A comment I wrote at http://foseti.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/questions-for-the-secular-right - which may help clarify:
I’d like to emphasize that this is not really a matter of what *I* want, but of what we will get. And that I am thinking on a timescale of human generations (c. 25 year units), not of the next few years
I was profoundly influenced by the analysis of Ernest Gellner who (in brief) divided all human societies into:
1. the hunter-gatherer,
2. the agriculturally-based (dominated by warriors and priests, in various combinations), and
3. the post-industrial revolution modern societies – which depend on permanent growth (which means permanent increase in efficiency/ productivity – largely by increasing functional specialization and coordination).
When (and not if) industrial civilization collapses (and this will happen sooner rather than later, not least because the politically correct ruling elites want to destroy The West and they are clearly succeeding); The West will (like it or not) revert to the agriculturally based societies run by combinations of warriors and priests which existed everywhere in the world (except among a handful of hunter gatherers) before the industrial revolution.
Our choices are between different balances of warriors and priests, and between different types of priests.
The current default world religion is (obviously) Islam, not Christianity – due to its demographic growth and sustained assertive self-confidence.
It is on that basis that I prefer the Byzantine Christian Orthodox model.
But – more importantly – since I regard Christianity as true, obviously I believe that society should *at its bottom line* be organized around the need for Christian salvation; and not around the desire for comfort (maximum pleasure and minimum pain).
H/T to Isegoria - http://www.isegoria.net/2011/01/should-western-civilization-be-saved/ - (I had forgotten I had written this).
While I tend to agree with this analysis, I wonder about your assertion that Islam is the default religion. It certainly feels that way, especially when one compares the heart of Islam (the Arab world) with the heart of Christianity (the European world). Still, just like there are Muslims outside the Arab world (like in Indonesia), there are Christians outside the European world (like in sub-Saharan Africa). Christianity grows ever stronger in places like Congo, Korea, and India. I'm far too ignorant to say whether this is an encouraging thing or simply a ... thing. But the simple assertion that Islam is growing whereas Christianity is shrinking needs some qualification.
Even in the world closer to my home in the United States, the Mormons are growing far faster than the Muslims. Do we group them with the Christians, or with the "Other"? (We certainly can't group them with the Muslims!).
On this sidenote, I would add that, the situation in the USA is of course not exactly the same as the situation in the world. (A truism, I realize... the same could be said for the UK.) From a purely world-historical view, it is easy for me to imagine a situation in North America where Western civilization collapses and we descend into racial and religious tribalism. As things stand now, the Mormons are far better prepared to set up their own kingdom of hard work, piety, chastity, and prosperity than are any of the traditional Christian or secular North Americans. Apart from their geographic concentration and their high level of organization, they have the distinct advantage of actually believing deeply in the rightness of their religion. I wish I could say the same for the historical church of my own people (Anglicans).
I made the mistake of reading from the top-most post first and missed the post just below this one when I made my comment about Christianity, Islam, and Mormonism.
You have already basically addressed the points I raised. You may publish this comment and the earlier one if you see fit. I think they are still germaine. But I just wanted to comment again and acknowledge that you have addressed this!
Post a Comment