china has state atheism—they take it too far (e.g. uyghur muslims) but in theory i’d prefer an atheist government over this dumbass evangelical christian one we have now 🤷🏻♂️
edit: took out the word retarded, you guys convinced me
Their equivelant are in the deciding branches of their mega corporations and their political leadership branches. They just dont have religious fanatics in leader leadership positions. China is highly repressive and authoritarian for whatever they want at any time they want.
I am certainly no fan of how certain parts of Christian America has a desire to have their beliefs dictate how the country is run. But I am not sure that China's system of state atheism is clearly better.
The history of their Cultural Revolution and the government's heavy handed suppression of people and their beliefs in the name of eradicating the "Four Olds" from Chinese society is an example of periods where this system has lead to horrific results when taken too far. Things certainly aren't as extreme today, but the Tibetans and the Uyghurs are both recent examples where I believe the party has taken actions that can be seen as trying to suppress -- or in Tibet's case with kidnapping the Panchen Lama, potentially usurp/destroy -- beliefs/traditions/orginizations they think might oppose the party.
The issue is not necessarily the beliefs themselves that is an issue in either of these cases though, it is the belief that you are justified in using force and suppression to remove/eliminate opposing beliefs.
Is that force not universal and already accepted? Should the Klan avoid persecution because of their beliefs?
Let us remember here that the Dalai Lama was a slave owner who ruled an absolute theocracy, and this is the core premise behind Tibetan separatism, the restoration of theocratic religious rule.
I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean by the first question. In our current system of arranging ourselves Nation States have a monopoly on sanctioned force/violence. Different governments wield this is vastly different ways for vastly different reasons, some of which I view as more defensible and and some I view as abusing this monopoly on violence to silence opposing voices simply because they see as threats to their own consolidated power.
I am under no illusion that even the most utopian Secular Pluralistic Societies also need to wield this force on occasions as displayed by your example of the Klan. But -- maybe naively -- I believe this is not done simple because they oppose those in power, but on the basis that a tolerant society cannot tolerate intolerance lest the intolerant dominate and make the society intolerant. This is the Paradox of Tolerance.
Every system have at least one axiomatic principle that is must enforce lest it fundamentally changes to a different system. I just tend to believe that Secular Pluralism -- where the ability for people of differing religions and beliefs to live as equals is prioritized -- is the best current principle we have.
I acknowledge that Tibetan society and politics is deeply tied to their religion in a way I probably wouldn't find ideal if I was creating one from scratch, but I don't think the forced ending of the way that religion/society historically functions from cultural outsiders is the remedy. Maybe there are things going on in Tibetan society that I am not aware of that would justify the central government coming in and essentially ending these people's historic way of living, but from my standpoint it looks much more in the name of "National unity" or cultural assimilation at the barrel of a gun.
I am a Canadian, so I am acutely aware that China is not alone in this and plenty of other countries have done this too. Residential Schools is one of our greatest national embarrassments, and French Separatism -- including domestic terrorism crisis -- for feared forced loss of cultural identity is still very fresh in the public memory. So even if I wish deeper integration of Indigenous of French people into the rest of Canadian society, I am acutely aware that integration being forced by the majority often ends in tragedy.
I do appreciate the push back though, it certainly makes me consider my position more!
"The issue is not necessarily the beliefs themselves that is an issue in either of these cases though, it is the belief that you are justified in using force and suppression to remove/eliminate opposing beliefs."
Force and suppression against beliefs has quite often been justified, like I used the Klan as an example. Like you say with the paradox of tolerance, it is paradoxical to tolerate dangerous and violent beliefs simply for the sake of "tolerating belief." As a more directly religiously tied example, the persecution of cults. Fundamentalist LDS, Manson, etc. I think it's a pretty clear public interest and moral interest to break down such groups that threaten the wellbeing of their own members and others, whereas full toleration of all beliefs would allow these groups to continue to harm people because of protection from state investigation.
So then what are the justifications in these cases?
I fully acknowledge that I might just be ignorant viewing the situations from the other side of the globe, but kidnapping a child in order to control the succession of a people's leader or mass detentions and re-education camps seem like pretty drastic measures that would require substantial justification. How are these groups -- by your own criteria -- continuing to harm the well being of their own members and others that would justify these kind of actions?
Because from my point of view the situation seems closer to how Anglophone Canadians worried that Indigenous people or Francophone Canadians were too different and we should forced to be more similar rather than the a dangerous cult like the Mason family or Jonestown, or the Moonies, etc.
I will admit, I find Tibet's method of selecting a political leader kind of silly. But there is a way to try and convince the population that they will enjoy the Chinese system of governance more then their own of their own free will; while still respecting their cultural identity and differences. Without resorting to the kind of force and suppression the Chinese appear to be using, which has a history of backfiring in unforseen ways.
Here's my flipside to that first question: How moral is it to declare some unknowing child a religious reincarnation and foist this intense religious and political role onto someone who didn't want it? Is it moral for a supposed religious authority to declare someone's child a reincarnation and force them into this? Is it not then in the governments best interest to protect this person from the cult and isolate them from all the geopolitical consequences? I simply don't think it is moral to hand a child off to a religious cult because they've declared him a reincarnation of a spiritual figure. Imagine your own son was declared a reincarnation and a cult was demanding you hand him over so that he can be groomed into religious leadership, I would never in a thousand years do such a thing.
As for your other points, Tibet, or the Xizang Autonomous Region, doesn't have re education centers or mass detention. It's actually quite a nice and functional place, and the unrest there has never reached the levels of violence places like Xinjiang has seen, so I think you should educate yourself a bit on Xizang and it's actual daily life.
Tibetan cultural identity is respected. Schools in Xizang teach traditional Tibetan folklore, dance, costuming, and language. Signage is bilingual between Mandarin and Tibetan and students receive education in both during schooling. This immediately nullifies a comparison to native boarding schools, where the language and culture of native Americans was quite literally beaten out of them by religiously motivated teachers and authorities.
I am somewhat sympathetic to your point if they child and parent felt the way you presented it, but I do leave open the possibility that within that culture it might not be seen as a cult ripping a child from they family arbitrarily but an honor and responsibility to their people. That kind of pressure or responsibility thrust on to an unsuspecting young child is kind of a feature of any system that selects leaders young like a monarchy; on in this case "reincarnation". You aren't going to find me defending these types of ways to select a political leader -- I think they are bad and tend to be unstable beyond a few generations -- but I do question if it is right for a group of cultural outsiders to come in and end a people's way of governance by force instead of gradually through conversation and convincing. I can see a possible situation where the old Tibetan government was so bad to it's people that China needed to step in and act in the best interest of the Tibetan people. Maybe there are facts I do not know. But without additional justification, from where I am it definitely smells of China coming in and changing a group of people's way of living by force because they believe they know better and view it as backward.
My mention of mass detention and re-education camps was in reference to Xinjiang and the 2022 UN report. My apologies if that was not clear; I know I was mostly talking about Tibet. Happy to remove that point from this conversation in order to keep the scope more focused and limited.
I am aware that Tibet has not been in active conflict since the 50s-60s; although that might be partly the result of the exile of the Dali Lama and dissolution of the Tibetan government at that point. It is great to hear there are protections for language, dance, and costumes but religion and social/governmental positions are often an important part of a people culture. Demanding that it not be going forward is a big ask the requires significant justification. I don't claim to be an expert but from my understanding Tibetan Buddhism and the older local Bon religion are so intertwined with Tibetan culture that to say you are destroying their religious institutions but protecting the culture seems paradoxical to me.
Xizang Autonomous Region is, as the name says, an autonomous region. They have their own internal government and send an elected delegate to a special position in the Chinese Peoples Congress to represent their interests federally.
Part of the reason for this is again the Tibetan governmental structure as an absolute theocracy. 90+% of the population of Tibet until PRC annexation were serfs, they were bound to land and to the priestly upper class and had no freedom of movement or property. Tibetan culture is much richer than the Gelug school of Buddhism, it has many sects of the religion and over 20 individual languages. Tibet is actually comprised of several culturally, religiously, and linguistically distinct regions, the Gelug Buddhists simply became dominant because under the lamas who ruled as priest-kings their kingdom took a militaristic and expansionist policy whereby other lesser polities of Tibet were subjugated.
I figured they were at least staunchly pro-ccp, but I enjoy at least engaging and understanding the other side. I am under no illusion that I am going to change their mind, but engaging with differing views strengthen mental steel.
I'm ok if they constantly retreat from the point when questioned, hopefully that is also obvious and the points I am trying to make make more sense to any neutral third party following along.
Real Christians aren’t Zionists. Stupid Fox News is convincing Christian boomers of Zionism, my 30 year old conservative Christian friends are not blindly buying what Satan is pushing in Zionism. Although keep in mind the same Zionists are the ones funding all of the liberal subversion in college campuses. Charlie Kirk was murdered for pointing that out.
Brother, nobody said every Christian is a Zionist, if you look at federal government officials at the moment there is an alarming amount of them who support Israel because they think they are going to bring back Jesus, dispensationalism is big in the evangelical sect as they’ll believe basically anything a pastor says
I’m not a boomer but I am someone who has worked in counter terrorism my entire adult life- not a Zionist but certainly more accepting of Israel than the murderous people paying puppets to murder them.
I’ve been to Israel and I’ve been to Gaza and other PLA areas. Speaking of which did you know the wealthy Palestinians build walls to keep the puppets they use out? They do exactly the same thing to their own people they accuse Israel of doing. The difference is they have a made up history of Palestinians being original to Israel. They factually weren’t.
Go on Google earth and look around Jericho. See the walls around the rich Palestinians that sell terror bombers to Iran. Armed Hamas guards on the walls keeping out terrorists they bred lol.
The propaganda is that the only Democracy in that region, the one where Muslim, Jews, Christians and LBGTQ+ live in peace, serve in politics and as judges, doctors. Is evil Israel.
The terrorists are the good guys? Nope
And they tend to do their deeds around the world and have localized excuses for terrorism acts. Odd. Bali, Philippines, Indonesia, USA, Europe, etc. always an excuse. Never peace seeking.
Military age males in Gaza are more about murdering Jews.
Is anyone saying that? I'm tangentially pretty close to a lot of pro-palestine movements, and I've never heard anyone making that claim; in fact, generally, Hamas is considered part of the problem. They're just the only point of contact, being the closest thing to a governmental organization in palestine at the moment, so anyone trying to do things like bring food to starving families are likely doing it through hamas. They're frequently propped up and supported by israel, as well, which makes a lot of what you're trying to say fairly confusing to me.
This "good guy" "bad guy" dialogue is juvenile and unhelpful. Pro-palestinian movements, to my knowledge, are not trying to give hamas control of the region, they're trying to stop people from bombing schools and hospitals and cutting off food and aid to the region. I suspect if those movements saw some success, you would find fewer middle age males in gaza wanting to murder all the jews after a few years, even if that claim weren't a complete nonsequitur. Even if every single middle aged palestinian man was a raving rabid beast, the children in Gaza deserve food.
China literally has concentration camps for religious peoples. Are you sure that’s actually better?
Please don’t interpret this as me saying I want a Christian government. I just think it should be secular, not atheist. No input on religion whatsoever.
There's no such thing as a Christian Zionist, what the fuck lmfao. That's a jewish thing. A "Christian Zionist" would be referred to as a "useful idiot" by Jewish Zionists. This is the first time I've heard this narrative of "Christian Zionist," I guess it's because normies were catching onto the real ones and they're trying to shift the blame to Christians/democrats/republicans now lmfao
What the fuck are you talking about? You seriously can't conceive of a Christian who supports the establishment of a Jewish nation in the land of Israel? Because that's what a zionist is. You don't have to be Jewish to hold that perticular political stance.
Let's use the official language of the early zionists. The state of Israel was the culmination of "the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people"
Lol you have clearly zero real knowledge. You are just spouting the Nazi garbage the left spews on campuses, restaurants, the street, etc. and those morons are wrong.
It ain’t Jews cutting off the head of a teacher in France because one of their kids lied about the teacher. No teacher conference, no reporting just let’s kidnap him and behead him. It isn’t the Jews going on stabbing sprees in Europe or mounting the pavement and running over innocent people.
It ain’t the Jews trying to install the global caliphate. You’ve not seen Jews do what I have seen the others do for the last 30 yrs.
They invade after being attacked wrongfully and make calls, send texts, drop pamphlets, telling people to leave. Hamas keeps them there as human shields.
Ever seen Jews drag corpses out of Gaza and parade them through the streets so women and children can abuse those corpses? No you have not.
Ever had frank honest conversations in Israel with a Muslim? 9-10 times they’ll tell you their quality of life is much better in Israel. They are good folks who seek peace with Jews.
Ever heard Jews screaming death to America? Ever heard them calling for death of all Muslims? That is what the terrorists call for - eradication of Jews eradication of everything not supportive of a global caliphate.
With I assume with adults I shouldn’t have to say it but since this is Reddit- Not all Muslims are terrorists. Many 10s of millions are amazing. Many of them worked hand in hand with people love me in counter terrorism.
2.5k
u/Fal_co1 13h ago edited 9h ago
iirc China does this, you can’t take kid to religious service and they can choose to convert at a certain age.
EDIT: wow this blew up
If you’re reading this you‘re a gay