K Michau
Now this religion happens to prevail/Until by that one it is overthrown/Because men dare not live with men alone/But always with another fairy tale.
al-Ma'arri, Syrian Poet, died 1057
You deny the existence of 999 alleged Gods. I merely deny one more - yours.
John MacKinnon Robertson, "Godism" 1896
"Never is a long time." Robert Fripp, 1998
Poetry, Art, Music |
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 5:15 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That article is a bit off the mark. The argument, If you don't work, you don't eat, might ring true, but it is not an argument against communism, which is about how wealth should be re-distributed through the intervention of the state. If one wants to argue AGAINST communism, then addres its doctrine, not some hollowed perception that it is another religion... |
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
