What is worse, religion or capitalism?

[Ol' Dirty]

Capitalism, definately!

[LSD]

Please do not start polls in this forum, it's here for serious discussion, not opinion surveys. In fact, it's an error that you were even able to create a poll in the first place.

Also, there is never cause to create a closed poll, as you did here. What's the point of raising a discussion topic and then not allowing discussion?

Poll deleted.
Thread Opened.

In terms of the question itself, it's really quite ludicrous. One cannot "seperate" social phenomena like that. Capitalism and religion are deeply interwoven: religion supports capitalism and capitalism fuels religion.

In a communist society, there would be no need for superstitious dogma and a truly materialist proletariat cannot help but recognize the inequality of capitalism. Accordingly, the elimination of one will almost certainly precipitate the elimination of the other.

That makes it very hard to assign a hiearchy of blame.

Not to mention that "worse" is a very subjective concept. How exactly are you defining it? Body count?

It's pretty much the only empiracal gauge we've got, but it's a rather tricky one in this cases, isn't it? After all, who's to say whether a death in question was caused by the religion of the rulling class or the class of the rulling class?

When the American rulling class declares war on "radical Islam" is it because they believe them to be "infidels" or because it serves their economic interests ...or is it both?

Furthermore, relgion has been around for longer so it's destruction is obviously greater. Indeed, religion not only predates modern economic concepts, it predates all economic concepts.

This means that millenia before the first slave was whipped, someone was being killed for failing to worship the correct "sacred rock".

But, does that make religion "worse" or just older?

Again, I don't think that there's an answer. Instead, how about we just agree that they're both bad and both legitimate targets of proletarian emancipation.

[Ol' Dirty]

Pardon me, I didn't mean too make such a mistake :lol: ! I will not make that mistake in the future. Thank you for telling me this. One problem is, I was not told I could not do this, so it is you and the administrators who are at fault. But I will not do it again.

But what I meant when I asked this question was this: What is more harmful in general, Capitalist ideology, or religious hate and blunder, as they are both philosophies that most on this board disagree with.

Peace.

[Hegemonicretribution]

It really depends what you meant by each term. I would say capitalism because there is inherent conflict there, however, in a few of the broadest senses, religion is not the same.

It is conceivable that a religion could arise without inherent clonflict, however this is unlikely and also misses the irrational nature of religion.

[Ownthink]

They both suck ass.

[drain.you]

capitalism is the greater evil.

[Xvall]

Which religion? Just religion in general? This is important.

[James]

I would agree that the specific religion in question is important to the question, and to any attempts of an answer.

Generally speaking though, i would say that a "free market" society, with lax official social codes is better than any "one way", perscribed by the state for all to follow.

If you meant a "theocracy", then this is exactly what happens. A strict social code is dictated to the people. All have to follow it. For example, take the taliban (whom have just recently cut the head off a headmaster for teaching girls - something which is strictly forbidden).

So essentailly, to me, the question is one of "liberty". Whilst i recognise that free market capitalism has obvious enforced rules of behaviour, as well as numerous unofficial social codes of behaviour, i do believe that it is a system which gives the individual more "freedom" than a theocracy.

I would like to point out that i have no problem with religion when it is a voluntary coming together of people. My support stops when individuals try to force their "way", onto others (such as a theocracy).


Although that is a very general answer to a general question.

[Postteen]

if it's organized religion, the one depends on the other.They're both equally destructive.

[James]

It is simply not true that capitalism needs religion.
Indeed one could argue that for truely succesful free market, a lack of morality (which is often derived from religion) is desirable.

What about football? Opium of the masses too.

[Alexknucklehead]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 12:20 PM
What about football? Opium of the masses too.
:rolleyes: Yea capitalism or football? That IS a tough one....god forbid the working class having some sort of enjoyment in their existence.

[James]

No... as in football used as an opium of the masses. What is so objectionable to that theory?
(its not mine by the way, its something my old politics/history teacher used to go on about)

[Alexknucklehead]

I have no opinion on it particularly as it equates to the same level of intelligence as saying that no one participating in revolutionary activity of any kind ever, has ever been a fan of some kind of sport. I was objecting to it on the fact that you seemed to be willing to add footbal to a list of evils in society, on the same field as religion and capitalism. <_<

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 02:12 PM
No... as in football used as an opium of the masses. What is so objectionable to that theory?
(its not mine by the way, its something my old politics/history teacher used to go on about)
Football is not some fantasy that blinds people to their situation. It may make miserable circumstances slightly more bearable but the exact same can be said of any enjoyment. Religion does not bring enjoyment or fun, just a pack of lies about how things will get better if you say the right prayers or eat the right food.

The difference between the two is that religion dupes people into thinking that misery and hardship are good and that by accepting that you can go to some magical afterlife/reincarnation/whatever. Football merely distracts while religion lies through its teeth.

[James]

I have no opinion on it particularly as it equates to the same level of intelligence as saying that no one participating in revolutionary activity of any kind ever, has ever been a fan of some kind of sport.

harldy. And if you thought that is what i meant, then your level of intelligence is somewhat questionable&#33;


you seemed to be willing to add footbal to a list of evils in society

Hardly. I think you "read between the lines" a little too much. I was questioning the need for religion in a capitalist society. I then "put out there" the concept that another opium of the masses is football. Obviously, capitalism does not rely upon football. Nor do i think it relies on religion. All these things distract people away from their black and white, social and economic situation.


+ + +


Football is not some fantasy that blinds people to their situation.

I certainly said no such thing. Nor did i mean to imply such a thing. I merely said that it could be described as another opium of the masses. As i also said, it isn&#39;t my idea, but one of my old teachers. To give you the context, she used it rather interestingly to explain the behaviour of another history teacher whom is heavily into chartism/socialism etc, but is also a classic football fan. He&#39;s happy as long as he can watch his matches.




It may make miserable circumstances slightly more bearable but the exact same can be said of any enjoyment.

I quite agree. Although you must admit, football is a rather special enjoyment. In England it has a mass following (especially in the "working class"), takes alot of time, is the subject of many conversations (an amazing amount of conversations in my opinion&#33;) and is also one way in which many workers spend their money (transport, tickets, merchandise).

It is certainly not a revolutionary social force&#33;


Religion does not bring enjoyment or fun, just a pack of lies about how things will get better if you say the right prayers or eat the right food.

Indeed. And how many english people are actually religious? It would be interesting to compare church figures with football match figures&#33;


The difference between the two is that religion dupes people into thinking that misery and hardship are good and that by accepting that you can go to some magical afterlife/reincarnation/whatever. Football merely distracts while religion lies through its teeth.

Fundamentally both distract from revolutionary affairs.

[VonClausewitz]

The difference between the two is that religion dupes people into thinking that misery and hardship are good and that by accepting that you can go to some magical afterlife/reincarnation/whatever. Football merely distracts while religion lies through its teeth.

How about religion as a comfort ? Even the most die-hard commissars at Stalingrad ended up praying. What you read in one of the books of whichever bible isn&#39;t essentially what is practised in the 21st century, people really need to learn that one.

Plus well, what form of social goverance hasn&#39;t lied through it&#39;s teeth ? Everyone from the first tirbal elder to the nice wonderfull &#39;freedom fighters&#39; in Palestine were/are full of it, it just goes with having a little bit of power over people&#39;s perceptions.

It&#39;s also how footballers get paid so much ;) if the real world ever wakes up and realises what a waste of space the over-paid dunces are, it&#39;d be a better place.


Football is not some fantasy that blinds people to their situation. It may make miserable circumstances slightly more bearable but the exact same can be said of any enjoyment. Religion does not bring enjoyment or fun, just a pack of lies about how things will get better if you say the right prayers or eat the right food.

Do you know any religious people ? Or just narrow-minded zealots, who be the same for any idealogy ;)

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by VonClausewitz
How about religion as a comfort? Even the most die-hard commissars at Stalingrad ended up praying.

They were people who grew up in an era when children were still being indoctrinated with superstition.

So, in extremis, they "fell back" on it in the final moments of their lives.

Childhood conditioning really works...and takes one "hell" of an effort to overcome. :(


What you read in one of the books of whichever bible isn&#39;t essentially what is practiced in the 21st century, people really need to learn that one.

They "practice" whatever they can get away with.

The law is rather harsh with those who attempt to burn a "witch" or a "heretic" these days...so they don&#39;t do that anymore.

Think they wouldn&#39;t, if they thought they could get away with it? :o


Do you know any religious people?

I don&#39;t think it&#39;s possible to live in the United States without constantly coming into contact with them.

Do most of them seem like "ordinary people"? Sure, that&#39;s what they are.

Do they seem "really nasty"? No, not usually.

Do you imagine that "all" the Nazis went around with blood-stained fangs?

No, most of them behaved fairly civilized most of the time.

It was when they had the opportunity to really "cut loose" and "run wild" that they revealed their real identity.

It&#39;s the same for Christians or Muslims or Hindus or Jews or Buddhists or the leaders and followers of any superstition.

Given the chance, the mask comes off and what follows would make a simple barbarian blush with shame.

Defenders of superstition respond to this by saying that "humans are all evil" so they&#39;re always just "looking for an excuse" to "do evil"...and anything will do.

I&#39;m not buying it.

Historically, it is religion that has been chosen most often and most consistently as the "best excuse" to "do evil" all around.

I don&#39;t think that&#39;s a coincidence.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

[James]

I think people&#39;s answers are heavily influenced by where they live. Their background (unsurprisingly).


I think our american friends are in a FAR more religious environment than say, for example, us english chaps. In England i would say that Football has a far bigger following than religion. Indeed, alot "follow it" in a manner which can only be described as fanatical.



If you wanted to be marxist (or revolutionary) about it, then you should be very critical as it, in effect, segregates the working class against itself. Indeed, football riots are internal clashes within/between the working class.
What does football do to topics of conversation? Makes it far less political for sure. Look at standard male literature which is created by and pushed by the big businesses. Typically some form of soft core pornography, combined with football. It is hardly a revolutionary catalyst.

Who owns the clubs and teams? Well of course, the capitalists.

It is in a sense, the most blatant form of class control, suppression, deradicalisation, in England&#33; It is ultimately, the main opium.



Religion in england? Well i certainly think it has a weaker influence and grip upon the working people.
I&#39;m confused by the reaction of some members to the subject of football. Sure play it, enjoy it. But why are you supporting what is in essence capitalism? So much of "our" capital is caught up in the thing it is appaling&#33;

Stop defending capitalism if you want to see the end of capitalism.

[Red Leader]

So which has more of a devstating impact: capitalism or religion??

I would have to say that capitalism does no question. With religion, at leaast you are not bound by anything real like money, at least you have the freedom as a person to think fo yourself and make up your own decisions.

If you follow a certain religion you arnt necessarily harming anyone else but yourself. (Unless you get on a horse and wear a cross on your chest and start shanking muslums). But seriously, if you believe in god and an afterlife and all that, really its only yourself who is in for a disappontment in the end.

With capitalism, you are not only hurting yourself because you give in to thinking that life is all about making money and do everything you can to make money, disregarding those who dont have money.

Religion in itself is not harmful. Its the instution that is harmful, which ironicly is corrupted by capitalism. iits organized reeligion that is harmful, but without capitalism this corruption would not exist.

[Martyr]

So I see everyone here is still fighting religion

[boosh logic]

I agree with Red Leader. Religeon isnt harmful until its put into the context of society. Personally, althought I don&#39;t believe in any religeon, I think that the basics of it - morals and guidance - are good. However, what I don&#39;t agree with is when it starts to impose on lifestyles, or when old customs influnce current lives in a way that is unnapropriate to modern living standards.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 11:45 AM
Football is not some fantasy that blinds people to their situation.
Oh yes it is. Many people devote endless hours to the mindless shit. You waste 4 or 5 hours alone watching a game, more if you go and more if you participate in the gauntlet of related activities/cultural football masturbation. Spectator football is a form of escapism like any other, it wastes your life away and helps no one. FUCK SPECTATOR SPORTS.


It may make miserable circumstances slightly more bearable but the exact same can be said of any enjoyment.
Indeed but the point is, many form of entertainment also stimulate your brain in a productive way or actually create meaningful bonds between people.


Religion does not bring enjoyment or fun, just a pack of lies about how things will get better if you say the right prayers or eat the right food.

As much as I don&#39;t want to; I must disagree. There is a certain satisfaction in religious dogma. The absolute worldview allows people to avoid uncomfortable questions and social obligation, plus you can be self-righteous and feel good about being "better" than others.


The difference between the two is that religion dupes people into thinking that misery and hardship are good and that by accepting that you can go to some magical

:lol: Are you familiar with football? The "other" team&#39;s suffering is always a good thing, just as "working through the pain" is commendable. "Taking one for the team" is also a great way to maintain self-inflicted suffering for spectacle.


afterlife/reincarnation/whatever. Football merely distracts while religion lies through its teeth.

Oh football is a cultural lie too; hardly similar in magnitude but if you live in a football town, you might not be so sure.

[Elect Marx]

Oh and as for the topic; capitalism has become a much greater problem than religion but then again, religion enables it. If you look at the dogma capitalists use, you might even mistake capitalism as it&#39;s own religion, especially amoung the non-religious cappies ;)

[Ol' Dirty]

Why the hell did we go from religion to footbal? Are we in Texas or something (sorry, Texans, just joking)? :huh: This thread was made in haste, my apologies for it being so helter-skelter; but please, either get back to the topic at hand: what is more harmful: Religion, or Capitalism?

Personally, I believe that if people want to "blind themselves with the grace of god", by all means, go ahead; but don&#39;t convert me, or chop off anybodies head (that&#39;s right, I&#39;m talking to you Islamic Fundamentalists). Capitalism, on the other hand, is a philosophy based on destroying ones competition to get money one thing: money, money, money, money... Monay&#33; (I&#39;m woefully sorry, I heard that song on the radio last night :lol: &#33;)

Peace.

[expatriot]

Organized religion brainwashes and controls people. Most religions are based on superstition and myths passed on from generation to generation in order to keep people ignorant. Some religions are worse than others- such as the Catholic church which is responsible for much of the misery and oppression in the world. Women throughout history have been the victims of most of this oppression which is still going on today, especially in countries where the church is against birth control and abortion. These poor women suffer and their children are doomed to a live of starvation and disease. Rich white men profit off of the misery of women and children and live in Vatican city.

Capitalism is the worship of money which is equally as bad. Again, rich white men profit off of the misery of others for the most part and hide behind Corporate interests and global banking as they jet set their way from island to island stopping off to deposit their off shore interests. These egomaniacs in their business suits turn a blind eye to child slavery in China while selling out the American worker and unions.

So, what is worse? I think they are equally as bad.

[James]

Why the hell did we go from religion to footbal?

Well firstly, you need to chill&#33; It was only me really. My reason? Because religion is usually opposed by those on the left for two main reasons: firstly, the lack of scientific grounding for it. Although secondly, and i would say that this is perhaps more "important": it is seen as the opium of the people (Marx&#39;s words). I was just throwing the idea out there that football is a bigger opium of the english people today.
It sort of went from there. It is an interesting "problem". I think i&#39;ll start a new thread on it. Sorry for getting off topic.

I don&#39;t understand the texas comment&#33;


+ ++

"Again, rich white men"

Not just white men.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 08:56 AM
I don&#39;t understand the texas comment&#33;
I was under the impression that they had a lot of crazy football spectators.

Anyway, I did respond to the topic...

[death88junkie]

i dont think all religions adopt a capitalistic hierarchy... well, im a muslim - well by theory more than by practice... and i think that islam is more or less socialist, bcuz eventho they have scholars they are not considered of higher prestige or social power.
i personally dont see much difference between communism and islam, and islam never advised the adoption of capitalism... i think islam leans more towards socialism, as zakat (compulsory charity) is a must for the rich. wouldnt that narrow the gap between the rich and poor?&#33; and plus, in prayers, muslims stand next to each other, equal, in same mosques, same floors... with someone leading the prayer - who is not a rich man or a bourgeoise, but is usually poor and lives in the mosque... but yet is very respected by even the richest of the ppl who pray in that mosque...
basically, in islam status is not about money, gender, race or anythin of such...
islam is the most socialist religion i knw, and im proud of being part of it :)

[boosh logic]

Death88Junkie, I could be wrong, but isn&#39;t it only recently that all have been equal in the Mosque? I heard that there used to be significant divisions, such as the rich and powerful occupying the front nearest the alter (or equivalent?), then poor etc, and that women were not allowed on the ground floor, but had to pray from an overlooking balcony in the mosque?

I may be wrong, or mistaking another religeon, but I think that was the case.

[Ol' Dirty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 02:51 PM
Which religion? Just religion in general? This is important.
Religion in general.

[Ol' Dirty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 02:04 PM
Why the hell did we go from religion to footbal?

Well firstly, you need to chill&#33; It was only me really. My reason? Because religion is usually opposed by those on the left for two main reasons: firstly, the lack of scientific grounding for it. Although secondly, and i would say that this is perhaps more "important": it is seen as the opium of the people (Marx&#39;s words). I was just throwing the idea out there that football is a bigger opium of the english people today.
It sort of went from there. It is an interesting "problem". I think i&#39;ll start a new thread on it. Sorry for getting off topic.



+ ++

"Again, rich white men"

Not just white men.
Pardon, didn&#39;t mean to seem a ***** :lol: &#33; Just saying that football and religion aren&#39;t related, and that we&#39;re getting out there...