2 ms·

> Moreover, the narrative of sin and redemption is not a coincidence: progressivism (including its environmentalism subset) is not metaphorically a religion; it

> Moreover, the narrative of sin and redemption is not a coincidence: progressivism (including its environmentalism subset) is not metaphorically a religion; it is a real, living (nontheistic) religion,* the clear intellectual descendant of mainline ecumenical protestant Christianity. I've heard that, but never found a reasonably objective source that references primary sources. I've read a couple pieces: The general gist I got is that North American Christianity split into two basic movements - Fundamentalist Christianity, which emphasized that the Bible was literal and the ancient rites were necessary to be followed, and Progressive Christianity, which said that the Bible was not literal and was more inclusive and open to discussion. But I've not found any primary or objective secondary sources on how this went - you sound knowledgeable, do you happen to know any? > If a nontheistic religion seems like a contradiction in terms, the problem is merely linguistic; English lacks a good word meaning "all religious beliefs minus the supernatural stuff". Yes, that I'm very aware of. I've traveled a lot, and you can clearly see that most non-religious people still inherited their basic religious beliefs of their culture. Very few people actively study ethics and come to independent decisions from their peer group - most people inherit their base ethics from their surroundings, and since religions were the way that most people got their ethics for a very long time now, it's mirrored quite well even in non-religious people. People with formerly Confucian surroundings tend to have a very strong family emphasis, which was a fundamental tenet of Confucianism. People with Jewish surroundings tend to get a very strong scholarly emphasis, at least partially descending from the heavy emphasis on Torah studies. Places that had a heavy Christian presence often are more ashamed about sex, pornography, and nudity than places like Africa and Japan which had did not have those same religious views on sex. The fastest growing religions in the world are nontheistic - this will enter common thought in the next 50-100 years as the power of formal religions continues to decrease and more nontheistic religions gain followers. And that's not a bad thing, but you still absolutely need to insulate public servants and scientists from their religious beliefs, lest they impose their morals on their science and law, thus leading to - well, most people are aware of the impact religion had on law and science throughout the ages. It's a little bit of a dangerous time now, because there's no separation of nontheistic churches and the state.

mambamamba 17y ago
>>But I've not found any primary or objective secondary sources on how this went It's definitely true. Progressivism is the memetic leftover of north-eastern US Mainline Protestantism. The poster above you makes the mistake of comparing it to actual religions, when progressivism has evolved to drop the religious components, which still makes its followers the cultural descendants of creepy religious maniacs even though they don't believe in a God (also, as a side note, consider that this makes progressives not "anti-American" as right wingers make them about to be, but "ultra-American" in the sense of trying to make the US progress into a more 'pure' and ethical state, as the Puritans wanted it to be. Edit: also consider that this might make the right/left 'culture war' more of a religious war between two protestant-influenced sects). This was mainly done for political power. Think about it, there is supposed to be a disconnect in the US between the state and religion, what better way for a memeplex to adapt to its environment then to drop the supernatural bits, and focus on propagating the values, mores, and aspirations of its believers through political power. You asked for evidence, here is a number of excellent sources: The main book you should read is "The Puritan Origins of AMerican Patriotism." That pretty much lays out the argument. Also check out "The Making of An American Thinking Class: Intellectuals and Intelligentsia in Puritan Massachusetts." It makes the case that Puritans are the forefathers of American radicalism. I also recommend these: God's New Israel: Religious Interpretation of American Destiny. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Authoritarianism. Hellfire Nation: The politics of sin in America. Also check out Michael Burleigh's two books on political religions (Earthly Powers and Sacred Causes). This isn't an aberration of history. Religious movements often drop their supernatural components under the guise of 'reason' and 'rationality' so as to adapt to the culture and politics. And if you are still not convinced, here is a large list by an American urban historian: http://www.amazon.com/A-History-of-American-Radicalism/lm/R20ZCIY17VJA5T/ref=cm_lm_byauthor_title_full http://www.amazon.com/A-History-of-American-Radicalism/lm/R2... Edit: I also forgot to mention there is a blogger that writes about this topic often. I generally disagree with a lot of what he says, but he comes up with a number of primary and secondary sources for this historical hypothesis. Here is one post that sums it up: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/universalism-postwar-progressivism-as.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/univers... And the multi-part Open letter series is also good: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-le...

mambamamba 17y ago

>>But I've not found any primary or objective secondary sources on how this went It's definitely true. Progressivism is the memetic leftover of north-eastern US Mainline Protestantism. The poster above you makes the mistake of comparing it to actual religions, when progressivism has evolved to drop the religious components, which still makes its followers the cultural descendants of creepy religious maniacs even though they don't believe in a God (also, as a side note, consider that this makes progressives not "anti-American" as right wingers make them about to be, but "ultra-American" in the sense of trying to make the US progress into a more 'pure' and ethical state, as the Puritans wanted it to be. Edit: also consider that this might make the right/left 'culture war' more of a religious war between two protestant-influenced sects). This was mainly done for political power. Think about it, there is supposed to be a disconnect in the US between the state and religion, what better way for a memeplex to adapt to its environment then to drop the supernatural bits, and focus on propagating the values, mores, and aspirations of its believers through political power. You asked for evidence, here is a number of excellent sources: The main book you should read is "The Puritan Origins of AMerican Patriotism." That pretty much lays out the argument. Also check out "The Making of An American Thinking Class: Intellectuals and Intelligentsia in Puritan Massachusetts." It makes the case that Puritans are the forefathers of American radicalism. I also recommend these: God's New Israel: Religious Interpretation of American Destiny. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Authoritarianism. Hellfire Nation: The politics of sin in America. Also check out Michael Burleigh's two books on political religions (Earthly Powers and Sacred Causes). This isn't an aberration of history. Religious movements often drop their supernatural components under the guise of 'reason' and 'rationality' so as to adapt to the culture and politics. And if you are still not convinced, here is a large list by an American urban historian: http://www.amazon.com/A-History-of-American-Radicalism/lm/R20ZCIY17VJA5T/ref=cm_lm_byauthor_title_full http://www.amazon.com/A-History-of-American-Radicalism/lm/R2... Edit: I also forgot to mention there is a blogger that writes about this topic often. I generally disagree with a lot of what he says, but he comes up with a number of primary and secondary sources for this historical hypothesis. Here is one post that sums it up: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/universalism-postwar-progressivism-as.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/07/univers... And the multi-part Open letter series is also good: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-letter-to-open-minded-progressives.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-le...