Alexis de Tocqueville: Democracy and Christianity

BidenPresident said:
Agree with everything you said.

I suspect Cypress would be happier on a religion website so he can talk with other believers.
Click to expand...


It may be the 'Everlasting Life' aspect of it. You know, why die when you can live forever? (I think that is a persuasive Sales Pitch for many)
 
Cypress said:
You can use google to find all the downside and crimes commmitted in the name of other world religions too, but you studiously avoid doing so.

Why do we not just acknowledge what we both know is true, but which you are studiously avoiding acknowledging?

You present yourself as a detached and rational-thinking, anti-religious person,

When in fact you are really just an anti-Christian zealot with a deeply emotional grudge against Christianity.

I am not responsible for the bible thumper church you were dragged to as a kid, or whatever the psychological reason is for your anti-Christian zealotry.


I am just interested in the history of western civilization which neccessarily requires thinking about politics, culture, religion, and economics -- and I generally touch on all these topics, when historical topics come up.
Click to expand...

I am not religious, but I see a lot of positive influence of churches in my community unrelated to any religious doctrine. When poor need help with paying bills, school clothes, moving, food, etc. churches are very active in providing those services. My area has experienced many floods and it is churches who organize boats to go in to flooded neighborhoods saving people and pets, and rebuilding their homes and churches.

The old cliche that millions have been killed in the name of religion are blaming religion for the actions of greedy humans seeking more land, riches, or resources using religion to justify their actions.
 
Cypress said:
You can use google to find all the downside and crimes commmitted in the name of other world religions too, but you studiously avoid doing so.

Why do we not just acknowledge what we both know is true, but which you are studiously avoiding acknowledging?

You present yourself as a detached and rational-thinking, anti-religious person,

When in fact you are an anti-Christian zealot with a deeply emotional grudge against Christianity.

I am not responsible for the bible thumper church you were dragged to as a kid, or whatever the psychological reason is for your anti-Christian zealotry.


I am just interested in the history of western civilization which neccessarily requires thinking about politics, culture, religion, and economics -- and I generally touch on all these topics, when historical topics come up.
Click to expand...


Cypress: "You can use google to find all the downside and crimes commmitted in the name of other world religions too, but you studiously avoid doing so."
Jack: I've repeated posted my feelings about Religious Quacks. They seem quagmired in the Distant Past.

Cypress: "Why do we not just acknowledge what we both know is true, but which you are studiously avoiding acknowledging?'
Jack: I acknowledge you promote Christianity. I can only think it has something to do with 'brainwashing' at an early age.

Cypress: "You present yourself as a detached and rational-thinking, anti-religious person,"
Jack: I'm not that detached to know that the Religious Quacks here want to put a Cross on every mountain top, a Prayer in every school. and a Ten Commandments in every courthouse.

Cypress: "When in fact you are an anti-Christian zealot with a deeply emotional grudge against Christianity."
Jack: I don't support the teaching of a Slave Philosophy to American children.

Cypress: "I am just interested in the history of western civilization in which neccessarily requires thinking about politics, culture, religion, and economics --"
Jack: Yeah, sure. Sounds like you enjoy talking about 'Christianity' and how it was so wonderful. Like in this Thread about 'Democracy'.

The Kings of Europe loved their Bishops and vice versa, keeping the populace stupid and scared meant great wealth for both of them.
 
Cypress said:
You can use google to find all the downside and crimes commmitted in the name of other world religions
Click to expand...

"But there is also the political problem of the ‘Mosaic distinction’ with its construction and exclusion of paganism. The political consequences of this distinction turn dangerous only if it is interpreted in terms of friend and foe. Then, the idolaters turn into enemies of God and the political leaders turn into God’s willing executioners.

This interpretation seems typical of the political world view of the two extreme spearheads, of radical Islamism and the Bush administration. One side speaks of Allah’s enemies, the other of the axis of evil. Each side perceives the other as the providential foe, the “personification of its own question.” (https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/83650072.pdf; p 10)


Monotheism creates enemies. You might want to reflect on this.
 
Jack said:
Cypress: "You can use google to find all the downside and crimes commmitted in the name of other world religions too, but you studiously avoid doing so."
Jack: I've repeated posted my feelings about Religious Quacks. They seem quagmired in the Distant Past.

Cypress: "Why do we not just acknowledge what we both know is true, but which you are studiously avoiding acknowledging?'
Jack: I acknowledge you promote Christianity. I can only think it has something to do with 'brainwashing' at an early age.

Cypress: "You present yourself as a detached and rational-thinking, anti-religious person,"
Jack: I'm not that detached to know that the Religious Quacks here want to put a Cross on every mountain top, a Prayer in every school. and a Ten Commandments in every courthouse.

Cypress: "When in fact you are an anti-Christian zealot with a deeply emotional grudge against Christianity."
Jack: I don't support the teaching of a Slave Philosophy to American children.

Cypress: "I am just interested in the history of western civilization in which neccessarily requires thinking about politics, culture, religion, and economics --"
Jack: Yeah, sure. Sounds like you enjoy talking about 'Christianity' and how it was so wonderful. Like in this Thread about 'Democracy'.

The Kings of Europe loved their Bishops and vice versa, keeping the populace stupid and scared meant great wealth for both of them.
Click to expand...

You will have to see a psychiatrist if you were traumatized by being dragged to a fundamentalist church as a kid.

That is a psychological issue.

I am discussing history here, as seen through the prism of Alexis de Tocqueville.

There are plenty of academic scholars who have published papers discussing linkages between Protestantism and development of democratic institutions.

The consensus seems to be that Protestantism does not directly cause democracy. But the environment and social context which emerges under Protestantism - aka, individualism, plurality of ideas, a propensity for civic engagement - provided a breeding ground for democracy to emerge.

Take a look at a world map of Protestant-majority countries, and tell me how well that tracks with the world's liberal democracies.
 
Cypress said:
You will have to see a psychiatrist if you were traumatized by being dragged to a fundamentalist church as a kid.

That is a psychological issue.

I am discussing history here, as seen through the prism of Alexis de Tocqueville.

There are plenty of academic scholars who have published papers discussing linkages between Protestantism and development of democratic institutions.

The consensus seems to be that Protestantism does not directly cause democracy. But the environment and social context which emerges under Protestantism - aka, individualism, plurality of ideas, a propensity for civic engagement - provided a breeding ground for democracy to emerge.

Take a look at a world map of Protestant-majority countries, and tell me how well that tracks with the world's liberal democracies.
Click to expand...


"For a close, I would like to summarize my interpretation of monotheism as being (originally) a political movement of resistance and
liberation in five points, which correspond to five leitmotifs in the Biblical narrative:
(1) The motif of liberation. The liberation from Egyptian serfdom is the first and foremost foundation of the new religion; it is thus purely
political, meant to found human society on a new basis which forever precludes oppression, exploitation and humiliation."

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/83650072.pdf


This is correct. Monotheism is essentially a political movement.
 
Cypress said:
You will have to see a psychiatrist if you were traumatized by being dragged to a fundamentalist church as a kid.

That is a psychological issue.

I am discussing history here, as seen through the prism of Alexis de Tocqueville.

There are plenty of academic scholars who have published papers discussing linkages between Protestantism and development of democratic institutions.

The consensus seems to be that Protestantism does not directly cause democracy. But the environment and social context which emerges under Protestantism - aka, individualism, plurality of ideas, a propensity for civic engagement - provided a breeding ground for democracy to emerge.

Take a look at a world map of Protestant-majority countries, and tell me how well that tracks with the world's liberal democracies.
Click to expand...


:laugh: hahahaha I'm giving you my opinion.

Maybe you should post more about QAnon and their philosophy? I'm sure it will be well received here.

Are these your Heroes?
"SOME QUAKERS WERE BRANDED ON THE FACE WITH A RED-HOT IRON WITH [AN] H. FOR HERESIE."
https://infoquakers.weebly.com/the-boston-martyrs.html
 
Cypress said:
You will have to see a psychiatrist if you were traumatized by being dragged to a fundamentalist church as a kid.

That is a psychological issue.

I am discussing history here, as seen through the prism of Alexis de Tocqueville.

There are plenty of academic scholars who have published papers discussing linkages between Protestantism and development of democratic institutions.

The consensus seems to be that Protestantism does not directly cause democracy. But the environment and social context which emerges under Protestantism - aka, individualism, plurality of ideas, a propensity for civic engagement - provided a breeding ground for democracy to emerge.

Take a look at a world map of Protestant-majority countries, and tell me how well that tracks with the world's liberal democracies.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you want to blame someone for 'democracy', you should start here:

"Democracy is generally associated with the efforts of the ancient Greeks who were themselves considered the founders of Western civilization by the 18th century intellectuals who attempted to leverage these early democratic experiments into a new template for post-monarchical political organization.[2] The extent to which these 18th century democratic revivalists succeeded in turning the democratic ideals of the ancient Greeks into the dominant political institution of the next 300 years is hardly debatable, even if the moral justifications they often employed might be. Nevertheless, the critical historical juncture catalyzed by the resurrection of democratic ideals and institutions fundamentally transformed the ensuing centuries and has dominated the international landscape since the dismantling of the final vestige of empire following the end of the Second World War."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_democracy
 
Jack said:
Maybe if you want to blame someone for 'democracy', you should start here:

"Democracy is generally associated with the efforts of the ancient Greeks who were themselves considered the founders of Western civilization by the 18th century intellectuals who attempted to leverage these early democratic experiments into a new template for post-monarchical political organization.[2] The extent to which these 18th century democratic revivalists succeeded in turning the democratic ideals of the ancient Greeks into the dominant political institution of the next 300 years is hardly debatable, even if the moral justifications they often employed might be. Nevertheless, the critical historical juncture catalyzed by the resurrection of democratic ideals and institutions fundamentally transformed the ensuing centuries and has dominated the international landscape since the dismantling of the final vestige of empire following the end of the Second World War."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_democracy
Click to expand...

Democracy was only for the wealthy and powerful in Athens--the aristocracy.
It was a way to move past monarchy into the rule of men. To be on the ballot one had to belong to the aristocracy.
Thus, it really is the basis for our constitution: Giving primary rights to the wealthy and powerful.
 
BidenPresident said:
Democracy was only for the wealthy and powerful in Athens--the aristocracy.
It was a way to move past monarchy into the rule of men. To be on the ballot one had to belong to the aristocracy.
Thus, it really is the basis for our constitution: Giving primary rights to the wealthy and powerful.
Click to expand...

I agree with that.

King John and the 40 Barons.

"Magna Carta was written by a group of 13th-century barons to protect their rights and property against a tyrannical king. It is concerned with many practical matters and specific grievances relevant to the feudal system under which they lived. The interests of the common man were hardly apparent in the minds of the men who brokered the agreement."
https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured-documents/magna-carta

Oh look, Cypress and his Christians:
"On June 15, 1215, in a field at Runnymede, King John affixed his seal to Magna Carta. Confronted by 40 rebellious barons, he consented to their demands in order to avert civil war. Just 10 weeks later, Pope Innocent III nullified the agreement, and England plunged into internal war.
 
Jack said:
I agree with that.

King John and the 40 Barons.

"Magna Carta was written by a group of 13th-century barons to protect their rights and property against a tyrannical king. It is concerned with many practical matters and specific grievances relevant to the feudal system under which they lived. The interests of the common man were hardly apparent in the minds of the men who brokered the agreement."
https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured-documents/magna-carta

Oh look, Cypress and his Christians:
"On June 15, 1215, in a field at Runnymede, King John affixed his seal to Magna Carta. Confronted by 40 rebellious barons, he consented to their demands in order to avert civil war. Just 10 weeks later, Pope Innocent III nullified the agreement, and England plunged into internal war.
Click to expand...

Did you look at a world map yet to see if liberal democracies track with where Protestant majority countries are? It should only take you 15 seconds.

If so, how good does it track?

I do not think Christianity directly caused democracy, and I think Tocqueville might be wrong that Catholicism is best at promoting democracy.

And anyone can do Google research to highlight corruption and crimes committed by churches.


The question Tocqueville, and other scholars raise, is not if there is crime and corruption in churches.

The question is - out of all the major world religions - was there something about the social context of Christianity ( and I would say Protestantism particularly) which facilitated a breeding ground for democratic ideas to ultimately flourish.
 
Jack said:
King John and the 40 Barons.

"Magna Carta was written by a group of 13th-century barons to protect their rights and property against a tyrannical king. It is concerned with many practical matters and specific grievances relevant to the feudal system under which they lived. The interests of the common man were hardly apparent in the minds of the men who brokered the agreement."
https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured-documents/magna-carta

Oh look, Cypress and his Christians:
"On June 15, 1215, in a field at Runnymede, King John affixed his seal to Magna Carta. Confronted by 40 rebellious barons, he consented to their demands in order to avert civil war. Just 10 weeks later, Pope Innocent III nullified the agreement, and England plunged into internal war.
Click to expand...

Magna Carta was hundreds of years before the Protestant Reformation.

Scholars generally link the emergence of democracy which was fertilized in the social context of the Protestant tradition - individualism, plurality of ideas, civic engagement, an explicit embrace of mercantile capitalism.

^ I already stated such in a previous post

Magna Carta was not a democratic document.

It was a document to preserve oligarchy and aristocracy. The rights enumerated in the 1215 Magna Carta only applied to high born nobility. No one else
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top