Will anything ever replace religion as a social and cultural glue and existential motivator?

Will anything ever replace religion as a social and cultural glue and existential motivator?

Other urls found in this thread:

thejournalofneoabsolutism.wordpress.com/2017/05/02/the-patron-theory-of-politics-revisited-religion-and-conflict/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It already exists, it's called money.

"Religion" in the modern sense was invented in the 15th Century.

thejournalofneoabsolutism.wordpress.com/2017/05/02/the-patron-theory-of-politics-revisited-religion-and-conflict/

Yes. The Truth. And it starts with you.

literature

doesn't work for burgers

i suppose globalism is an attempt at doing so

religion is literature dummy

Universalist Progressive totalitarian government with a quasi-mystery religion of futurist optimism derived from secularized Christian morality, and a selective viewing of Star Trek

The other option is kin nations, and city states. Ironically, in 100 years, China will be less authoritarian than Europe, and Japan will be the only non-Islamic monarchy.

not until world iq gets over 120

marxism was explicitly created for that purpose

Too bad its dead asf.

Lmfao.

>cultural marxism
>root of modern degeneracy

sure it's dead lmfao

Lunacharsky tried to create an atheist religion in the Soviet Union and there was various shit along the lines

Marx started his obscure writings as a spin-off of Hegel's philosophy, one can barely distinguish the latter from theology on drugs, just as any German philosophy of the time.

Well people had tried it before that, the Cult of Reason and the Cult of the Supreme Being in Revolutionary France come to mind.

fpbp

what's the point you're trying to make?
yea, but cultural marxism is the only one to take hold as it has today, not that i agree with any of that shit

Our social glue MUST be towards something that exists outside of our physical world, because if it doesn't we idolize it and it becomes corrupted. How do you corrupt a heavenly ideal? It can never be touched.

No, tribes and common good is ingrained in the human brain, its biological and can't be rooted out unless there is some massive DNA modifications (think something like Assasins Creed)

His point is that he's repeating the Hitchens line that Marxism is just another religion. He's a New Atheist who thinks a society based on reason is the only thing that doesn't qualify as religous civilization. He ignores that fact that Marxism was explicitly an attempt to base society on reason and a materialistic, scientific view of history.

Nature runs this planet, not Man. That is God's true word. His actual creations.

he's a paranoid from Polan

he's reading Bible and do not fap

>The other option is kin nations, and city states. Ironically, in 100 years, China will be less authoritarian than Europe, and Japan will be the only non-Islamic monarchy.
sadly true

Social Justice

Western Europe will have to be totalitarian to be held together in a hundred years. It will be totally irrelevant either way.

new computer background thanks user

...

I see, that makes sense. But I guess the nuance lies in whether we're talking about the marxism that was created in the frankfurt school vs the cultural marxism we see today.

If we become a space-faring species, killing xenos.

>Marxism was explicitly an attempt to base society on reason
No it isn't. Reason is not the same thing as one man's semi-reasoned perspective.
>and a materialistic, scientific view of history
Belief in phases of human society as portrayed by Marx is not scientific or materialist. LToV is an attempt at a materialist understanding of the world but a failed one that has been proven logically broken. Marxism doesn't have a monopoly on reason, science, or the materialist worldview. Rather, it does poorly in all three respects.

Hence I said "attempt".

MY point is that it's disingenuous to call Marxism a quasi-religion, and it shields other modern ideologies that are based on similarly providential views of history (like Progressivism) from self-reflection and criticism.

Or alternatively, if you call Marxism a quasi-religion, then you HAVE to call the metaphysics of Progress a quasi-religion as well. The issue is intellectual consistency more than what label one choses. New Atheists want to have it both way, and Progressives don't even know enough to be willfully hypocritical.

it's frightening to know what an ideology can do, particularly when it preys on the emotional quality of humans

galactic conquest

No, and nothing should.

Dunno, maybe some alien invasion or something. Something that would threaten to destroy all of humanity in a generation.

Anime

ideologies tried it very hard but failed