questions about the history of religion

Nov 2016
400
Munich
#11
Not necessarily. Think about a theocracy, such as Iran. This is how the people (or at least the majority of them) want their government to function. There are those who want to see more religion and religious practices in government as opposed to our separation of church and state. Not nearly to the lengths of the Renaissance or The Dark Ages, but more so than exists now.
Even if it was true that the Iranian "majority wants" a government like that is actually ruling, this wouldn´t contradict my statement,

Wherever there is a ruling class that profits from the ´religious´ system of their communitiy it can be said that the purpose of this system is not the welfare of the whole community but mainly of the ruling class,

since the Iranian society is factually divided in a small ruling class (clerical and economical elite) and a large ruled class (normal population). The thing is that the majority has been religiously indoctrinated right from the cradle so that they take it for granted that there are clerical people that teach them the ins and outs and have the right to higher social positions and to greater personal welfare. In Iran, the leading clerics are either plutocrats or intimately fraternized with secular plutocrats.

In sum, the religion of this system can be seen as instrumental for stabilizing and legitimizing the social and economical hierarchies. This doesn´t not necessarily mean that there is a ´fraud´ going on, since the clerics have been indoctrinated themselves right from the cradle, however, from an objective point of view, religion is the lubricator that makes this system work.
 
Last edited:

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#12
Not necessarily. Think about a theocracy, such as Iran. This is how the people (or at least the majority of them) want their government to function. There are those who want to see more religion and religious practices in government as opposed to our separation of church and state. Not nearly to the lengths of the Renaissance or The Dark Ages, but more so than exists now.
They do ? I thought they were just installing a tradition thatwas partially theirs to force out a tradtion that was not ( that is , 'alien' / foreign ) .

I am sure there are still some people in Iran that want their government to function 'religiously' but I doubt it is a majority. The majority of power brokers and opium regulators, that is ;) . The rest keep their head down 'in public' but otherwise , due to other means ( black market, etc . ) live quite well .

And there is always 'holidays' in Azerbaijan ;)




BAKU, AZERBAIJAN - JULY 9, 2016: Bar drinks at restaurant.
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#13
One of the most common terms that we translate to 'religion' from ancient (and some modern ) cultures is more correctly translated as 'law' .

AS said earlier, their used to be no distinction between religious and secular , ( in government, society, regulation, etc . )

I will post more on this later ( gotta go, for now ) .
 
Jun 2018
117
Philadelphia, PA
#14
They do ? I thought they were just installing a tradition thatwas partially theirs to force out a tradtion that was not ( that is , 'alien' / foreign ) .

I am sure there are still some people in Iran that want their government to function 'religiously' but I doubt it is a majority. The majority of power brokers and opium regulators, that is ;) . The rest keep their head down 'in public' but otherwise , due to other means ( black market, etc . ) live quite well .

And there is always 'holidays' in Azerbaijan ;)
You would be entirely wrong then. It IS a majority, but it isn't a super majority. That support may be on the decline, though what is noteworthy is that Iran is still an extremely religious country.
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#15
You would be entirely wrong then. It IS a majority, but it isn't a super majority. That support may be on the decline, though what is noteworthy is that Iran is still an extremely religious country.
No, I am NOT 'entirely wrong ' ;


" Iran is being rocked by its biggest wave of protests in nearly a decade. Since December 28, tens of thousands of Iranians have taken to the streets in huge numbers of towns and cities to demand freedom from their theocratic government. . .

" ... over the past week they’ve morphed into a wave of major demonstrations in which ordinary Iranians are often heard calling for a revolution against the country’s theocratic government.

" ... this massive movement — one with the potential to reshape the Middle East ..."

" The socioeconomic roots of the protests, in short, have now linked up with deeper political dissatisfaction "

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/1/3/16841310/iran-protests-2018


"In the lead-up to Iran’s presidential elections, a new Zogby Research Services (ZRS) poll shows that the Iranian people are not happy with either their economic situation or their government’s priorities and performance

" The results of this year’s survey established growing dissatisfaction among Iranians and stood in marked contrast to the findings of our 2014 and 2015 SBY surveys of public opinion in Iran.

" Over 70% were dissatisfied with efforts to advance democracy and protect personal and civil rights.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/iranians-are-dissatisfied_us_5870fadde4b0a5e600a78b28

My opinions were actually formed before this all started due to having Iranian friends that were visiting Iran, numerous times over a period of years , who told me about their experiences there and the people's opinions , and how it was changing .
 
Jun 2018
117
Philadelphia, PA
#16
Yeah, you ARE entirely wrong, that is why I made the statement.

A large wave of protests does not equate to the majority of people sharing an opinion. Depending on the population size (and Iran has upwards of 80 million people), 10% of that is still sizable (in the case of Iran, 10% would still be 8 million people, far more than enough to create a sizable population participating in a protest).
 

Similar History Discussions