The world as a whole is a remarkable practitioner of Jesus's instruction to 'turn the other cheek' when it comes to putting up with the YHWH cult in its three main manifestations: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It angered me to see President Hope-and-Change groveling in front of AIPAC, the most powerful Israeli lobby in the USA. This isn't a partisan attack against the Democrats; a Republican president would probably already be bombing Iran.
Won't some leader get up and say that the YHWH cult has long outlived its use to the world, if indeed it ever had any!? And that the rest of the world is sick of the violence and economic hardship that this ridiculous superstition is inflicting. Where are Tom Paine and French Revolutionaries when you need them?
Which of the three main branches of the YHWH cult is most bizarre and dangerous? Most people would probably answer, Islam, because of the enormous publicity given to terrorists. But how many people have terrorists actually killed, compared to "legitimate" governments? Terrorism was not invented by Islam; it was adapted by them to fight against Western imperialists who have vastly better military technology and organization.
My choice would be for literal-Bible-Protestantism as the most bizarre and dangerous form of the YHWH cult. It's ironic that 30% of the Republican party are Rapture Christians who hate Islam and worship Israel in light of what the historian, Arnold Toynbee, said about Protestantism: right from its inception, it represented the Islamicization of Christianity. That is, it turned its back on the intellectual growth of Catholic Christianity during the High Middle Ages, and stopped seeing the Church itself as a divine instrument. Instead, it retrenched in an atavistic idolatry of an old holy book. Like Islam, Bible-Protestantism can not move forward like religions that worship a church instead of an old and flawed book. Catholics and Mormons are less hopeless.
Meanwhile, the tribe of ethnocentric fanatics that started the YHWH superstition are barely religious at all. Modern Judaism is less of a religion than a nationalism. I sometimes wonder if that weren't true even in ancient times. Other countries can be fanatical nationalists, so why shouldn't Jews? But over 99% of the American population do not have relatives in Israel, so why aren't we essentially neutral toward Israel?
I believe that Pat Buchanan wrestled with the central organizing myth of our political and foreign policy establishment when he wrote Hitler, Churchill, and the "Unnecessary" War. Until we confront the Good War myth, our presidents and Congress will function virtually as operatives of a foreign country.
Comments
It seems to me that people are always primarily emotional creatures first, and then seek the logic that supports their emotional feeling. One can be perpetually disappointed in people if anything greater than this is expected.
It's going to war over it that makes me lash out at these religions, not whether I believe in their religion.
Tom, I too have been surprised at some of the editorials from Haaretz seen on the internet. I didn't know they were unpopular in Israel. Thanks for that information.
The real reasons for war usually are more along the lines of controlling territory, wealth, power, and resources necessary for life. Organized religions are really more like political institutions than the spiritual organizations they profess to be.
It isn't easy to see one's delusions though and, as soon as we do, it isn't a delusion any longer. It would no longer have its former powerful (and unconscious) hold on us.
That's why a diplomatic approach is a good one, in my opinion. A heads-on approach to delusions usually just results in greater conflict. You just can't break through the powerful hold the delusion has.
War is in our DNA. It's not a happy thought.
Ideology and religion aside, put an example where your mouth is. As Iran inches toward becoming a nuclear power (they've already got the missiles) do we just let Israel handle it? Too late for that as Obama already drew a line in the sand by saying he's not bluffing.
What about proliferation in general, beyond Iran? No reason too big to go to war, you say?
Mark, I'm not avoiding your question, but nuclear proliferation is a big issue that I can't take up right now.
I just think it is time for the non-JHWHists of the world to tell them what nuisances they are to the human race, and how we are not going to put up with it anymore. We are no longer going to respect and kowtow their sensibilities.
BUT, the "we" comes with a price. Collusion. You simply have to accept and even support many little things you don't personally subscribe to. This is uncomfortable and so along the way the person chooses denial because they do not want to pay the price of facing it head on. That is why someone from the outside can so clearly see the dysfunction but those on the inside cannot.
Alot of what happens internationally is posturing....just like a charging ape who beats his chest in order to elicit fear and hopefully a back-off. This is also in our DNA. Happens naturally. Most people don't even know they are doing it.
IMO, what trumps everything on the international level is our rising debt. We can't afford these involvements. And that's my position on Syria as well. We simply can't beat off every tyrant out there.
But kowtowing, it's just playing the game and I think it is the best way to protect national interests for we should play our cards to our advantage, build a strong "we" but keep our cards close to our chest.