Opiate of the People

[The Jay]

Is religion really the opiate of the people anymore? It seems to me that "sports" have taken the reigns on that one. What do people automatically go to (mainly men) when conversation is struck up? They talk about their favorite team or some player instead of the important things or intellectual discussions. They are kept sedated with propaganda on the occasion they do get the news and don't even bother to look further into things. Philosophy books get one section, Glenn Beck gets a whole row, and sports history gets a whole isle. I just don't know . . .

[Kitty_Paine]

What do people automatically go to (mainly men) when conversation is struck up? They talk about their favorite team or some player instead of the important things or intellectual discussions.

What's important is in the eye of the beholder. While you may not think sports are "important", they are millions who do. And who are you to say it's not? People like to talk about what they like, what they enjoy... I'd say sports is no more an "opiate" than video games these days anyway.

The fact is what the majority enjoys is catered to more than the other things. Hence the section sizes at your book store... It's to be expected and doesn't surprise me. I do think intellectual pursuit is underrated in the States, and it's said... but I don't think other, more entertainment based values are neccessarily "less important"... people like being entertained, it's human nature.

But as far as the opiate goes... I don't know, I think Religion is the end all be all... :p

[roy]

I don't think that it's possible to pinpoint any single factor as the "opiate of the people". Some are definitely much more influential than others. Religion is certainly up there as it has many harmful teachings which I think prevent a lot of people from developing their own values. Then again, a lot of people who claim to be religious aren't religious at all. Many choose only to believe the positive teachings of their religion, which to me seems odd, but I have no problem with it.

But sports? I dunno. I suppose that could be true, but I don't think there's anything evil about sport, in essence. However, it's true that sport stars are put on podiums while scientists who make great leaps forward in cancer treatment go largely unnoticed. Anyway, I'd guess that there are far more religious folk than sport fanatics.

[The Jay]

I know how it can be fun to follow that stuff but I would be saying the same about video games or theater if they were the most popular "distractions" of the time. While religion may do more to mess with people's logic, sports seems to currently hold more of the nation's attention. I think that things would change for the better if that attention were placed on social issues. :D

[ericksolvi]

I'm going to say something that some will instantly dislike. I'm begging you to keep an open mind.

I was taught to place any writing in it's historical context. To understand the time and place of the author, and I'm going to do that with Marx.

Germany in the 19th century. Atheism was all the rage among philosophers. The union of Christianity and Monarchy had ruled the continent for centuries. Those that wanted big system changes saw religion as a barrier. They saw religious leaders as pushers of conformity, and the status quo. They felt that belief in an afterlife stopped people from demanding a better life here on earth. The term opiate of the masses was created to be a barb against religion.
Today the relationship between religion and state power is more complicated. Some evangelicals might still be handing out opium. However let us not forget that the 60's Civil Rights movement was in large part organised in church basements. That Unitarians stand for gay rights.
In this time you can be a person of faith and a proponent of revolution. I would say that if someone really wanted to emulate Christ they would support communism.
I am not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim, but I do have faith. I follow a moral edict "If it harm none, do what you will" this sentence procludes me from even harming myself. And I follow Hermetic philosophy, a complex set of interlocking principles that try and explain reality and consciousness.

In conclusion. In the time of Marx religion did make people passive conformists. In this time in the western world religion has lost state backing (with some exceptions), and therefor no longer defends the state. Today a person of faith could be a member of the tea party or the communist party. In fact some studies have shown that people who identify as having a religion are likely to be better politically informed.

I agree that in this time football might do more to pacify the masses than faith does (At least in the US).

[The Jay]

You mean that you follow hermes trismegistus? What could have lead you to believe in alchemy, I'm genuinely curious?

[ericksolvi]

You mean that you follow hermes trismegistus? What could have lead you to believe in alchemy, I'm genuinely curious?

Alchemy was chemistry under a different name, with less understanding. Hermetic philosophy has a lot off historical claims made about it. I've scene some claim it's the oldest philosophy. Other more respected people say it's probably a Greek philosophy from the Hellenistic period. The ideas are what I follow so I set the origin debate aside.
Seven core principles each so simple that they can be summed up in a single sentence, yet having such vast implications and applications that it can take years to understand them. Here's the short list.
1. The Principle of Mentalism. If God is sleeping then everything is a dream
2. The Principle of Correspondence. As above so below, something that holds true on a small scale will also probably hold true on a large scale.
3. The Principle of Vibration. Nothing is still, everything moves at some level. When you consider someone said this centuries before the discovery of atoms, it lends credit.
4. The Principle of Polarity. Opposites are the same, differing only in degree. Hot and cold are just different levels of atomic vibration.
5. The Principle of Rhythm. The pendulum swings, as does everything. Nations rise and fall. Societies go from conservative to liberal and back again.
6. The Principle of Cause and Effect. Self explainitory.
7. The Principle of Gender. Creation is the result of opposing forces (but remember the 4th principle, masculine and feminine are flip sides of the same coin) coming together. Male and female creatures have sex and make a baby. The strong and weak atomic forces interact and we have a universe. Yin and Yang.

The Kybalion is the best introductory text. It was published in 1908, so it's public domain and can be found in full online.

[The Jay]

I've skimmed it already. The religion still needs a lot regarding proof just like christianity. Aside from all that, you didn't answer my question at all :)

[Zostrianos]

The association of Hermetism with alchemy is rather late, and dates from Medieval times. Classical Hermetism (1st to 5th centuries AD) was an esoteric system akin to Gnosticism, where mystical prayer and theurgy were used for self transformation and communion with the Divine. The traditional Hermetica are:
- The Corpus Hermeticum
- Asclepius
(both of which are found here in Copenhaver's scholarly translation: http://www.orderofmelchizedek.com/hermetica.htm)
- The Discourse of the 8th and the 9th (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/discorse.html)
- The Discourses of Isis to Horus (http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/vow/vow06.htm)

The Kybalion is also an excellent book, but it was written in the 1930's I think; one of the "3 Initiates" who wrote it was Paul Foster Case if I'm not mistaken.

As for alchemy, nowadays it is more metaphorical, but physical alchemy is still practiced, chiefly the field of spagyrics or herbalism. The "Weiser Concise Guide to Alchemy" is a great book on the subject. As for turning lead into gold, I don't think anyone takes that seriously anymore.

And the opium of the people nowadays is no longer organized religion, but rather consumerism, tv shows, gadgets, etc....People are too busy watching "Dancing with the Stars" and playing with their Ipads to worry about improving our society :thumbdown:

[Zostrianos]

And yes, sports are also part of the problem

[ericksolvi]

I've skimmed it already. The religion still needs a lot regarding proof just like christianity. Aside from all that, you didn't answer my question at all :)

Sorry.
To answer your question: No I don't follow Hermes Trismegistus. He's probably made up, an imaginary founder. The Hermetic principles probably came together from a number of different schools of philosophy.

Wikipedia says the Kybalion was published in 1908. I believe the hard copy I read years ago also said 1908, some of the ideas seemed so modern that I checked the publishers page. I was so impressed that I started taking notes, which I still have, about ten hand written pages of condensed philosophy.

[kitsune]

Populations have long been pacified by "bread and circuses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses)." This is somewhat different from the idea of religion as a means of suppressing the pain of alienation and exploitation, though I think the distinction may not be entirely black and white. Religion can be used as distraction and diversion, and entertainment can be used to reduce psychological suffering.

[blackandyellow]

Sorry that working people dont conform to your ideal of harderd proles who want to march protest and attend whatever else the left actavist ghetto is doing in their spare time. Stupid workers enjoying watching a football match on a saturday! Why are they not reading Lenin!??

[pastradamus]

We must first ask the question : What did Marx mean by the term "opiate"?

An opiate does not cure an illness, it sedates and numbs the pain of an illness. Marx applied the term socially to mean that religion does not cure anything but rather numbs one to the economic reality of working-class life and so presents itself as a portal to which one can escape the harsh conditions of reality by hoping and praying that it might effect their socio-economic fortunes for the better.

To apply this term to Sport just does not work. Spectator sports are just a form of entertainment. The reason one goes to a football match on a Saturday afternoon is because of the joy the gain from the shared experience of watching athletes perform. The same people who do so do not believe it will profit them economically and under no such illusions. Granted, they hope and look forward to their team winning and achieving but this is strictly emotional.
Then there is the real sport. The sport you participate in. This sport is good for you physically and mentally and DOES reap profit for you in that regard. I play football at least once a week and I always look forward to it.

[ericksolvi]

We must first ask the question : What did Marx mean by the term "opiate"?

An opiate does not cure an illness, it sedates and numbs the pain of an illness. Marx applied the term socially to mean that religion does not cure anything but rather numbs one to the economic reality of working-class life and so presents itself as a portal to which one can escape the harsh conditions of reality by hoping and praying that it might effect their socio-economic fortunes for the better.

To apply this term to Sport just does not work. Spectator sports are just a form of entertainment. The reason one goes to a football match on a Saturday afternoon is because of the joy the gain from the shared experience of watching athletes perform. The same people who do so do not believe it will profit them economically and under no such illusions. Granted, they hope and look forward to their team winning and achieving but this is strictly emotional.
Then there is the real sport. The sport you participate in. This sport is good for you physically and mentally and DOES reap profit for you in that regard. I play football at least once a week and I always look forward to it.

I think in this context we're discussing American football, and the people who sit at home watching it and drinking beer rather then dealing with reality. My friends who like what we call football can watch it at home almost every night if they like. They are totally transfixed by the games, and can barely even talk while there on, even if they have a DVR and can pause it if they like. They watch Football the way addicts use drugs. It can be disturbing to see the effect sports viewing has on some American's.

[The Jay]

I think in this context we're discussing American football, and the people who sit at home watching it and drinking beer rather then dealing with reality. My friends who like what we call football can watch it at home almost every night if they like. They are totally transfixed by the games, and can barely even talk while there on, even if they have a DVR and can pause it if they like. They watch Football the way addicts use drugs. It can be disturbing to see the effect sports viewing has on some American's.

That is exactly what I'm talking about. The problem is not watching a game on a Saturday, it's spending ten hours a week watching it, ten hours a week talking about it, and more reading about it. Of course, I'm exaggerating for most but not by much. And yes, I am referring to north american football.

[pastradamus]

I think in this context we're discussing American football, and the people who sit at home watching it and drinking beer rather then dealing with reality. My friends who like what we call football can watch it at home almost every night if they like. They are totally transfixed by the games, and can barely even talk while there on, even if they have a DVR and can pause it if they like. They watch Football the way addicts use drugs. It can be disturbing to see the effect sports viewing has on some American's.

Fair enough. You could make the same argument for people who watch xfactor or soap opera's. Its simply a negative habit they have. I dont think you could call it the "opiate of the people" and apply it as Marx did to religion.

[F9]

We are addicted and we admit it(serious answer btw, if someone didnt notice...)
Its not a bad(most of the times) addiction though and its nothing compared to the "opiate of the people".You cant control what people like, or choose to follow, many leftists try to do that and its stupid!Yeah i know lots of money are thrown in football but fuck me, thats what i like to see, whats the point of you trying to interfere on my choices and preferences?

[The Jay]

We are addicted and we admit it(serious answer btw, if someone didnt notice...)
Its not a bad(most of the times) addiction though and its nothing compared to the "opiate of the people".You cant control what people like, or choose to follow, many leftists try to do that and its stupid!Yeah i know lots of money are thrown in football but fuck me, thats what i like to see, whats the point of you trying to interfere on my choices and preferences?

Who says that I want to stop people from watching? I'm just saying that it has it's place, but that most take it way too far. I wouldn't force people to talk politics or read philosophy instead of talking football. I just thing that they shouldn't focus on it so much for the health of the group, but to use violence to sway them would be even more wrong.

[RedGrunt]

Sports of course is one opiate which simultaneously creates nationalist-esq pride for ones team/factionalism, as well as consumerism all the while charging the people for these chains. Sports as an "opiate" is nothing new though, Rome used it for the same purposes. Religion is still there of course, but you have many other things as well. Video games for instance. It's also taken parts of the working class and made them into generally materialistic, self-conceited puppets to do this.

I'm sure there were other "opiates" during Marx's time, he was just merely reflecting upon religions role which played an especially important role within feudalism and early capitalism but has been traded off for some other opiates(mainly forms of entertainment). It's all the same concept really, the content doesn't matter much.

[blackandyellow]

That is exactly what I'm talking about. The problem is not watching a game on a Saturday, it's spending ten hours a week watching it, ten hours a week talking about it, and more reading about it. Of course, I'm exaggerating for most but not by much. And yes, I am referring to north american football.

Why does it matter if someones only hobby is football? It might make them abit boring, but thats their fault.

[black magick hustla]

Why does it matter if someones only hobby is football? It might make them abit boring, but thats their fault.

they dont post enough in revleft thats why