How can the author not see that Woke is exactly the kind of rigid all-encompassing religion that he claims is the draw for the people he cites??
Additionally, it has the draw of being cool and ascendant. It controls every institution in America. It allows you to metaphorically stone to death apostates. That’s mighty attractive to a lot of lost angry people.
Wow, what an interesting post. Just because much of Christianity has gone soft in accommodating way, I see no reason to abandon orthodox Biblical Christianity. I have never understood the faithful evangelicals who convert to Catholicism because it involves the adoration and virtual worship of Mary, the mother of Jesus. To convert to Islam because it takes itself seriously strikes me in a similar way. I am interested in the truth. Islam and the Koran have not proven their authenticity while the Bible is the most authentic and true of ancient literature. Yes, there is a certain beauty in the liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church but does that Church provide a better path to the deep truth represented by Jesus? I do not think so. It is good for people to pursue religious truth.
"Secularization doesn’t make religion irrelevant; instead, it creates new ways of being 'religious.'”
Could be interpreted two ways: secularization is itself a "new way of being religious," which is a replay of an old conservative trope, e.g., communism as a religion-substitute, or that a secular milieu will create backlash such as observed with Tate and others.
There's nothing surprising about extremists aligning themselves with a militant ideology. From 1945 to 1975, if you were a rebel movement of any kind, leftism was de rigeur, because that was a militant period for European and American leftists. The IRA took weapons and training from jihadi groups, with whom it had nothing in common except a desire to smash and existing power structure.
Secularity is a neutral point with respect to religions: all are equally tolerated, none has preference in the public sphere. It is a value of a completely different kind than religions--which are usually not neutral about anything.
That penultimate paragraph is the neatest encapsulation of the modern moment I've seen. I wonder if the most fanatical commenters on Free Press recognise themselves in it, while constantly pointing across the aisle.
Very interesting piece! Religion has been used for politics from antiquity. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the best examples. High profile conversions (like Roman Emperor Constantine to Catholicism in 313 AD) have been exploited by religious groups for political purposes. It will be no different in the case of Andrew Tate.
I take it this wonk is a Muslim? Doesn't understand much about his own culture if so. Islam isn't JUST a religion; it is EVERYTHING. Just as Christendom was and Judaism too. I smell korasne budale.
Religion provided and identify for many people for thousands of years. But with religion losing steam politics has picked up the slack and identity is now associated with your political leanings. The more we lose our small communities and people lose their identity, the easier they will be to recruit to believing in a single ideology, whether that’s through religion, politics or something else.
Have to remember this author's name in case the free press posts another one of his articles I won't bother to read it. What was really the point? I guess it was over my head.
First I heard of 'political conversion'. But not the first time I see someone who seeks the structure of religion to keep their moral life within the guardrails (if this is what Andrew Tate did). Religion serves an important role for folks who need help keeping their moral compass pointed north. The death of religion is part of what ails Western Civ.
Of course, modern evangelical Christianity has become a spectacle often represented by characters show take donations from their parishioners and spend them on helicopters and personal jets and/or who preach against homosexuality only to be later found to be abusing boys on the side. Religion that trumpets its righteousness is often the epitome of hypocrisy. Find one that values love and humility and you won't see blatant politicization. Instead you'll see caring for the poor and valuing service to others. Jimmy Carter has it right.
I am personally not comforted by blindly believing anything. I take comfort in knowledge that is at the very least reasonable and is preferably provable. That’s where I find success. I resist emotional decisions because they are random and dangerous. Religion demands an emotional decision to blindly accept unprovable ideas from the most recent or charismatic religious person. I am just not willing to give up my mind for emotional comfort. Sorry, not sorry.
How can the author not see that Woke is exactly the kind of rigid all-encompassing religion that he claims is the draw for the people he cites??
Additionally, it has the draw of being cool and ascendant. It controls every institution in America. It allows you to metaphorically stone to death apostates. That’s mighty attractive to a lot of lost angry people.
Wow, what an interesting post. Just because much of Christianity has gone soft in accommodating way, I see no reason to abandon orthodox Biblical Christianity. I have never understood the faithful evangelicals who convert to Catholicism because it involves the adoration and virtual worship of Mary, the mother of Jesus. To convert to Islam because it takes itself seriously strikes me in a similar way. I am interested in the truth. Islam and the Koran have not proven their authenticity while the Bible is the most authentic and true of ancient literature. Yes, there is a certain beauty in the liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church but does that Church provide a better path to the deep truth represented by Jesus? I do not think so. It is good for people to pursue religious truth.
"Secularization doesn’t make religion irrelevant; instead, it creates new ways of being 'religious.'”
Could be interpreted two ways: secularization is itself a "new way of being religious," which is a replay of an old conservative trope, e.g., communism as a religion-substitute, or that a secular milieu will create backlash such as observed with Tate and others.
There's nothing surprising about extremists aligning themselves with a militant ideology. From 1945 to 1975, if you were a rebel movement of any kind, leftism was de rigeur, because that was a militant period for European and American leftists. The IRA took weapons and training from jihadi groups, with whom it had nothing in common except a desire to smash and existing power structure.
Secularity is a neutral point with respect to religions: all are equally tolerated, none has preference in the public sphere. It is a value of a completely different kind than religions--which are usually not neutral about anything.
That penultimate paragraph is the neatest encapsulation of the modern moment I've seen. I wonder if the most fanatical commenters on Free Press recognise themselves in it, while constantly pointing across the aisle.
Very interesting piece! Religion has been used for politics from antiquity. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the best examples. High profile conversions (like Roman Emperor Constantine to Catholicism in 313 AD) have been exploited by religious groups for political purposes. It will be no different in the case of Andrew Tate.
Well, he’s not wrong. Religious beliefs are just that.
If you don’t actually believe in them what is the purpose?
Not the rappers who are talking about their whoring baby mamas : )
Very informative article...thank you.
I hadn't heard about this, and now I am sad that I have.
I take it this wonk is a Muslim? Doesn't understand much about his own culture if so. Islam isn't JUST a religion; it is EVERYTHING. Just as Christendom was and Judaism too. I smell korasne budale.
Religion provided and identify for many people for thousands of years. But with religion losing steam politics has picked up the slack and identity is now associated with your political leanings. The more we lose our small communities and people lose their identity, the easier they will be to recruit to believing in a single ideology, whether that’s through religion, politics or something else.
so many converts to all sorts of religions. me. I am the Pope. Pope Bestuvall in a pantsuit....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS6PZb83fNs. Farther Sarducci says so
Have to remember this author's name in case the free press posts another one of his articles I won't bother to read it. What was really the point? I guess it was over my head.
First I heard of 'political conversion'. But not the first time I see someone who seeks the structure of religion to keep their moral life within the guardrails (if this is what Andrew Tate did). Religion serves an important role for folks who need help keeping their moral compass pointed north. The death of religion is part of what ails Western Civ.
Of course, modern evangelical Christianity has become a spectacle often represented by characters show take donations from their parishioners and spend them on helicopters and personal jets and/or who preach against homosexuality only to be later found to be abusing boys on the side. Religion that trumpets its righteousness is often the epitome of hypocrisy. Find one that values love and humility and you won't see blatant politicization. Instead you'll see caring for the poor and valuing service to others. Jimmy Carter has it right.
I am personally not comforted by blindly believing anything. I take comfort in knowledge that is at the very least reasonable and is preferably provable. That’s where I find success. I resist emotional decisions because they are random and dangerous. Religion demands an emotional decision to blindly accept unprovable ideas from the most recent or charismatic religious person. I am just not willing to give up my mind for emotional comfort. Sorry, not sorry.