Image by Arenamontanus via Flickr
by Rocket Kirchner
Featured Writer
Dandelion Salad
Rocket Kirchner (blog)
Rocket Kirchner (youtube channel)
January 31, 2012
Be it articles by Chris Hedges, myself, Philip A. Farruggio, Gunther Ostermann, other writers, or even when Lo herself posts a documentary having anything to do with religion or spirituality, it seems to be always met with either an apathetic yawn or just downright hostility. Why is this?
Having been a social activist in theory and in practice for about 40 years now, my observation is that most other activists with a strict secular mindset either ignore as irrelevant spiritual concepts, or resent them as an intrusion as if they are competing components to progress. When historically, by and large they have worked together very well.
There always seems to be some sort of perceived threat when someone brings up the notion that a sphere of transcendence is needed to make sure that a revolution does not devolve into mere power changing hands. This rigid reactionary response is something that Gandhi warned about time and time again. Granted, the fusion of the spiritual and the political did not work in South Africa when Gandhi attempted it, because there was not the raw materials to work with it there. Nor was it at the right historical time. But it did work in India as a broad based coalition of Hindus, Sikhs, Jesuits, and such great Muslim leaders like Bhatsi Khan [Abdul Ghaffar Khan] all put their strategy and heads together and realized that it took something divine in behavior to overthrow something human in oppression. And all of this done without lifting a sword.
And yet the French revolution of 1789 that discarded everything spiritual ended up with Robespierre wielding the guillotine in his reign of terror because of its natural outcome of reason being all and all, which in and of itself is devoid of real reason… for if thy head offend thee cut it off! Do i need to go any further? Utopias become dystopias without a spiritual center to hold them together. And the United States of Amnesia has invaded like a venomous snake the good garden that produces Dandelion Salad, a blog that seeks to enlighten in all ways with an ever vigilant vigil.
The irony in all of this is the articles that are written about spiritual matters on this blog are numerically only a pittance compared to over the 17,400 that are not. But even that infinitesimal number is enough to get people riled up in arms beyond mere criticism to go so far as to unsubscribe to a blog that they have never even paid for. What the hell is that all about? Is it really that hard to conceive or even be open minded enough to at least entertain the idea of shall we say Victor Hugo’s idea of a revolution within Revolution as shown in the changing character of Jean Valjean in the book Les Miserables?
“The world of politics and activism is a very important one, but it is not the only one”, said Thomas Merton. He goes on to say, “we must first expose the racist in ourselves, the lovelessness in ourselves, the warmonger in ourselves”. Is it any wonder that to bring up this challenge is to invite apathy at best and scorn at worse? And all of this begs the question: where is the state of activism in this period of American history today? And, where will it end up with this attitude? Are people interested in politics and activism just to vent their frustrations and dark forces that they carry around in them, or is it a natural expression of good will that they possess? Because if it’s the former, then welcome to the land of no return culture of complaint.
In the last analysis, well written articles and documentaries on the spiritual problems that face our era in context with the issues of the day on this blog can move one to a deeper and more effective form of activism. One ignores or mocks them at one’s own loss.
see
The Gospel of the Penniless, Jobless, Marginalized and Despised by Chris Hedges
Where Were You When They Crucified My Movement? by Chris Hedges
What Jesus Said About Who He Is, Life and Following Him
Exclusive: What is Christian Anarchism, and is it useful today? by Rocket Kirchner
Exclusive: Why is there no peace in the peace movement? by Rocket Kirchner
The Devil Always Comes As A Friend by Philip A. Farruggio
There was and is, A CAUSE, prior to the big bang By Gunther Ostermann
Flags, Crosses and Circuses… And Apathy!! by Philip A. Farruggio
Christianity on Dandelion Salad
Filed under: Spiritual, Christianity, Blogging, Religion, Dandelion Salad Featured Writers, Dandelion Salad Posts News Politics and-or Videos 2 Tagged: | Kirchner-Rocket, Rocket Kirchner, social justice, Christianity on Dandelion Salad
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
The church buried the concept of FEMALE spirit! This is the conundrum to be address urgently. How can 51% of the population be ignored – and that is going on in OCCUPY and other so-called leftist organizations full time, full tilt right now. I don’t think people “get” how done in they are by a Bible which has cut out major proportions, turning it into a paper doily. Thus, so many ACCEPT a beligerant patriarchal, paternalistic “voice” as authority when trying to figure out how to HEAL ourselves AND the world.
Quite frankly, I come to Dandelion Salad as I cannot tolerate the secular nature of most of the other new left online news forums (truthdig, ICH, Democratic Underground, etc.) and their readers. I surely do not get beligerant here about the spirituality! I love it and recommend as often as possible.
Yeah, we are and we are not The Problem. We are infinite souls who have been deceived, doing the very best we can. Too bad we aren’t all enLIGHTened already, but we’re not. At least HERE, we have a few soulmates to hang out with, and that’s better than I do at any local church . …
<3 <3 <3 and X O X O X O
I LOVE that this is being discussed!
Thanks, Virginia. Love to you, too!
Virginia , thank you for your response. It has been proven since the 18th century that secularism has not been able to accomplish its utopianistic goals that is for sure. Recent history is replete with examples of this . This blog has a foundation of a spiritual base whether inferred or direct that there needs to be an inner change to make outer change . i am glad that you find solace here.
Though there is a point to which i would only half disagree with you . Yes , the Church has been Patriarchal to a fault , but not totally . I wrote something on this blog to check out in this regards :
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/exclusive-is-the-new-testament-a-sexist-book-against-women-by-rocket-kirchner/
i hope you will read it . The official Church in Roman canonized the new testament , a book that exalts women over men . i find that a bit paradoxical . i hope that you consider these points . in all my studies i have always found them curious .
no blog can be a substitute for the geographical location of meeting with other believers face to face. but at least this blog tries to help as an intelligent companion to one who seeks to fuse the spiritual with being an activist .
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
What is meant by everlasting life, how exactly and in what state do you end up in heaven or hell? Am I still me, with all my faults, do I have to spend eternity lamenting all the bad things I did while alive?
I consider life after death wishful thinking, based on fear. Nobody gets out alive as L.Cohen said.
Sometimes a Day seems long and no human can comprehend eternal. But Death eventually takes everyone, both believer and unbeliever. The flesh turns to dust and the Spirit returns to God who gave it. We are the walking dead heading to the grave.
Death in the grave is eternal darkness. To have a Faith in the Eternal Spirit of God knowing one is a part manifestation of God while living in this world is a Joy, and not a Fear. It is written Perfect Love casts out all Fear.
Jim , wishful thinking ? that was Frued’s theory . i say that it is wishful thinking NOT to be accountable to a Supreme Being . then you can do anything you want . anything . is it any wonder that our world is so messed up ?
in regards to heaven and hell and the state of being etc.. –it goes thus : man has been created in the image and likeness of God . the image is our mind , will , and emotions . they will live forever in no matter what . ..weather it be in hell or heaven or wherever.
it is the likeness that determines where we spend eternity . we must get back into the likeness of our loving maker. this is formed in us thru the mediator jesus christ . that is why the word gospel means ”good news”. it is a process .
As Christ is formed in us we begin to take on the ”likeness ” of the divine . ..in the here and now. when we shuffle off this moral coil , this likeness continues.
Thinking we were created in the image of god is just mans egomania. If a horse, a dog, a rat could speak they might like to assume they were created in the image of God.
The bible states that God gave man dominion over all the earth, that’s where all the disrespect for all the creatures and earth itself started, whoever wrote that, it is the statement of an self important egomaniac.
According to born agains, a person could be guilty of the most evil crimes imaginable and all he has to do is say the magic words ” I believe in Jesus ‘ and all is forgiven and he goes to heaven.
Like the Catholics say a few hail Marys and wipe out last weeks sins.
I’m sorry, to believe such nonsense takes more suspension of reason than I’m capable of.
Jim , actually it is totally reasonable . why ? becuase to disbelieve it is to reduce the dignity of man . reducing this dignity has disfigured that image and caused men to treat each other less than human . and in history it shows .
but history can be turned around if human beings really see the divinity in each other and treat each other accordingly . excuses wont do . the good news has been proclaimed , and it is relevant to post modern man in every point and particluar , and ever issue .
the golden rule is bound up with man seeing man created in a loving God’s image . that is why God had to become a man in place and time in history and paradoxically live out the divinity /humanity matrix. as the perfect example of how we should treat each lother.
that risen christ lives in those who believe to be servants to others. this is contructive for the planet , and is totally reasonable . what is against reason is turning way this redemption with more excuses in order to live a selfish little piggy life that wishes that the christ story was all a fable in order to avoid accountability .
but one can wish all day long that they wont be accountable …they will . we all will . that is why we must love each other , and even love our worst enemies , just like christ did .
Jim , i wanted to add one more thing –you mentioned ”Dominion”. usually when people read that they think that it gives them license to run rough shot over everything . its just the opposite .
it means to take care of animals , and the earth and serve and love other human beings , mainly the most helpless .
Christ confirms this in Mark ch 10 when he says ”you are not to be like the Gentiles who lord it over them . for the greatest among you shall be the servant of all”. then here comes the kicker , the fulcrum of Mark’s gospel 10:45 ”for even the Son of Man ( referring to himself ) , came not to be served , but to serve and make himself a ransom for many”.
That is true dominion .
Onward Christian soldiers.
Believers have been killing for their deities since the beginning and religions are a detriment to human progress.
Are you saying man cant live a moral, caring, decent life unless he believes in some religion?
Hi again Rocket,
Honest question, with respect;
Is it your feeling that the USA would be a better nation if we were a more completely Christian country?
AH — fair question .
my answer –we are , and have never been a christian country . never. one look at Zinn’s work and it is crystal clear that this nation was founded on genocide , fueled by slavery , inequality to women, gross materialism , GREED, and then we turned into an Empire in 1899 at the start of the Spanish-American war. ..and have been one since. ..full of violence and aggression to other nations.
This nation has perverted and twisted the words of Christ and the Bible for its own ends .
this is why divinity need to be redefined. This is just one reason i will not give up on being a missionary (playing music in bars) to America . This country needs to hear the good news, and messengers to be sent here to expose this fraudulent gospel that seeks power and oppression thru government .
i forgot to fully answer your question . yes –if the REAL gospel ever took root here , no one would be hungry or homeless or lonely , and we would be a better nation . This should be every Christians goal .
On this point rocket you will like this video embedded in an article in my Blog. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pYnsn_PShkA
Jim — i agree with Oscar Wilde ”morality is something we make up for people we personally don’t like ”. all of this talk about being moral and condemning religious people is a lot of self-righteous bullshit .
can someone live a moral life without being under the divine guidance ? well , lets just say i am from Missouri , the show me state. so show me . i aint seen it yet. the secular moralism is = to the religious moralism . same crap , different day . what is needed is authentic spirituality . and a real authentically spiritual person would never knock Christ. But a self-righteous moralist would . be they either secular or religious .
I highly doubt as someone here has said, “the vast majority of our politicians are Christians” that is true. I do believe they use it like they went on to say, to “pander to Christians” but that does not make them Christian themselves. It’s the politicians and religious right who have given Jesus a bad name and have used Him for their own personal moral judgmental agenda. As far as this statement “A Christian is one who follows Christ . period./ not the Old testament . not churches. not ethics or morals.” yes it’s a matter of personal opinion, but I agree 100% with it and to me it’s unfortunate that it “has been rejected by most Christians, both those on the right and those on the left” except I think there are many on the left who do not reject it but rather understand how to interpret the old testament in light of what Jesus has done. Many Christians today still live in or with an old covenant mentality when in reality it was never even intended for us who are gentiles. It wasn’t until Jesus came along that the gentiles had a covenant with God to begin with. It is very clear in the scriptures but for some reason, and I’m sure it has to do with controlling others thru legislating morality, they refuse to let it go and to see the big picture that love is the only law we are called to live by.
Shawn — the legislating morality is so against what Christ was about ”my kingdom is not of this world”…he said to Pilate.
so we have the so called Christians trying to lay their trip on the government and the non believers got their trip going . both are drunk on power . and we got us out here trying to tell them to all get off their moral high horses and LOOK at the good news of Christ and how we must follow him in his servanthood and humility . and we are met with nothing but resistance from both sides.
That’s exactly what the religious right is doing in legislating morality and it’s unbelievable to me to ever consider doing it if you ever read what Jesus taught. It blows my mind, and even further when discussing it with them it’s as if they shut their hearing off and goes deaf on you thinking that it will corrupt their faith to continue hearing what you have to say. I think they get that from a verse where Jesus stated “take heed what you hear” and that’s when they stop reading the rest of the verse and the misinterpretations of it happen. There are so many scriptures let alone historical documents that prove we were never a Christian nation yet they continue to push the issue that we were not seeing the reality of why they shouldn’t considering Jesus would never do what they did in the founding of this country. They even put more faith in the founders and their documents than the teachings of Jesus themselves. That is why I am so passionate about it and continue pushing the issue back to them myself. I’m sick of it. There is a huge separation from God’s Kingdom and the kingdom of the world that is all over in the New Testament. For example, just reading what Jesus said to His disciples about taxes He said “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” to me there is a clear separation there and that is only one example. Anyways, I get your point and it’s a good one.
The render to Ceasar line has been used to justify taxes, but before that Jesus asked whose picture is on the money? When they said Caesar’s that’s where the line comes from, but even Caesar is accountable to God. Where does this fall in with Jesus saying you cannot serve God and money at the same time?
I find this a very curious view:
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Does not your master pay tribute?
He said, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What do you think, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Peter said to him, Of strangers. Jesus said to him, Then are the children free?
Matthew 17:24-26
An interesting question Jesus poses. Do we live in a True Free world when the psychological, emotional and financial costs are rising?
Ray, good questions and points. Romans 13 has also been perverted by churches. Mark Nanos in his 1997 ”The mystery of Romans ” clears this up by stating that Paul is not talking about governmental authority but synagogue authority . This later plays out as called the ”sacrifice of the Gentiles” later mentioned in Romans . there is something that is both a witness to the Jews about the Messiah thru Gentiles that are tempered by submission to the local synagogue . that is why Paul took the lashes from Jews , because he was in submission to rabbinic authority and paradoxically in submission to the Messiah .
The Apostolic view of freedom as played out in the book of Acts is totally interior . Paul and Silas singing with their hands and feet in stocks at midnight . The freedom is not dependent on circumstance , but is within . we must exhibit this freedom and make unbelievers jealous for it , in order for them to come to Christ. all the while working for social justice.
When I see the pictures of the saints with a halo around their heads, it is nothing more than the noticeable radiant joy on the faces of those having the indwelling Spirit of God.
But to the Son he says, Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even your God, has anointed you with the Oil of Gladness above your fellows.
Hebrews 1:8-9
But as many as received him, to them he gave power TO BECOME the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13
To him that OVERCOMES will I grant to SIT WITH ME in my throne, even as I ALSO OVERCAME, and AM set down with my Father in his throne.
He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.
Revelation 3:21-22
I’ll simply say that it’s possible to disrespect and insult people without calling them names (and I’m pretty certain that I didn’t do so myself, if that’s what’s being implied). Rocket has made it clear that he thinks nonbelievers are ethically inferior to Christians like himself; how I as a nonbeliever am not supposed to be insulted by that is beyond me.
In response to Rocket, this statement — “A Christian is one who follows Christ . period./ not the Old testament . not churches. not ethics or morals.” — is a matter of personal opinion, and it’s an opinion that has been rejected by most Christians, both those on the right and those on the left. Likewise with this statement — “There is no, and i mean no middle ground or shades of grey with Christ on the manner of the death penalty.” I’m not sure where he’s gotten the impression that we live in a “Christophobic society,” all I know is that there’s a church on every street corner, the vast majority of our politicians are Christians, and pretty much all of them pander to Christians. There are a multitude of Christian TV channels, cable networks, radio stations, and bookstores, and you don’t have to look that hard to find businesses who wear their Christian affiliation openly, Jesus fish and all. There’s an entire segment of the music industry devoted to creating Christian songs in just about every genre. Meanwhile, I could count on one hand, with fingers to spare, the number of openly atheist/agnostics there are in this country at all levels of government. We’re hardly ever acknowledged in the mainstream media, unless it’s to belittle us or blame us for society’s ills. And when one of us dares to assert our Constitutional rights, we get hate, rejection, ridicule, and even death threats. And the vitriol doesn’t just come from Christians on the right, either. Hell, we can’t even put up a billboard with a positive message about our lack of belief without the local media reporting on it as if it were some sort of affront to community morals, complete with quotes from outraged Christians. I for one am tired of the persecution complex that so many of you in the Christian majority exhibit simply because we nonbelievers insist on existing, and occasionally making our existence known to others.
This will be my last comment on your page, as I’m going to go ahead and unfollow. I see no value in being preached at and told that my values as an agnostic are inferior by people who belong to a religion with a 1,700-year-long running history of atrocities and other ethical breaches.
M — define what it means to be ethical . you keep saying that your ethical . well , what does that mean ? you have never defined it .
as far as being persecuted for being an agnostic . try actually following the real Christ in a phony christian America and you will see what it is like to be really persecuted. they can dismiss you , but they hate me . that’s real Christophobia. why ? because my faith lived out exposes their fraudulence , and their employment of the terminology of the faith to manipulate others.
you think that i am critical of non believers… you should see me in a group of phoney baloney Christians . i let em have it !
I’m not an agnostic nor am I going to judge them but I have no idea what they go thru as far as being persecuted but I have to say I do agree with your comment here “try actually following the real Christ in a phony christian america and you will see what it is like to be really persecuted.” I have had more (at least I thought real) Christian friends that I’ve known personally delete me off of facebook because I didn’t believe just like them and challenged the status quo only wanting to discuss.
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
Atheism is the complete opposite of “close-minded,” it only takes a rational mind to understand this simple concept. I don’t really care if anyone wants to believe in myths and fairy tales; if that’s what you need to get you through life- go for it. But I draw the line when you want to push it on children or push it through in laws that effect everyone else. We’ve had thousand of years of a culture dominated by various religions and where has it gotten us-misogony, abuse and wars. Yeah that “faith” thing really seems like the answer-doesn’t it?
james , it always amuses me when atheists talk about a rational mind . my response is that someone can be so rational that they lose their sense of reason . Rationalism has never been the all and all to what it means to be human . and since the atheist cant define what it means to be human , then what have to offer to human problems in the concrete here and now but accusations like yours against people of faith .
people of faith have committed atrocities . so have people of unbelief. its called being human .no one has patent on hypocrisy and destructiveness on this planet.
Are you saying that all people who believe in God are not rational?
My question to you is, are you open-minded enough to read Jesus’ words?
There are people who know the Bible by heart and don’t know the heart of God.
The Way is clearly revealed in the testimony of Jesus, a glimpse in lines dispersed throught John, and the other Gospel writers. Only the Spirit of God opens the eyes of the reader seeking the Spirit of God.
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:13
The words of Christ are as True Today as when Jesus revealed them 2000 years ago.
He answered and said to them, Well has Isaiah prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honours me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Mark 7
Christ is not addressing Atheists by these words.
Ray , true ..he is not talking to atheists , but in the gospel of Mark , Mark describes Christ as being ”beside himself in anger at their unbelief ”. Unbelief is the root of hypocrisy , be it secular or religious.
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
The role of religion is complex. I wish there was any one solid answer as to why people are so up in arms over debating religion. We all breathe air. What more do we need to cultivate compassion?
Blessed are the Peacemakers for they shall be called the Children of God.
These words of Christ transcend Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Atheism.
Be as wise as a Serpent and as harmless as a Dove
JED , people are uptight about religion primarily becuase they are products of the overwhelming consensus of the age of Modernism , and the spiritual wisdom of the Ancients is competition to that. Also , many have contempt prior to investigation . We live in general in the age of digital dumming down ..heaven forbid that people should read books these days . And the book that is considered by many to be a literary masterpeice is the Bible …just as Homer and the Greek tragedys , and the works of Shakespeare , and Dante , and Milton , so on and so forth .
so given a illiterate society , and one that is prejudice , that has made up its own mind about what they think is right and wrong , have a hard time even cracking the book known as the Bible .
And those who have cracked it find it disturbing and dark and forboding , so they get uptight and blame the main tragic figure in it –namely –GOD . What they fail to realize is that all masterpeice Literature in any age ; be it the Theocratic , Aristocratic , Democratic , or Chaotic age is disturbing . Happy America does not want disturbing . it wants half and hour pizza delivery , smart phones , and sports. so when they get stung by the words coming off the pages they usually recoil and bite back , and claim to be so moral , and other excuses like ”i am a good person ( without defining what good is ) … and look at all the relgiuos hypocrites , etc ..blah blah blah …..
I think the biggest obstacle and roadblock to the new reader of the Bible is the thee, thou, thy, and the many words like cometh, pleadeth, watcheth and keepeth and so many others like these.
After so many years I automatically in my mind see you, your, come, plead, watch, keep.
We are justified by Faith and God knows the secret thoughts of the heart.
You glorify the ancients, because they are ancient?
To be ancient is to be inevitably outdated.
You can’t ‘blah’ about so many answers, so concentrated in our era, to most of what the ancients thought were divine events.
Hitchens:
“Religion ends and philosophy begins, just as alchemy ends and chemistry begins and astrology ends, and astronomy begins.”
I think you’ve looked at philosophy, & recoiled back to religion & bitten back, as you say.
It’s silly to assume ‘dumbing down’ is not at least equally produced by the blind-believer set– they’ve gotten gullabity down to a ‘science’, the first ‘Mad Men’.
Does Catholicism ‘work’ for you by suggesting reliability of prevalence & age? Do not the highly dubious suppositions, the campy ‘carrot & stick’ of Heaven & Hell at the basis of the story not give you pause…
Ah — The mistake that Hitch made in his book on Atheism was in the subtitle — how it poisons everything . EVERYTHING? i would say somethings . yes . but everything ? that’s a tall order. it sure didn’t hurt Bach’s composition of cantata 140 . Or Dante’s ”Commedia”. or Milton , or even Hitch’s fav poet –john Donne . The grand cathedral at Chartres. way too much generalization . so , in the quote you used from his book , all of this begs the question as to what is progress?
what makes the Ancients so outdated. define outdated. Bertrand Russel said that ”Philosophy stands in the no mans land between science and religion , held on suspect by both sides”. lets run with Russel for a moment . if he is right about his assessment of philosophy , then that means that science and philosophy are inextricably bound . so is religion and philosophy. they all get intertwined . i can tell you that after decades of studying theology and philosophy –you cannot have one without the other. Augustine alone proves that.
because it jumps the gun does humanity a disservice and violates consensus , a given all power leads to abuse
Sunshine , violating consensus is where the action is . J.S. Mill in ”On Liberty ” talks about the importance of hearing out dissenting voices so as to avoid uniformity . An Orwellian style uniformity always hangs over every society and culture. so when a truly spiritual person comes along and goes into intelligent and civilized dissent it disturbs the powers that. be . but they need to be disturbed.
So for example a person makes a spiritual claim that others don’t agree with those others also have the responsibility and voice to say “No”. that is unfair you can’t tell us you are a message from ‘god’ w/o proof.
Sunshine , yes , they do have that responsibility to say no. the problem is that most people are even too apathetic enough to not even challenge the spiritual claim in the article . or they are too hostile to say no and back up their no in an intelligent manner.
my articles, and other people articles that have a spiritual center to them, as well as the documentaries that Lo posts on this blog have been well thought out and worked on hard. therefore , if one says NO , that is their view and i respect it . what i have a problem with is that most of them cant back it up the no.
perfect example of this is my article that the Christ story is not a copy cat of ancient myths:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/why-the-christ-story-is-not-a-copycat-of-ancient-religious-myths-by-rocket-kirchner/
i have spent 4 decades of study on this subject. and yet what i got in return was personal attacks , stupid remarks , or not even intelligent rebuttals ..but rather just new age prattle .
is there intelligent life on earth ? is there intelligent life on this blog ? let us have some spirited Socratic style civilized debate that has been thought out and backed up with facts on every subject.
I made a comment in The Jerusalem Post Today with that same concept as it relates to the possibility of Israel starting a war with Iran
The writer imagines a lot. History proves despite what one imagines, the realities of war have unintended consequences.
The king of Israel and the king of Judea planning to go to war against their enemies assembled all 400 prophets of Israel for advice. With one voice they told the kings God is with them in the battle. Go to war.
Micaiah, the one solitary voice said the war is a mistake and the God of Israel is not with the king of Israel. The king of Israel died in the battle that night.
2 Chronicles 18
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=256739
It’s been suggested that striking iran would be a strategic, tactical nightmare & that bunker-buster-bombing nuclear sites would be a fallout disaster & war crime.
(That ‘king of judea’ stuff is a bit of a stretch, Ray, biblical references never brought peace there, you’d have to secularize the place & its protestant funders to make it safe for sanity– So much for Spritualism promoting peace!).
If people who want to live there want to compete in a medieval myth of ancient irrelevant theocracies battling over patches of desolate desert, that’s a war never meant to end, glad i don’t live there!
AH — i cant believe that you and i are agreeing . but i have to on this one . the sky-god warrior god is directly juxtaposed to the Christ –God in humility paradox.
i think that what causes all those wars over there is not just the old sky-god paradigm but the fact that the weather is just too damn hot . they are going crazy from the heat !
They also drink lots of caffeine. No alcohol in Islam, but really strong good coffee all day. But you’re so right, very hard to keep a cool head in the hideous unrelenting desert heat!
Well said! The notion of changing the world without changing oneself is naive and absurd. And that’s all genuine spirituality is about — reaching our highest potential as beings of wisdom and compassion. If more of us could do that, or at least make good progress towards it, there’s no doubt that we’d have a better society. The “bad guys”, the greedy, exploitative ones, would still exist, but there’d be less obedience and compliance from a more conscious populace and it’s unlikely we’d ever let them take over the reigns of society in the first place.
Unfortunately, too many people have had such bad experiences with conventional religion that they then reject anything that isn’t strictly secular. They throw the baby out with the bath water and reject mature, authentic spirituality as well, or, more accurately, they never enquire into it in the first place. While I think we should all be activists, activism can be an excuse and a distraction from introspection and doing the necessary transformative work on oneself. Any social change that comes out of such an unreflective stance is doomed to be a case of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
The Kingdom of Heaven is within you, Jesus taught.
You see, in the final analysis, it is between you and God; it was never between you and them anyway.
Mother Teresa
http://ray032.wordpress.com/2011/06/12/all-you-need-is-love/
Linda–bullseye ! wow ! Chris Hedges refers to this as ”externalizing evil , instead of dealing with it in ourselves ”. nothing really changes . in fact it just gets worse with the us verses them jargon which leads to further Imperialism .
Linda, as i sit here and re-read all the comments on this thread , i am convinced that you have summed it all up better than i could .
would you consider writing an article for this blog on this subject of what takes to really change within hence changing the world without ?
i keep thinking after reading your response –salvation verses the re-arranging the chairs on the Titanic . i could write a song with that title .
for as Bob Dylan said ”if you believe that this world is all there is , then you are stuck ”. sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo true.
It is so not so that secularistic campaigns for change are ‘doomed’!
Secularism is the language, the culmination of all heartfelt advocates for popular political change.
Laws are secular. Progress succeeds by changing laws effectively.
Religion unifies neither religious people nor subsumes secular people, this whole notion that religion will unify a progressive movement is a myth.
But if your MO is ‘spreading the good word’ at every opportunity, then any venue, even the mildly religious DS, will be used by an evangelical to attempt to convert the masses.
We’ve all heard it enough all these years. I think it’s over the top, all due respect, RK.
Rocket, might I suggest that perhaps you could kindly apply your amply informed mind to producing something beyond the Christian conversionistic harrangue?
Let’s hear more about your pacifism beyond & before the biblical transduction you’ve experienced, were you a pacifist before ‘crossing over’?
And perhaps you might elaborate on exactly what you mean when you say you’re a Socialist, as it pertains to the practical socio-political theory…
Click on Rocket’s name either in the blog post or on one of his comments and you can see his list of articles on Dandelion Salad. They cover a wide range of issues.
AH — fair enough .
1. i was a pacifist before my conversion politically , but i did not have peace in my heart. the indwelling Christ brought that peace. that is why i wrote for this blog ”why is there no peace in the peace movement ”? the difference between being for the cause of peace and actually being peace itself is night and day .
2. Socialism –Athiest Micheal Harrington used the 1930s Catholic worker model ala peter maurin and dorothy day . that is my model too. it includes political involvement and volunteerism . this is also called ”the Swedish middle way model ”. Without Christ in my life i would be way tooooo selfish to give a shit about those in need. but when one gets to know Christ one sees the whole human race as their family .
the term ”good news ” is indeed ”GOOD”. to me it beats out Platos idea of the good , Spinozas , Kants, Benthams , etc … once a person exhausts the entire spectrum of ethics and still holds truth to be of value , there can be only one response to the good news of Christ. maybe that is what Chesterton means when he says ” you can hear the gospel 999 times and still find it to be not relevant . but watch out , its the thousandth time that will get you .
From Facebook comment #3:
Facebook comment #3 — thanks for your honesty . here is an article i wrote for this blog sometime ago about real liberal progressives that became even more progressive after their conversions to Christ.
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/11/21/exclusive-progressives-that-became-more-progressive-after-their-conversion-to-christ-by-rocket-kirchner/
there is a sustainability that the grace of God gives us to do even more for our fellow human beings on this planet in regards to social justice and equality . I hope that this article inspires you , and illuminates to you that the afterlife begins in the here and now the instant one gets to know Jesus .
If the afterlife begins in the here/now (upon conversion), what happens after you die, are you in a seamless state of nirvana from the momnt of knowing, bypassing the pain of death & on to blissful, comfortable heaven until eternity?
You could make money on that…
AH -come on !! you are too intelligent to make remarks like that. Lets at least hear some serious rebuttal from you on the topic .
If you’re curious as to why your articles about religion and spirituality might be getting a negative reaction, you may want to re-read them and consider the negativity that they might be conveying towards those of us who have chosen to be nonbelievers. Like in this article, for example, in which you seem to imply that revolutions without a religious component are doomed to failure, and appear to blame the ultimate failure of the French Revolution on the fact that it was secular in nature. It bears reminding that some of the worst atrocities in history have been committed in the name of, or were at least inspired by, religion. Hitler, in Mein Kampf, wrote, “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
Religion has inspired radical Muslims to fly airplanes into buildings, to blow themselves up in crowds of people, and to stone women to death as adulterers for being raped. Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, Jews, Muslims and Christians in the Levant, Hindus and Muslims in India and Pakistan, all have been inspired by their religious differences to do horrible things to one another. And yes, some people like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. have been inspired by their faith to do good in the world. But I would argue that religion (and spirituality, religion in its watered-down form) has never accomplished anything good that couldn’t have been achieved just as easily, if not more so, through the simple application of common sense. What we refer to as the Golden Rule has been in existence in some form or another much longer than any of the religions currently in existence, and one need not believe in a higher power to see its wisdom. Meanwhile, the same bible that inspired Dr. King also proved useful to those defending Jim Crow, and slavery before it. And more than a few of the people who marched with Dr. King against segregation were nonbelievers.
As an agnostic, I personally have no interest in religion or spirituality, but I have no issue with those who discuss it, as long as they do so with respect to the beliefs (or lack thereof) of those of us who choose to differ. It’s when those who would do so attempt to imply (or outright state) things about nonbelievers like myself that are insulting and untrue that I take issue.
Maikeru — one can state historical facts all day long about the abuses of religion ( the crusades , the pogroms ) as well as Atheism ( Pol Pot , Mao , Stalin ) , and it just turns into a pissing contest.
The Romans main contention against the early Christians were that they were ”haters of all mankind”. Now why would these men and women bearing ”good news” of a humble inner kingdom be called that? could it be that the Roman Stoics viewed them as competition to their so called virtue and that the whole notion of sainthood and martyrdom is an affront to their egos? So , the message to them comes off ”negative”. However , to those who had open hearts it came off as a proclamation of divine love , and that divinity is not Caesar ruling in violence but in Christ in love.
The secular man of today is like the secular man of yesterday . And what we are witnessing is time standing still. The time standing still is the secular insistence that ( what Protagoras said ”Man is the measure of all things).. man and the state ( be it commie or capitalistic ) has what it takes ( without God in humility changing hearts ) to sustain itself . This was the whole problem with the Stoic paradigm and it has not really changed one bit. One cannot understand Nazism without understanding the reverberation thru history of Protagorist and the Sophist statement about the centrality of man over God .
The golden rule : well , yes you are right about it always sort of being around . But the teachings and commandments and the person of Christ goes way beyond that rule . Jesus commanded his followers to not just love your neighbor , but to love your enemies too. He command his followers to forgive always . And last but not least , he stated that he was not just a messenger , but that he himself was THE message…and to not partake of his body and blood , one has no life in them . of course this all comes off as foolishness to those on the outside . In the original coine Greek , the term ”the foolishness of the gospel ”means ”the madness of the gospel ”. But how can something that St. Paul would and did defend as the outline of truth and sanity for man be madness ? why would Paul call it madness ? because he knew how outsiders viewed it . why ? because that is how he viewed it before his conversion .
The upshot of all this is this : one cannot prove that revolutions will last even if they have Christ at the core , because humans screw up all the time and drop the ball. but what one can do is show that they stand a slightly better chance, and how those with deeply held spiritual convictions are usually on the vanguard of some movement to liberate humanity . There are solid historical examples of this. And it is this vanguard of the spiritual is what the secularists by and large either ignore or resent . This blog is in microcosm of our whole society of that resentment in the responses to articles and documentaries of a spiritual nature.
See, this is exactly what I’m talking about. You mention the “abuses” of atheism without mentioning that none of the people you mentioned killed in the name of atheism, and each of them killed in the name of the cult of state and personality that they created. You attempt to blame the atrocities of the Nazis on secularism, when in reality the vast majority of the Nazis were Christians and the anti-semitism that motivated them had its roots in the fact that many Christians blamed Jews collectively (and more than a few still do) for the alleged crucifixion of Christ.
You mention that the teachings of Christ go beyond the golden rule. This is absolutely true; in Matthew 6, for example, Christ says, “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” If only more Christians on both sides of the political spectrum were more familiar with the full extent of his teachings, and more serious about adhering to them…
But you forget to mention that Christianity goes beyond the teachings of Christ, at least as it’s practiced by the vast majority of Christians. You forget the book of Leviticus, and its admonitions that adulterers, homosexuals, psychics, blasphemers, and even disobedient children be put to death. According to Leviticus 21:9, if the daughter of a priest embarrasses her father by becoming a “whore,” she is to be burned at the stake. The bible as a whole teaches many things, some of which contradict each other, but what it stresses above all else is that Christians should obey the will of their god above all else, regardless of what his will compels them to do. Thus we have Abraham nearly murdering his own son, until the god that told him to do so sends an angel at the last moment to stop him; thus we have the children of Israel performing ethnic cleansing in their promised land at the behest of the almighty. And thus in the modern era, we have angry Christians who issue threats of violence, rape, and death against atheists who dare to assert their rights under the Constitution: http://www.alternet.org/belief/153803/why_is_an_atheist_high_school_student_getting_vicious_death_threats?page=entire
Say what you want about the secular man, but at least his ethics are consistent, and not subject to be swept aside by the whims of an angry god.
M — the Nazis were not Christians . a tree is known by its fruit.
the cult of state and man was created and destructive because nature abhors a vacuum . and that vacuum is unbelief in God . for as Chesterton said ”if you don’t believe in God , you will fall for anything ”.
there are exceptions ; Atheists like Nat Hentoff , Albert Camus ..etc.
Consistent secular ethics : where ? this is a problem that even the secularists will tell you . for just as the Titans in mythology did not ruin heaven but laid waste the world , so the secularist since the Age of Enlightenment have reached a dead end where they cant even agree with each other and it is wreaking havoc . there is no magnetic true north here . the collective ethos in modern and post modern thought is slippery all over the place. We have gone from the arbitrary ethics of the Situationist movement in Euro thought in the late 60′s coming off of the Heidegger to Sartre to the post-structuralist , to the de-constructionism of Derrida. ….its a mess.
in regards to your comment about Christianity and the Old testament –it is a non sequitar. a good excuse to not take a serious look at the good news of Christ , but a non sequitar. the New testament of Christ is NEW. it is not the old . you quoted the verses about capital punishment . Jesus strictly forbids that. he said ”he who is without sin cast the first stone ”.
its ethos comes from its transcendence and its ever newness as expressed in the life of the christian practitioner . hence it stands in contradiction to both old testament thinking and secular thinking . despite what the fundamentalist say . and the fact the religious fundamentalist in America have misrepresented this good news , is even more the reasons that clarification of it thru article on this blog need to be written in context with today’s issues.
FIrst of all, it’s completely untrue that the Nazis weren’t Christians. According to a 1939 census in Germany, 94% of Germans identified as either Protestant or Catholic, while only 1.5% identified as nonbelievers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany). You may not like the way that these Christians chose to conduct themselves, but it doesn’t change the fact that they were Christians. As for a tree being known by its fruit, the last 1,700 years or so of Christian history suggests to me, anyway, that the behavior of the Nazis during the Holocaust is perfectly consistent with the way that Christians have been behaving themselves for quite some time. (http://notachristian.org/christianatrocities.html)
As for the idea that the Enlightenment launched some sort of secular dark age of ethical decadence, much as you seem to have overlooked the centuries worth of atrocities committed by your felllow Christians, you also seem to have overlooked how the values of the Enlightenment have actually tempered the behavior of your fellow Christians. Specifically, you seem to have overlooked how your fellow Christians once sought to correct the inconsistent ethics of homosexuals by burning them alive, or by shoving red-hot pokers into their anuses. You seem to have overlooked the multitudes of pagans, Jews, Muslims, native Americans, heretics, and others who had their inconsistent ethics corrected with the blade, the arrow, the bullet, and the occasional smallpox-spiked blanket. I can’t speak with a whole lot of authority about the philosophical arguments that have been waged among a handful of academics, but I can state that most of the nonbelievers I know and have encountered have a lot of overlap in their beliefs regarding what constitutes ethical behavior, and — more importantly — I know that they are relatively consistent in how they apply their ethical beliefs to their own actions and to the actions of others. I wonder, though: if your god does exist, and he appeared before you and asked you to kill in his name, as we’re told in your bible that he has done on multiple occasions, would you as a Christian obey him? If he, say, asked you to bomb an abortion clinic, or to shoot an abortion provider, or to beat a gay man to death, would you follow his orders, or would you refuse to do so on the basis that doing so would be unethical?
You say that the Old Testament is a non sequitur, but if that’s the case, why is it still included in the vast majority of Christian bibles? Why is it still cited so often by so many Christians, and read from in so many pulpits? I’m familiar enough with the “good news” of Christ’s teachings to know that he himself is quoted, in the New Testament (specifically Matthew 5) as saying, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” That law he’s referring to is Mosaic law, which includes all that nasty stuff about stoning people to death that you would seemingly prefer be swept under the rug and forgotten. As for the idea that Jesus “strictly forbids” all capital punishment in his dealing with the woman who committed adultery, that’s not at all clear. It’s certainly not how most of your fellow Christians have interpreted it. Again, Christianity as practiced by most Christians goes beyond the teachings of Christ, and even when the teachings of Christ are involved, they’re subject to interpretation.
If this discussion we’ve had has demonstrated anything to me, it’s that you seem to want your audience to react to your postings about your Christian beliefs, and about religion and spirituality in general, with a level of respect and acceptance that you seem unwilling to extend to those among your audience who are nonreligious and/or nonspiritual. This seems to be a general problem among most Christians, who nurse a perpetual sense of victimhood even as they set about marginalizing and insulting non-Christians and especially nonbelievers. It’s not particularly attractive behavior to those of us who aren’t Christians, which may explain some of the blowback you’ve gotten.
Um, when has Rocket been disrespectful? He has taken the time to respond to everyone’s comments, some multiple times. Rocket doesn’t insult people either, he actually can respond without name calling/personal attacks.
Bringing up Christian hypocrites throughout the centuries doesn’t mean anything.
What Rocket is attempting to do is show that there indeed is a Christian Left in American society and what I’m trying to do is publicize that fact.
M — A Christian is one who follows Christ . period./ not the Old testament . not churches. not ethics or morals. Oscar Wilde was right when he said ” Morals are something we make up for people we personally don’t like ”. i have no interest in moralizing . because in the last analysis it accomplishes nothing . it is lethal . it poisons the air.
victimhood you say . we live in a Christophobic society . of course there are many reasons for this : the oppressive rise of the religious right , the non believers SELF righteous ethics , etc.
this Christophobia is so pregnant in our society that any excuse will do to reject Christ. ANY. even if it is not thought out .
There is no , and i mean no middle ground or shades of grey with Christ on the manner of the death penalty .in fact he was a victim of it . I saw a poster that Amnesty International had –it was a picture of Christ on the cross , with a caption underneath it saying ”Maybe we should have ended the death penalty a long time ago”.
”Judge not lest you be not judged”
”He who is without sin , cast the first stone ”.
”you have heard it said ”thou shall love your friends but hate your enemies . but i tell you to love your enemies , and pray for them who despitefully use you ”
”Father forgive them , for they know not what they do ”.
It is very very clear that Jesus Christ came into this world to exhibit divine love and not to pass judgement . this is the good news. it is only bad news to and considered negative to those who want the world to be made in their own moralistic image , and seek personal convenience over truth .
Onward christian soldiers…
The most violent and militarist peoples in societies are historically religious freaks. They drive the masses into genocidal and xenophobic frenzies that erupt from their own delusions, or their manipulation of ethnic mythologies into xenophobic genocides.
There are no successful ‘spiritual revolutions’. Religion and spirituality promise other-worldly rewards. Pray, meditate, eat bowls of shit now for buckets glorious afterlife.
Scooter– wrong ! the Chinese took over Tibet and the Dalia Lama had to flee for his life. The Buddhist living there for many years were successful and peaceful there before that . FACT.
The early Christians non violently undermined the brutal Roman Empire.FACT
Martin Luther King lead the civil rights movement thru non violence and it was successful . Fact
The early suffragettes ; Susan B . Anthony , and Mary K Stanton were devout Quakers that lead the early women’s liberation movement, without them doing anything violent . FACT.
the list of spiritual movements thru history are great and they have lasted . FACT.
these are just a few. that is why religious and spiritual issues need to be discussed in context with the secular issues of our time now . As i said in my article..those who disregard this do so at there own loss.
Could Afghanis have thrown off the us empire with peace…
(Did faith help?)
What would Abdul Ghaffar Khan think?
Kudos on the spirited discussion!
AH — the story of Khan is just downright amazing . how it would apply today i dont really know. but lets face facts .. no country has ever conquered Afghanistan . fighting there is like fighting on the dark side of the moon . its crazy from a strategic view.
Read anthropologist David Graeber’s ‘Debt:the first 5000 years’ and you’ll soon realise that religiosity is often the patsy or the palatable excuse given to veil the real motivations for war and violence.
What becomes clear in his stuady is that during the course of human history it is one person or a group’s claim on the resources of another or their attempts to impose debt obligations on others which are the most common causes. Differences of religion have often been the palatable excuse. It’ the human compulsion to commodify things and commodify relationships between individuals and groups; to create property with the implicit and real threat of violence in order to impose and enforce these property claims which lies at the heart of much of the violence throughout the course of human history.
Incidentally and for the record, I’m an atheist and I see Dawkin’s claims on the evils of religion as being resolutely unscientific (much like his so-called memetic theory) and not borne out for the historial or anthropological record.
And for the record, belief in Progress is a kind of religious thinking. The Abrahamic faiths hold to a human telos and manifest destiny for humanity. As Reason dispensed with the God-centred universe we nonetheless held fast to life with purpose; and a grand human narrative and an unyielding an exponential vector towards our destiny. This human-centred universe was soon challenged by the industrial revolution coalescing with new concepts of property and the markets. The emerging technologies during the Industrial Revolution coupled with a correlating belief in the ‘invisible hand’ and the efficiency and perfection of capital and markets if unfettered by human interference led to the exalting of an ideology of efficiency. ‘Efficiency’ as purpose, as a raison d’etre and as ‘progress’. Here were machines unencumbered by so-called human frailties which though their capacity to produce mass quantities of articles both mechanistically proved and buttressed the efficiency of self-regulating markets and flows of capital. A perceived natural ordering was best left to the machines coupled with the market and increasingly both in their onward march to ever greater efficiency would subsume human purpose.
Of course we’ve seen the negative consequences of this thinking; this longing for purpose and praise of efficency and progress as a raison d’etre. It has culminated in our lifetimes in an interrelated economic and ecological catastrophe playing our simultaneously on a global scale. And yet, true to religious thinking, people hold fast to their belief in progress.
Progress is both subjective and never certain. With regards to social progress, slavery for example has appeared and disappeared at numerous times during the course of history. Slavery exists now in our world and our technologies and economic models, both consequences of the myth of progress indeed permit new forms of slavery to emerge.
To hold that technology or markets have or should have their own raison d’etre or manifest destiny (progress) is to believe in a perserve totalism. To believe that technology and the markets must necessarily chart their own destiny and that they’re must be ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ – people who profit from the re-ordering and people who become dispensable or even perish – is to perversely justify the state of affairs which have emerged. A new ruling elite and a priesthood technocratic class which utilising the re-ordering capacity of machines and markets to accumulate wealth and justify property rights and the accumulations of ever-more property in their hands.
The Myth of Progress is tied to yearnings and beliefs in purpose and is not a force in the universe but a social construct developed for advancing the beneficiaries of claims to property and capital with clear albeit complex historical origins just as divine purpose amongst our pre-Renaissance/Age of Reason ancestors justified a feudal, noble and religious hierarchy.
Supermundane– good to have another intellectual on this blog. welcome . on the nature of progress , of course there is a very real danger of the linear form of history as developed by Augustine in ”City of God ” , and extended by Hegel in his ”philosophy of history ”. before that as we know history was seen as cyclical .
all of this begs many questions –where is history going ? what really is progress?
my position as a Christian practitioner is that we need a lasting revolution , and that that comes from within . the parallax of that is externalizing evil and projecting utopias . this leads to Imperialistic thought . To Dawkins credit he did not ever fall into that like Hitchens did when Hitch went from a Trotskite to a Jeffersonian . but i digress.
i think that we cannot entirely dismiss Jung’s statement that the Medieval Renaissance was the golden age of the West and that everything has splintered from there”.
why must reason and faith be separate? Francis Collins and Isaac Newton saw them the same . It is not only religiosity that is the one of the roots of war for but also arbitrary ethics. in fact i see no difference between them .
as a christian pacifist i seek thru my articles to on this blog to redefine the notion of divinity out of the sky -god mindset and into its form of humility .
Articles like ”the Gospel of Mark verses the Imperial mindset ”, and ”What is Christian Anarchism ”? seek to do just that.
[...] Exclusive: Why is there so much apathy or hostility toward spiritual things on Dandelion Salad? by R… [...]
From Facebook comment #2:
WOW –that is an amazing story !!!! Phil Ochs wrote a song in the 60′s about that kind of a problem called ”Love me , i am a liberal”. the song exposes mere liberalism that is not radical enough to change anything .
Secularism is the principle of separation between government institutions and the persons mandated to represent the State from religious institutions and religious dignitaries (wiki).
It’s a technique, not a dogma. It’s a language of common humanism we can mutually hope to ascribe to, a shared realtime reality regardless of alternative religiostic, tribalistic & archaically nationalistic mythological imagined pack imperatives. Oy vey!
AH — look …i think that the founding fathers of this country were onto something when they sort of became the referees so to speak between the religious and the secular.
but there is a caveat here — secularity in a balanced way is fine for some basic stability . but this sort of fundamentalist rabid secular”ISM’ is as dangerous as the religious idiots trying to shove their agenda down our governmental throats .
the guy who really gets this is Chris Hedges. He wrote 2 books back to back –one on christian fundamentalism in America , and the other on atheistic fundamentalism . both Imperialistic . both oppressors. 2 sides of the same coin . you catch my drift. we have agreed on this one before.
Atheism is an ideology, as is biblicalism, unsupportable arguments. Ideologies are something you either believe or not. Differeing Ideologues don’t easily often reconcile. Better we find common ground through secularism where practical change actually happens.
But really, RK, you must see that you’re the one injecting christian ideological arguments into the discourse, (looking for marks?). You are driven by belief to find fertile soil to plant your Christian solution to society.
I’ve followed this blog, & it doesn’t seem secularist commentators are here preaching unprovoked about the destructive crutch of archaic religiosity in the age of intelligence, except in response to your pro-christian articles…
I honestly think you seek to drum up the debate, flush out the atheists to argue with, either to wrestle with your own misgivings about faith, or to hook some fresh soul to marinate in your philosophic maze where all roads lead to the bible.
We’d like to hear from you, just please try anything but jesus for a bit, you’re starting to sound like a bible-thumping missionary.
Ah — there is an assumption in your last comment that the Ancient wisdom of the Christ is not relevant to the existential predicament of post modern man . but i state categorically that it is . and not only am i willing to state it , i have and will put it into context with every single problem that we have these days . we are are not dealing merely with fluffy outdated fairytale religiosity here my friend , but a gritty message that can match the grit of our age.
a lock has only one key . only one key can fit the lock . if the human heart is a lock , and we can’t get in to change what is inside we need a key right ? everyone is scrambling round to find a key and it ain’t working . or they are denying that the human heart is the problem . either way , time marches on and the borders bleed so to speak . what to do what to do ? The purloin letter was there all the time right in front of our face. the truth is always in the most obvious place, hidden right before our eyes. this is the gospel . and if you still don’t believe me , then try everything else. Process of elimination is a very sobering thing.
From Facebook comment #1:
Well –facebook #1 at least you read the articles , and it is healthy to have an intelligent disagreement. in Regards to Lenin and the Russian revolution , he did have the whole world against him , but he also had the advantage of the Russian troops fighting out of town fighting ww1.
The analogy to the early communist in Russia taking on the whole world so to speak would be the early Christians undermining the Roman Empire thru pacifist resistance by refusing to pay homage to Caesar. interesting too that the word Czar comes from Caesar.
the advantage that the early church had was that it was the only way to fight oppression by taking an alternative way of fighting , which is by non cooperation .
any secularist worth his or her salt would tip their hat to that …because it is resistance to oppression . even the most ardent secular soldier respects a non violent steadfast martyr. and visa versa. courage goes beyond ideology .
It does not seem to me that Christianity had much to do with undermining the Empire. If it did, then how does one explain the Byzanitnes, that were both very militaristic, fought on for another thousand years, but also did were very Christian (while interestingly enough not developing a holy war concept)?
Did they not actually work within the Roman system, eventually becoming a part of the Roman system? The fact that they were non-violent seems to be a result of the fact that if they tried to be violent about it the pagan legions were not very far away. They did well because imperial Rome was increasingly polarized and they provided a set of doctrines more fit for a certain strata within that arrangement.
Well yes, the Czars are an almost word for word copy of the Byzantines, the Cyrillic alphabet is a creation of two Orthodox priests, etc. There was trade with that part of the world, and early Russians fought both wars with and alongside the Byzantines.
While there might be a respect for a non-violent resistance that does not imply its sanctioning, or a lack of criticism of it. It could be just cowardice, a lack of desire or ability to actually take the steps necessary. From that follows a self-gratifying pacifism.
Kon , i think that we must differ to Gibbon on his assessment of Rome’s decline and fall. …Christianity and Barbarism . Gibbon as one who supported the British Empire , also loved the early Roman Empire , and stated categorically that the Christians were undermining Rome with their non cooperation with the military pre-Constantine , to the point to when the Parthians , the Ostrogoths , and finally the sacking of Rome in 410 by Alaric and the Visigoths came in , and then the Vandels , Rome itself proper was for the taking .
What you are referring to is the morphing theory from Empire to Empire ( Spanish , French , British , American …) and that the gospel did not really change anything for good. well. maybe . but on the other hand , we have to ask our self what the world would be like if it never had any impact at all.
if you can find Thomas Merton’s ”The non violent alternative ” , you will be amazed at some of the things we don’t hear about . for example how the Danish resisted Hitler by everyone putting a Jewish star on and refusing to unload German cargo. This really demoralized the SS. The gave up on Denmark . and of course we know about Bonhoeffer and Kolbe and their martyrdom under the Nazis as part of their resistance as Christians . There is a long history of non violent resistance even in Judaism before Christ by the non violent Maccebean Martyrs in 135 B.C. under the oppression of the Syrians . Also , the Sufi Muslims , and them proclaiming the holy Jihad has nothing to do with the outer world , but is a form of struggle inside , and it is non violent on the outside. all of these people paid a heavy price for this resistance. I would call these pacifists truly courageous and not cowardly . and furthermore … there is a reason why this news is suppressed in American schools . along with the integrity of the Quakers like William Penn who honored the treaties of native American Indians , despite the fact that he was persecuted by his fellow white-men for it .
the fact that this and much more is kept from American school children , and violence is taught and allowed everywhere , goes to show that non violence is a real threat to a Fascist society like we live in . why ? because it is credible … and it spreads like wild fire. let us hope that Occupy wall st. can stay non violent . it will give it more credibility .
I agree with the final assertion, that Occupy should stay non-violent. But what kind of violence are we talking about here? Occupy should not engage in the anarchist nonsense of smashing up store windows, that is the kind of violence that I would be against.
Almost every revolution, however, has required violence. I do not reject that it may be required, that civil war may be required, etc. I simply think it stilly to put away a tool before the exact nature of the task is decided on. Non-violent resistance could be a part, but could it have done as much as actually overthrow the Germans rather than just cause them to stop trying to find the Jews in frustration?
As far as Gibbon – I am relying on the fact that the Byzantines, having been Christian, still had no problems with violence. The Western Roman Empire, even when Christian, fought as best as it could against the invasions. Why it could not fight as well as before? Many factors for that. Peter Heather is good, and he is, unlike Gibbon, modern, and bases his analysis on science and rationality, rather than some pacifying value of Christianity. History seems to show that if it does have one, it is rather minor. Christian Europe seems to have had no problem conquering most of the world, using Christianity to justify it!
I wonder, what would Gibbon say about Christianity and the American Empire?
The Gospel is preferable to the cult of Baa’l. Especially when capitalism comes around, when value is given to every individual, that is progress. When Christianity is freed from the confines of Catholicism, that has some progressive value. I just really have one objection to the whole non-violence forever thing – the enemy has no problems with violence. I want to be able to live. I want the revolutionaries to be able to survive. History shows us many cases of the fact that they do not have to kill everyone to be victorious, and it is highly unlikely that there will ever be an actual rebellion of the 99% against the 1%.
KON –Nietzsche said ”we become what we hate”. so , as to what cost does one respond in violence? can one live with oneself after killing another human being ?. i do a lot of prison performances as a musician , and i know and write people on death row. some dont care about life , others live in grief that they killed someone .
you say ”i want to live”. fine . but is life worth living with that kind of guilt of killing a person ? to me it would be better to die than to kill. to each his own . so i take off the table violence being used in a revolution .as one person said on this blog –it is like rearranging the chairs on the Titanic . that is not change. it is the same old tired self deception that change is being made.
as to Gibbon … good question . Gibbon was a monarchist. a friend of mine wrote a book on Hume’s influence on Gibbon called ”Melancholy duty ”. In all do respect to Peter Heather , it still is by scholastic consensus that the buck stops at Gibbon when it comes to expert work on the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. As far as the Roman republic goes ; Grant , Bury , and many others weigh in . But the Empire ‘s demise , Gibbon still is ( besides a few small oversights) the bottom line .
you talk about the eastern and western part of the Empire and keep insisting that they were Christian . i totally disagree. once Constantine appeared the Apostasy began . for one cannot be a christian practitioner and be violent .
I also agree with your opinion on not needing spiritualism in political activity.
Taking any position on religion is like taking a position on the time of day…perspective and experiences that are as unique as your point of view. It’s not universally believed or felt to be true. Rather than argue these points, people keep their beliefs to themselves are wise. “Those who speak, do not know. Those who know, do not speak.” It’s not anyone’s job to save a single person or to tell them how to live. Each person interprets their faith. I am of the school of thought that the reason most people use religion is to save them from personal accountability. Others, could see it as a source of comfort. The problem, is the weak are often taken advantage of. They are lied to. They are betrayed. The real truth….each one of us has to go out and find it.
So — mmm — so you are saying that i should just not speak out about the fact that i believe that men and women should get equal pay ?
Should i also not speak out against wars that kill human life? ‘
Should i stay silent about ( in word or in deed) the homeless problem in America ? the fact that Gitmo is still open for torture ?
Should i just shut up about the fact that there really is good news out there for those who are truly brokenhearted and hate themselves for the weakness they conceal ?
the gospel of Christ means ”good news”. does not the world need tried and tested good news ? it has worked in my life for 37 years. and by living it , and telling others i have seen their lives go from being very bleak to being not only transformed inside , but expressing that vital interior transformation to combating exterior social injustices …and really changing our corner of the world .
Those who know –do say ! the Taoist have it wrong . to know and not say is nothing more than being a cowardly selfish cruel act. silence is complicity . shame on those who hide their love and their light !
What exactly is the ‘Good News’ in your mind, the concept ascribed to Jesus of salvation in heaven after death for those who believed him?
AH — the good news is that Christ came into the world to reconcile man to God . it is about reconnection. it is not just about his teachings , but about being in union with him . He IS the message. the proclamation that one lives forever is part and parcel of the good news.
if one just existed forever in full sentience without a qualitative definitive change , then one would not LIVE forever. one would just exist. Here we are dealing with the theology of ”intrinsic qualitative difference” , which was developed by the christian –platonists in the second and 3rd centurys from Plato’s concept of ”intrinsic quality”.
Hellenized Judaism was the fusion of Platonic and Judaic thought . so we have the application of the uncreated life of God who created the world ”ex nilio”( out of nothing ) , superimposed conceptually via Platonic thought , with Jesus as Nazareth as the mediator . That ”LIFE” ( zoe –in greek ) is available to everyone who receives Him .
Cosmic dust in the solar wind ~~~
So existing forever in full sentience isn’t enough, you can actually one-up that with yet more fantasy about unification with a long dead obscure individual whose words you know so few of & only by heresay, & whose existence you’re only aware of because of imperial Rome?
& what if universes really can self create ‘ex nilio’ per the ‘new math’?
Perhaps you’ve mined the library for philosophy & religion, & could focus a bit more on current cosmology, particle physics & brain science. This is the huge game changer that make all prior seem primative. Plato’s gift was the technique by which we found all this out.
At least it could update & contemporize your religious arguments, which seem mired in old books & give short-shrift to current thinking.
Ah — i always stay up on current thinking . If you read Anthony Flew’s work on Gerald Schroeder’s comparative physics with Genesis ch 1 on the nature of light , you might find it interesting . or ”Quantum Theology ” , not to mention the importance of Teliard de Chardin’s ”Phenomenon of Man ”, or Francis Collins ;founder the Genome project ( one of Hitchens best friends and a devout Christan and first rate scientist) . Neuro scientist Sam Harris serious flirtation with the consciousness remaining sentient after death . i read like a bat out of hell ! Also ..Oxford analytic philosopher Bostrum’s ”Simulated universe theory ”. ..is dynamite on the life after death one . the list goes on .
as far as Jesus being dead . well , that is your view. you say i talk about someone i dont know. oh , but i do know him , because he is not dead . and you may cry ”solipsistic”, or ”R.K. were is the objective facts’?’. the facts are –
1. truth is processed subjectively .( forgive my Kierkegaard )
2. my life has been changed for 37 years.
If Dandelion Salad carries any more articles like this, I won’t want to subscribe or read any of it. Please spare me this kind of stuff. Religion is the opium of the masses. Keep it to yourself if you must. It just pollutes and weakens any real social movement for equality and justice.
Sounds like a threat, Amy. Not very peaceful of a comment.
My suggestion is to read the article again as you seemed to have missed the point about Gandhi, Khan and MLK.
Please see:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/exclusive-why-is-there-no-peace-in-the-peace-movement-by-rocket-kirchner/
Generally I post articles/videos of under-reported news items/issues, that does and will include Christians on the Left. They don’t receive the attention as the Christians on the Right do.
Social Justice, anti-war/pro-peace, economic justice and human rights dominate this blog. As Rocket mentioned there are over 17,400 blog posts on these issues/topics and another under 400 on spiritual matters.
As far as “keep it to yourself”, that would against my religion. Sharing the Good News is as important if not the most important thing I can do. Should I also keep quiet about other issues of the day?
The point again of this blog is to let as many people as possible know about under-reported issues of our day.
The unsubscribe button is at the end of all the email newsletter that are sent out for this blog.
Another suggested article:
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2009/07/13/jesus-was-a-communist-by-darren-pedigo/
Amy , gee wiz… last i heard …Television was the opium of the masses.
Yawn
Thanks for taking your time to put in your 2 cents, Harry. At least you were not hostile, that I appreciate. Cheers!
Yeah but the yawn of apathy is just as bad as the sharp teeth of hostility . same coin.
So true.
nice piece rocket. at least you get many comments. wish i could say that for my columns ( Ha Ha )
i agree with the opinion that things political or really for social and economic justice should envelope a spiritual center. why not? i know many atheists who are more spiritual in ACTION & FEELING than many who follow religions. it is , as you delve into, the HEART that is the center of our belief in the power of Love etc.
i stand for years , each and every week, for justice and a better country. i know that the angels or the Christ or the Buddha or Krishna or whatever spirits there may be of a higher consciousness … STAND WITH ME AND OTHERS IN PEACE
thanks philip . it is hard to get people to understand that without a deep spiritual center we just end up with power changing hands.
Because it’s irrational, no matter how much you personally believe. We need rational.
Behavior is not divine, if anything it’s the oppression that’s divine (and a holy mess).
Human problems are solved with human means, god is clearly not helping.
Spirituality presupposes the superhuman, and he’s hardly interested in fixing our human problems. But if we are going to entertain ‘spirituality’ on DS why must it always be Christian? It starts to feel like a subliminal evangelical message.
Belief, dogma, groupthink, nationalism, religiosity, so often dated & disproved, unsupportable, simply gets in the way of solutions. If spirituality gives you the personal strength to fight for morality, so be it, but the fight itself must be rational & human to succeed, following the laws of logic and the law of the land.
Articles involved in the minutia of history, reporting, facts & documentation, are at complete odds with the entire ideology of biblical Christianity, which requires believers to take virtually every dubious, archaic biblicalism on faith.
Trying to mesh an evangelical, prosylitistic Christian message with progressive news & commentary is like trying to mesh same with the conservatism, and we saw haw that turned out since the ‘Moral Majority’. It’s a bad mix.
Christian faith has not lead us to peace, unfortunately, though it’s had millennia to try. But notwithstanding history, you cannot make a logical case for Christianity, any more than one can for Atheism without committing multiple logical fallacies, therefore much of the commentary is wasted, imo.
When people become accustomed to visiting this blog for its insightful news & information, and are suddenly blindsided by a relentless, literalistic believer armed with every quote by every philosopher all in service of proving secularism wrong & biblicalism undeniable right, it seems completely out of place, almost like all this awesome blog is all a foil for a sermon.
One hopes DS isn’t about luring good people who are trying to figure out society it’s laws into the maw of inexplicable religiosity, which will solve nothing except leave thinking readers with the suspicion that they’re being hustled by evangelicals.
Of course it will cause shock & alarm, and likely weariness & avoidance of the blog in future if news, related commentary and reality on the ground is what readers seek and instead they are suddenly confronted with a Fox-esque diatribe about the ‘x’ abbreviation for Christ & the ‘war on Christmas’ canard concocted by the Religious Right.
(All due respect!)
AH — unreasonable ? mmm. there is such a thing as too much reason without anything spiritual becoming itself unreasonable . do the equation . And if you would peruse this blog on the articles written on spiritual things you would find Gandhi and MLK all over the place. as well as many other people who have changed the world .
how much do peace activists know about Bhatsi Khan ; considered to be the ”Northern Gandhi”, and who worked with Gandhi to get his fellow Muslims to lay down their arms and fight the British Empire in a different way . AND IT WORKED! how can one debate something that really worked?
because you disagree with my last post , and put me unfairly in the fox news category ( which is a crazy categorization ) , if you look at the body of my work on this blog you might see a thread of intelligence at work here that seeks to raise the bar on the root problems of humanity that seeks not to externalize evil but deal with it in ourselves first. and then that makes us effective activists.
all the best.
Kindly provide any links re: Bhatsi Khan
http://forusa.org/blogs/judy-bello/some-thoughts-abdul-ghaffar-khan-efficacy-nonviolent-resistance
here is a good overview. and at the bottom of the page is a great book listed that i read on him about 11 years ago . my jaw dropped after reading it i was so impressed.
I think it’s association, mostly. The biggest hypocrites I’ve met have also been the biggest Book thumpers. By design and default the human mind infers and couples links between things just in order to ensure survival. Big black and orange cat = Tiger = danger. The ones who couldn’t make those casual links ended up being eaten. That’s why we have racism. No one walks down the street, sees an African American and says “hmmm.. I bet his genetics cause a 2.31% deficiency in mathematical acumen compared to Caucasians”. They just see Black = (100+ bad anecdotal stereotypes).
Right now, on first instinct, organised religion looks like Charles Manson walking down the road with a blood stained box cutter in his hand. Seriously, when you see Pope Ratsinger in a picture, who’s first instinctive impulse is a good one? At best it’s, “Oh, bother. I hope he isn’t making another verbal screw up..” I love the Quakers and their “Speak Truth To Power” message. I like reading nice articles about the Amish. I get a warm glow reading about acts of charity. I understand that a real donation is anonymous and therefore unseen to us (are you reading this, Bill Gates? I don’t mean your paid publicity Foundation).
But people want to feel empowered to make the world a better place without attributing it to a higher power. The biggest scorn I read in posts is directed at people saved by medical services who then attribute it to God. I can see in my mind’s eye the doctor standing behind them smiling sadly and dying a little inside at those press conferences.
Hid , actually I have friends who are surgeons and specialists doctors who are constantly astounded by things that happen to people that should not have. they are not so quick to just brush their faith aside. my dad was a doctor and saw it . and my present doctor wants me to speak to a group of interns about spiritual matters. this century is one of a major paradigm shift in this direction , and to those who hold on to their out dated 19th and 20th century thought will be left in the dust.
in regards to hypocrisy — the biggest hypocrites are simply the biggest hypocrites . no one has a patent on that one .
you mentioned the Quakers –yeah –right on –william penn , susan b. anthony ..etc. now here is an excellent opportunity for you to write something on them for this blog on how they were the main impetious for native American rights , women’s suffrage , and the early abolitionist . it was their faith in the inner light that prompted them to be the real christians that mattered. and right on about the Amish — the first green party people . we will send it to bill gates with an Amish pie in the mail . LOL .
Well…if the very fact of our own existence isn’t proof enough of our innate spirituality, I don’t know what else would be. Otherwise, what would be the point of living and breathing? The thing is, atheists insist on proof, and the majority of the rest of us need or require a deity of one sort or another. So its usually a lot easier to set that issue aside when discussing politics unless you want this forum to absorb a lot of written space and time devoted to religion — especially considering the diversity that exists in the United States and abroad. For instance, if we have to first agree that Jesus is our savior before we can discuss anything else perhaps, as a general rule, it might most often be best to set that issue aside. I, for one, would probably find myself disqualified from that sort of requirement. On the other hand, if you want to base your position on a spiritual belief of one kind or another, I would certainly hope that people feel free to do so and by all means go forward and express the courage of that conviction with all due respect for others who may differ. And likewise, I would certainly hope that that would be respected.
Black cat– point well made. though Christ is my Savior , i have dialogue with many religions and even my Atheist friends. the main thing here is to first exhaust common ground . we can do this on this blog. it is an open forum.
i think that the problem on this blog is that Lo works singlehandedly ( without pay ) around the clock , and she does not post crap . and so when something is written on a subject any subject , it is one thing to disagree .. it is quite another to be belligerent . the spiritual ones responses usually are belligerent . and one has to wonder — are these people activists because they just want to express rage that they have not dealt with from within , or are they generally interested in changing this world ?
that is why i wrote this article . it is in a question form .
I think there a lot of people who have had it in for religion because of some negative experience with it usually early in life. As an adult, my father came to reject Catholicism because I think he came to feel that he had been abused by Catholic schools as a child (a seemingly common phenomenon) and his sentiments towards the church and those of many others like him has often struck me as knee jerk and a bit overly hostile. I was sheltered as a child from having a particular faith poured down my throat so I have been free in my adult life to come to my own conclusions about spirituality and without having been burdened with a particular axe to grind. That isn’t always true for people.
Good point, Black Cat.
Even more the reason to have writers intelligently and non emotionally articulate the importance of various spiritual things as they relate to various political issues.
considering that , it is paramount for each writer to re-define divinity in order to leap frog over knee jerk reactions and create a meaningful dialogue .
He is a good example: When Mark wrote his gospel he set out in narrative form to redefine divinity under the Roman Empire that worshiped the Emperor as divine . On the Roman coin it said ”Caesar, Son OF God ”. The Caesars were brutal and violent and into might makes right . Mark does something interesting here by using a literary device that causes a paradigm shift. He has the Roman soldier at the foot of the cross of Christ to say after this humble , kind , and loving servant of men Jesus is dead to say ”Behold , this truly was the SON of God ”. Kapow !!!! there is the shift in thinking against the Imperial mindset.
This kind of redefining of divinity undermined the Empire. it made people think . it moved them . it is that kind of writing that we need more of .
i have attempted to do this time and time again depending on the issue and have almost always been met with hostility . So , one has to wonder whether people are just not reading the articles , or are they siding with the Caesar mentality , and want this rotting destructive American Empire to continue .
Dear RK, could you kindly defign ‘belligerent’, was I belligerent?
AH — i don’t sense that you are belligerent at all. you are smart enough to defend your own position without stooping to ad hominum .
if you read the responses to some of my articles , you will see that people don’t seek constructive dialogue or debate , or even come up with a decent thought out response , but are just belligerent in their reactionary knee jerk reactions.
the differences we have had ( and this is not to flatter you ) … have been refreshing to me because i think that we can match wits as iron sharpens iron . so i welcome your rebuttals .
It isn’t surprising that such a militaristic country is spiritually going through a dark time… you can look at it as a unified energy field concept or karma or a number of different ways. We reap what we sow. Drones killing people in other countries, manipulating markets for our benefit, ruling the world through the force of our military, imposing economic sanctions which make children suffer the most in a country, the extensive use of torture, intimidating, threatening, attacking country after country. If people are afraid, if they don’t want to examine themselves in the mirror, it’s because they’re not ready to see the beast.
I see soul sickness in the way people live today in the U.S. I see cognitive dissonance so great and so unresolved that there is a collective psychosis. You can’t engage most people in a conversation about the wars the U.S. is fighting for more than a minute or two. They always change the subject. It’s as though if they don’t talk about it or think about it, it’s not real.
So under these circumstances, are people really ready to examine deeper spiritual issues? I doubt it.
Ariel , very well stated ! do i think that people are ready to look in the mirror and see that we all are the problem and examine deeper spiritual issues ? no. and responses to them on Dandelion salad reflect that.
However , speaking truth to power as we know it does not just deal with the aggregate of overt fascist power hovering over us , but speaking it to all to say ”we are the problem”, weather people want to hear it or not.
So , ready or not , one must.. after dealing with ones self , and taking the beam out of ones eye , take the splinter out of ones brothers eye .to remain silent is complicity .