this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
242 points (98.8% liked)

Palestine

831 readers
96 users here now

A community to discuss everything Palestine.

Rules:

  1. Posts can be in Arabic or English.

  2. Please add a flair in the title of every post. Example: “[News] Israel annexes the West Bank ”, “[Culture] Musakhan is the nicest food in the world!”, “[Question] How many Palestinians live in Jordan?”

List of flairs: [News] [Culture] [Discussion] [Question] [Request] [Guide]

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

You are conflating my criticism of monotheism with a direct criticism of Judaism. I am saying the core value of monotheism (i.e. there is one god and its the one I picked) has created a colonial mindset in all monotheistic religion. You're saying "I did it again", but I'm doing it for all. I mean the Arab conquests soon after Muhhamad's death is the same as well.

Monotheism, as an ideology, has stolen a lot from us in terms of ways of thinking, belief, and added division in its stead. This continues to be true in major geopolitical states including America, Israel, Iran, and many, many more countries.

[–] Maturin@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think you are trying too hard to conflate the colonial/genocidal mindset with monotheism when the evidence doesn't really support it. Was Ancient Rome not colonial and genocidal? Greece? Egypt? They also had slaves. They conquered everyone they could. The exterminated whole swaths of peoples. They didn't need monotheism to do that. You could argue that the legacy of those polytheistic societies (specifically Egypt for the ancient Jews, Rome for Christians) laid the groundwork for the same genocidal/colonial mindset. But the main point is that the colonial and genocidal mindset is easier to understand from a class/material analysis than one tied to any specific theology. The monotheist theologies were used as a tool to organize and mobilize populations because that was the easiest tool to grab and it was couched in a language that the populations already spoke, but polytheists and other non-monotheists are just as capable of using their theological tools to do the same. For a more modern example, see for example the relationship between Hindu and Buddhist sides over Sri Lanka. Neither are abrahamic monotheisms, yet the colonial and genocidal tendency and forces are still at work.

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

While I think that's interesting point, two things:

Destroyed swaths of people is dubious. Cultures, yes, men, yes, but peoples, no (hence the slaves but also why those lands were still administered by high ranking officials).

Essentially, I feel it's whataboutism. There's very good reason why it's said the Philippines was conquered by friars, the Crusades weren't caused by resources, and the age of Empire and the Atlantic slave trade were both back by the concept of monotheistic "other".

Just because other ideologies (and theologies) have negative kernels, it does not excuse the vast negative issues the have directly born out of monotheistic religion as an aspect of otherhood and a sense of colonisation or superiority. That does not make them the sole source (the concept of land ownership, for example, is a non-theistic ideology that is used to cause group division and destruction). We could also talk about Manifest Destiny, as a non-religious movement (though it did have large religious support), but it's not what I am talking about

Monotheism as it has manifested on the world stage has come with colonisation, destruction of old ideas, and entitled due to the other people being sinful heathens. It is a useful tool for the powerful (which is why we see the royal conversions in Europe, leading to internalised oppression of polytheistic beliefs). It is worth questioning.

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

jagoff

It's been 2 days now.

Go away.

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nah didn't see your name on the door.

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

and added division in its stead

And what the fuck are you doing here, now, with your smug Reddit New Atheist bullshit?

[–] BurgerPunk@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

Quick what year is it??? Is it 2006 again? It feels like the worst time travel experiment ever

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The irony is I'm not even an atheist. I've described a specific ideological problem I have with monotheism as a concept. Why does that upset you so badly? Why would that compel you to say someone doesn't belong?

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The irony is

I don't care what you claim to be, especially 2 days later. Your bloviating is masturbatory, tiresome, and now days late.

Go away.

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Being chronically online isn't a character trait. It's an addiction.

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

Being chronically online

Says the jagoff that came here two days later to continue tipping that totally-not-atheist fedora.