Religious affiliation in u.S. Falls below 50 (first time ever)

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

A command economy is not burdened by silly Western values, and can turn on a dime.

Have you watched much mainland Chinese tv?  The modern dramas show people concerned with much the same capitalist desires and fears as the West...getting and keeping the good job to get ahead money and status wise, fear of having enough to pay medical bills, corruption in the everyday man in business and on the street.  They do present a different view of government and military, little to no corruption there in the modern government (though historical dramas and fantasy pieces allow their power people to be corrupt or misguided) which is very different from other Asian shows which generally have massive corruption the higher you go in government,

Anyway, my point is if you are allowing your people to become highly materialistic and pretty capitalistic as well, turning on a dime may not be as easy as in the past.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Calm

[carbon dioxide]

5 hours ago, Analytics said:

But in all cases, reason, science, and humanism give us the tools and incentives to make the progress continue. The fact that the nones are growing is great news in this regard.

Nuclear weapons are part of it, but the bigger parts are two other things. First, as more people have become more wealthy, they have more to lose from any war, nuclear or not. Second, as people have become more secular, they are more inclined to be peaceful. As Pinker says:

An immaterial soul is unmoved by the earthly incentives that impel us to get along. Contestants over a material resource are usually better off if they split it than fight over it, particularly if they value their own lives on earth. But contestants over a sacred value (like holy land or affirmation of a belief) may not compromise, and if they think their souls are immortal, the loss of their body is no big deal—indeed, it may be a small price to pay for an eternal reward in paradise.

Many historians have pointed out that religious wars are long and bloody, and bloody wars are often prolonged by religious conviction. Matthew White, the necrometrician we met in chapter 14, lists thirty religious conflicts among the worst things that people have ever done to one another, resulting in around 55 million killings. (In seventeen conflicts, the monotheistic religions fought each other; in another eight, monotheists fought heathens.) And the common assertion that the two world wars were set off by the decline of religious morality (as in the former Trump strategist Stephen Bannon’s recent claim that World War II pitted “the Judeo-Christian West versus atheists”) is dunce-cap history. The belligerents on both sides of World War I were devoutly Christian, except for the Ottoman Empire, a Muslim theocracy. The only avowedly atheist power that fought in World War II was the Soviet Union, and for most of the war it fought on our side against the Nazi regime—which (contrary to another myth) was sympathetic to German Christianity and vice versa, the two factions united in their loathing of secular modernity.

Pinker, Steven. Enlightenment Now (pp. 429-430). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

Only a religious zealot or a bona fide madman would think a global war would be better than figuring out how to live together in peace. It's a good thing the nones are taking over.

 

Science and all of that gives us good things but they are temporary and easily replaced.  Sometimes science creates the unintended consequence.  For example, antibiotics have been great for medicine but the misuses has created antibiotic resistant bacteria which is a real threat to medicine in the future.  Technology is neutral. It is neither good or bad.  How people us it determined whether it is good or not.  

You see the "nones" being a great thing.  I am not so sure that will be a great thing.  Religion regardless of belief brings people of different walks of life together.  It builds community.  I see more social isolation in the future as the younger people get older.  I see more mental health and depression developing over time in the nones than in religious groups.  Can't prove it right now because the future is the future and I can't show data of what is going on between 2040 and 2050 because that has not happened yet but it believe it will happen.

I also don't see secular people becoming more peaceful.  In fact most wars are fought over secular things than religious.  WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and many other wars where not religious wars.  If we have a war with North Korea or China, it will be on secular things. It will not be war based on religion.  Sure some people use religion as a pretext for some wars but religion is not the motivation.  

" “Encyclopedia of Wars,” authors Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 123 have been classified to involve a religious cause, accounting for less than 7 percent of all wars and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare. While, for example, it is estimated that approximately one to three million people were tragically killed in the Crusades, and perhaps 3,000 in the Inquisition, nearly 35 million soldiers and civilians died in the senseless, and secular, slaughter of World War 1 alone."  https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-religion-the-cause-of-_b_1400766

The nones will not prevent war.  If anything, they will engage in more warfare because secularism tend to lead to conflict and war.   I personally have no secular reason to love Chinese, Japanese, or any other group.  Why should I trust strangers who many of them probably do not like me.   The fact that they are humans is not a reason to love them.  I love my dogs but that does not mean I like or love all dogs.  Some dogs I don't want to be around.  The reason I love other people as I see them as children of God.  I see an eternal connection between them and me.  Thus even if they don't like me, that is ok because that enmity is temporary.  Humanism only works in times or peace and prosperity.  But the history of the world tells us that peace and prosperity does end.

Politics is replacing religion in the lives of many people.  Politics is more volatile than religion.  I don't see the future being as great as you think it will be.  Why do so many nones fear climate change?  Because they see it as a great threat to their lives and future.   I see climate change as part of the signs of the last days.  I easily see its influence in the events that are said to occur.  So I don't fear it.  I don't like having to go through some of the difficulties but is all part of the script.  The nones have reason to fear and the scriptures say the people will fear in the end times because the world around them will come crashing down and do no see or understand the other side of what is to happen.  

Edited March 31, 2021 by carbon dioxide

[Kenngo1969]

22 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Okay, so this has gone from being about different ideologies reproducing at different rates to the usual hysteria about the white race being headed to extinction unless we keep the filthy infidels out.

Enjoy your racist fever dream. See ya.

You don't know diddly-squat about Robert's background.  If you did, you would know that he is the last individual you would be calling racist.

[carbon dioxide]

22 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Okay, so this has gone from being about different ideologies reproducing at different rates to the usual hysteria about the white race being headed to extinction unless we keep the filthy infidels out.

Enjoy your racist fever dream. See ya.

It is not really an issue of racism as but cultural replacement.  Europe is changing.  History is about groups of people being replaced by other groups over time.  Europeans used to be religious.  Now they are mostly secularist.  This has lead to a lower birth rate.  People from Africa and the Middle East who have higher birth rates are coming in and slowly replacing them.  That is just the overall demographic shift that is happening.  Some people might say this is a good thing.  Other say its bad.  Whether good or bad, it simply a reality.  It is what is it.   I would say the enemy to white Europeans is not Africans or Muslims but secularism.  

[The Nehor]

26 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

You don't know diddly-squat about Robert's background.  If you did, you would know that he is the last individual you would be calling racist.

Now I am deeply ashamed and have curled up in the fetal position and am weeping uncontrollably in utter horror that I said a racist thing is racist. If I only I knew how “not racist” he was in advance I would have deduced that the racist thing was not racist as it is impossible for someone that unracist to type a racist thing.

OH THE PAIN!!!!!!!!!

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Have you watched much mainland Chinese tv?  The modern dramas show people concerned with much the same capitalist desires and fears as the West...getting and keeping the good job to get ahead money and status wise, fear of having enough to pay medical bills, corruption in the everyday man in business and on the street.  They do present a different view of government and military, little to no corruption there in the modern government (though historical dramas and fantasy pieces allow their power people to be corrupt or misguided) which is very different from other Asian shows which generally have massive corruption the higher you go in government,

Anyway, my point is if you are allowing your people to become highly materialistic and pretty capitalistic as well, turning on a dime may not be as easy as in the past.

There is no democracy in the way to interfere with the will of Emperor Xi, who has been given all power for life by the Chinese Communist Party.  That is the reality, and they could not even tolerate the mildly democratic governance of Hong Kong -- and have stamped it out.  Within a decade, the Chicoms will have taken over Taiwan by force, crushing any democratic tendencies permanently.

The Marxist system they follow is fully materialistic and is not actually communist -- instead it is state capitalist (as Milovan Djilas, The New Class, shows us in detail).

In case of the problematic Uyghur people, the men have been sent to forced labor camps, and the Uyghur women find Han Chinese men moving in and becoming their new husbands.  Like the Borg, they absorb everyone and everything.  Resistance is futile.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There is no democracy in the way to interfere with the will of Emperor Xi, who has been given all power for life by the Chinese Communist Party.  That is the reality, and they could not even tolerate the mildly democratic governance of Hong Kong -- and have stamped it out.  Within a decade, the Chicoms will have taken over Taiwan by force, crushing any democratic tendencies permanently.

The Marxist system they follow is fully materialistic and is not actually communist -- instead it is state capitalist (as Milovan Djilas, The New Class, shows us in detail).

In case of the problematic Uyghur people, the men have been sent to forced labor camps, and the Uyghur women find Han Chinese men moving in and becoming their new husbands.  Like the Borg, they absorb everyone and everything.  Resistance is futile.

With all these red threats I better make sure everything is safe and secure with our defenses.

Whoops, sorry about that.

[Meadowchik]

6 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There is no democracy in the way to interfere with the will of Emperor Xi, who has been given all power for life by the Chinese Communist Party.  That is the reality, and they could not even tolerate the mildly democratic governance of Hong Kong -- and have stamped it out.  Within a decade, the Chicoms will have taken over Taiwan by force, crushing any democratic tendencies permanently.

The Marxist system they follow is fully materialistic and is not actually communist -- instead it is state capitalist (as Milovan Djilas, The New Class, shows us in detail).

In case of the problematic Uyghur people, the men have been sent to forced labor camps, and the Uyghur women find Han Chinese men moving in and becoming their new husbands.  Like the Borg, they absorb everyone and everything.  Resistance is futile.

Wow that is a whole lot of assumption and speculation. 

There are major, foundational shifts happening in China. Hundreds of millions coming out of poverty. And China is teaching English to its schoolchildren. I teach Chinese kids online through a company that is meant to enhance the brick and mortar teaching. There are hundreds of thousands of teachers like me, in fact. Usually Western, native-English-speaking teachers meeting children face to face once or more a week, making personal connections and building on that to teach English. And then many more Chinese who have already grown up and been educated in the West and returned to China. 

Once it joined the global economy to become competitive, the first dominos got knocked over. For the record, I'm not saying that the West has the correct answers for China, but rather that the Chinese government cannot hide the humanity and goodness in other people from its people. It cannot hide the possibility and potential of different ways of thinking.

Perhaps it has not yet reached critical mass, but I do not think China is immune from change toward more democratic, more human-rights-concerned directions. 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Meadowchik

[Analytics]

8 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

You see the "nones" being a great thing.  I am not so sure that will be a great thing.  Religion regardless of belief brings people of different walks of life together.  It builds community.  I see more social isolation in the future as the younger people get older.  I see more mental health and depression developing over time in the nones than in religious groups.  Can't prove it right now because the future is the future and I can't show data of what is going on between 2040 and 2050 because that has not happened yet but it believe it will happen.

Religion builds community, but it also builds tribalism which has been and continues to be a component of all sorts of conflicts and wars.

On a local level, belonging to a local Church is a great thing in terms of mental health, but psychologists have seen people receive the same benefits by joining a bowling league. I'm optimistic that people can figure out how to be healthy without having to throw false and sometimes harmful beliefs into the stew.

Quote

I also don't see secular people becoming more peaceful.  In fact most wars are fought over secular things than religious.  WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and many other wars where not religious wars.  If we have a war with North Korea or China, it will be on secular things. It will not be war based on religion.  Sure some people use religion as a pretext for some wars but religion is not the motivation.  

A war can be a "secular" war but still fought by very religious people who see the world through their religious-colored glasses and do things based upon their religious values. 

Quote

" “Encyclopedia of Wars,” authors Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 123 have been classified to involve a religious cause, accounting for less than 7 percent of all wars and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare. While, for example, it is estimated that approximately one to three million people were tragically killed in the Crusades, and perhaps 3,000 in the Inquisition, nearly 35 million soldiers and civilians died in the senseless, and secular, slaughter of World War 1 alone."  https://www.huffpost.com/entry/is-religion-the-cause-of-_b_1400766

It's hard to say a "senseless" war such as WWI was driven by secular values, much less by humanistic ones. WWI was driven by nationalism and the ideals of people who think the way to make their country great is by building walls. It is the religious people who tend to be the most nationalistic and want every day begun with a solemn pledge of allegiance. It's the religious who get the most upset when the ritual of the national anthem is tweaked before the commencement of a sporting event. Nones tend to be humanistic and don't care that much about the national anthem. Humanists are the ones who get teary eyed when they imagine a world with nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too.

Quote

The nones will not prevent war.  If anything, they will engage in more warfare because secularism tend to lead to conflict and war.   I personally have no secular reason to love Chinese, Japanese, or any other group.  Why should I trust strangers who many of them probably do not like me.   The fact that they are humans is not a reason to love them.  I love my dogs but that does not mean I like or love all dogs.  Some dogs I don't want to be around.  The reason I love other people as I see them as children of God.  I see an eternal connection between them and me.  Thus even if they don't like me, that is ok because that enmity is temporary.  Humanism only works in times or peace and prosperity.  But the history of the world tells us that peace and prosperity does end.

In theory what you say sounds great, but it doesn't change the fact that as Europe and the world has become more secular, it has also become dramatically more peaceful. Pinker goes into great detail as to why--PM me if you'd like me to send you a copy.

Quote

Politics is replacing religion in the lives of many people.  Politics is more volatile than religion.  I don't see the future being as great as you think it will be.  Why do so many nones fear climate change?  Because they see it as a great threat to their lives and future.   I see climate change as part of the signs of the last days.  I easily see its influence in the events that are said to occur.  So I don't fear it.  I don't like having to go through some of the difficulties but is all part of the script.  The nones have reason to fear and the scriptures say the people will fear in the end times because the world around them will come crashing down and do no see or understand the other side of what is to happen.  

I don't want to live in a world where people see climate change, the end of times, and Armageddon as things that are "part of the script." In addition to every natural disaster and war for the the last 2,000 years, people saw the plague, small pox, polio, and AIDS as signs of the times and used them to build their religious faith. Others saw them as problems that could be understood and fixed through science and a dedication to making this world a better place. I'd rather live in a world with people who embrace reason, science, humanism, and progress.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Analytics

[Analytics]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, of course, but each is handling the crisis very differently.  A command economy is not burdened by silly Western values, and can turn on a dime....

One needs to distinguish suicidal behavior from forced behavior -- which can be turned around due to the totalitarian nature of China.  China can turn on a dime.  We cannot and will not.

What a strange comment. Most mainstream economists think that free markets and distributed decision making systems are strong because they have the ability and motivation to quickly and successfully adapt. I think the U.S. economy proved the point a year ago when a huge amount of office work shifted to work at home on a dime, a huge percentage of retail shifted to home delivery--often next day--on a dime, and food was redistributed from sit-down restaurants to supermarkets, takeout, and delivery. Again, on a dime.

And even then, why does an economy need to turn "on a dime" to deal with the predictable, glacial changes of demographics?

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Very nice, and I myself am heavily of Scot extraction.  However, you need to show that a huge percentage of the Jan 6 Capitol rioters were Scots, and that you have not done -- and cannot do.

Why do I need to show that a "huge" percentage of the domestic enemies of the Constitution are of Scots? All I claimed is that they are "disproportionately of Scottish decent."