The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
-----------------------------------------------------------
First, there is no such animal as "the church". It is but a dream in a theocrat's eye right now. Plenty of blood spilt to end that idea.
Second - and this is just a hunch - guilt and learned helplessness probably do not usually go well together with support for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When you speak of guilt, I am guessing you are speaking of the Catholic Church. It seems to me that their stand on Homosexuality would fairly clearly violate the spirit of the declaration. It may, depending on interpretation, violate the letter of the document. Of course, individual Catholics may or may not be in support of the universal Declaration of Human Rights. When we measure, we are not limited to aye or nay.
At some point you are just going to have to call it a day and accept that your measuring tool may not be perfect. The question is, is it good enough? Of course you can look at other tools as well. Some may in some ways make stronger statements than the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One example would be the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It, unlike the UDHR is quite explicit on the rights of Homosexuals. If you feel it important to examine the role of learned helplessness within Christianity, or any other religion, then do so. Don't limit yourself to religion, and do not fall into the trap of assuming one-size fits all. Personally I think that one can get unnecessarily complicated and loose sight of the forest for the trees.
If we are speaking about the attempt at making the US into a theocracy - there is no need to worry how they will measure up on the UDHR. The question is, do they support any of it?
As far as the rest of it goes: Use the measuring stick and see what you get. It seems to me that in general the UDHR tends to support positions that are farther, not closer, to learned helplessness.
aspiring to genteel poverty
Why has Canada not succumbed to either neoliberal fundamentalism, or fundamentalist Christianity in the same way the US has?
Hard to say. The stakes are lower in Canada from the point of view of those who think in terms of power, as Canada doesn't have the power that the US does.
However, fundamentalism has nothing to do with it. Guilt and learned helplessness are part of the christian experience with few exceptions. (I'll also reduce my use of the term "the church" to christianity. I don't know enough about any other religions to say either way.)
Your assumption of a complete lack of nuance on my part is telling.
you are the media you consume.
If that is true, then sorry. Still I note that you are saying "Christianity". There is no "one church" in Christianity either. No, you do not have a complete lack of nuance, but when it comes to Christianity, there are mighty few shades of gray. You do recognize that there may be a few exceptions to your idea of guilt and learned helplessness.
As long as you define Christianity as effectively evil, you will have accomplished nothing but to engage in the politics of guilt. Measure and prove. Compare to other aspects of society. What is good? What is bad? Is it true that modern Protestantism is based on guilt and learned helplessness or has Protestantism (and no, there is not a "Protestant church" either.) changed as society has changed? My impression in Canada is that it is not the same as when I was growing up. Even while growing up, Christianity was not monolithic. I was involved in advocating for an end to religious public schools. The group of people who were most interested were Christians. (With some notable exceptions like Unitarians.) Christians were divided on the issue. In general we received the most support and the most opposition from Christians. This included all political parties. Bluntly, some Christian churches were significantly more progressive and more supportive of my rights as an atheist than any of the political parties and society at large.
Bluntly, some Christian churches were significantly more progressive and more supportive of my rights as an atheist than any of the political parties and society at large.
This isn't about religion vs. everything else. Political parties are self-interested in power, they won't represent the people's interests unless the people demand it firmly. Churches still provide some sense of community which the rest of society has done away with. Secular society needs to recreate this.
Ok sorry for being slow on the uptake: Does Christianity leave people more prone to being controlled?
Very quickly, I can say yes and no to both of these and can come up with examples of specific sects or individuals to match.
Now what? Perhaps we may wish to compare it to other aspects of society and see if a particular Christian sect is contributing to greater freedom and less control compared to some other social institution or group. Still where does that leave us?
We still have a huge number of unanswered questions - such as what is the role of religion? How does religion work? What is religion? How is religion changing over time? How do religion and social attitudes feed off one another?
Let's assume you have managed to prove your point - which I do not think you will be able to do - then what? Almost any form of direct intervention will create helplessnesses and victimization.
It seems to me to be far easier to work on social policies that increase the level of freedom that people have. Universal medical care, old age pensions, unemployment insurance, and so on. These are the things that have caused religious membership to drop like a stone in Canada. Let's continue along the same line. Let's support free daycare, free dental care, higher baby bonuses, longer maternity and paternity leave, free university education and so on. Internationally, lets support peace initiatives and fair treatment for oppressed people in the third world. And yes, lets support community growth at home.
Not only that, but you can get some Canadian Christians to help you put forward these policies - especially the more left wing groups. Church antecedence has been dropping like a stone. An yet, they will work hard to implement social changes that will further decrease their numbers. It seems to me to be a win-win situation where the question of does Christianity contribute to being controlled becomes a complete non-issue.
by Oui - Dec 5 8 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 8
by Oui - Dec 617 comments
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 58 comments
by Oui - Dec 41 comment
by Oui - Dec 21 comment
by Oui - Dec 156 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments