rfmcdonald: (Default)
[personal profile] rfmcdonald
Richard R. considers the question over at Castrovalva, considers Dawkins' critique of religion as an ideology and finds it entirely satisfactory. Would that the distinction between religious and secular ideologies never been made.

The distinction between religion and other forms of ideology seems particularly untenable to me given that of the fourteen characteristics of an ur-fascism identified by Umberto Eco, ten apply quite straightforwardly to most of the major monotheisms (religion as a cult of tradition, rejection of modernity, a cult of action for action's sake, disagreement as treason (heresy, to use the correct euphemism), distrust of disagreement, stemming from individual or social frustration and the provision of a social identity, a cult of heroic martyrdom, and life as a form of struggle). By comparison, Stalin-era communism would qualify for about eight of Eco's characteristics. In such cases as the Middle East and Northern Ireland it seems clear conflict and violence are attributable to a complex mixture of causal factors. But there's no shortage of examples of religious groups persecuting one another without reference to other factors to suggest that religion is perfectly capable of being every bit as pernicious as nationalism, racism, fascism or communism.

Écrasez l'infâme.
Page generated Jan. 31st, 2026 08:20 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios