Please respond to my previous post I made in here. I`d like a clarification wether you would claim victory on the issue of likely popularity of this “manoralism” if you go unchallanged here?
Make sure you learn basic history. For instance, Molinari explains quite nicely the connection between conservatism, church and state. The same connection that some people in this forum fanatically deny.
Yes, at least in regards to BP and Juan.
You mean the state coopted the institution of the church? That’s not like something the state would ever do (say, in relation to business).
Juan, Brainpolice, why don’t you just debate Giles, so it’s over and done with. If you’re confident with your arguement’s validity, this should be no problem.
Ah Giles, if you knew history, you’d be aware of the fact that theocracy is the oldest form of government. Hight priests in Egypt, Druids among the Celts, Brahmans in India, etc., etc. So, get this : if anything, the church co opted the state.
Now, what’s the point of my underlining such basic facts ? People driven by emotion are not interested in facts.
I get it, forget the libertarian rhetoric about government being evil when it becomes inconvenient to your militant atheism.
By the way, you missed the point. The state will use whatever it can to give itself legitimacy, including the church (and yes, business).
I’m not missing any point. And you are playing dumb. The church is as evil as the state and predates it.
You’re trying to frame things in terms of “poor innocent church perverted by the evil state”. Too bad that’s not what really happened/happens.
Also, I’m not an atheist, I’m an agnostic. I believe I made that clear before, so please remember it. Or else I’ll assume you’re purposely lying.
hi juan, perhaps you can help. i was trying to find a posting on mises forums where Giles states his religious beliefs, and his personal religious affiliation. i ran some searches but couldnt find anything, what am i doing wrong?
All churches of all religions?
what if I established my own “religion” (call it “Blue”, or whatever), and based it upon libertarian principles? Let’s say it more resembles Buddhism than say, Christianity.
Am I automatically an evil, irrational predator upon the human mind?
I could make the exact same case for business. What’s your point? In fact I make the case for secularism except remove the “older” part.
You don’t have a point, your rationalizing your hatred of religion.
No. I’m not.
Fine. There’s nothing revealed about that, is there ? Or are you going to claim that god sent you a PM instructing you to preach libertarianism ?
As long as you don’t claim to have knowledge you don’t have I see no problem. However, that’s not what I was talking about is it ?
Dunno. But Giles is on record saying that absent the state ‘society’ would be mostly culturally conservative and churches will play a key role (or something along those lines). Also I’m not sure your ironic tone helped your case…
I already said that churches are a form of government older than the state. Businesses are not governments - you’re babbling nonsense. So you can’t make the same case for businesses. And it’s irrelevant anyway. You’re attempting to change the subject.
Really now Juan, one would have thought you might know what fascism is.
I hope you don’t mean Christianity, because that would be a strange thing to say.
Well, I mentioned the relationship between theocracy and secular government. You just keep on trying to divert attention to a different subject. I’ll take that as meaning you know you’ve lost the argument.
For the record : businesses are not ideological institutions concerned with man’s soul and behaviour. Churches are.
Oh really ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Taylor_(Radical) Get a copy of his history of christianity.
Anyway, you should know that christianity is mostly paganism repackaged…I mean, you’d know that if you knew any history…
I find it equally close-minded assume all churches are in bed with the state. I don’t see how it’s unreasonable to assume that The State would also wish to butt into the churches to aid in it’s monopoly over human thought.
If you can give examples of churches in bed with the state, perhaps you can give examples of those who are not in bed with the state?
You make an exception for businesses, yet you will have those (i.e. statist-leftists, socialists, anti-authoritarians, etc.) who argue that buisseses also facilitate a concern over man’s soul & behavior (i.e. the anarchist argument of “wage slavery”, however rational or irrational one may find such argument), in so far as much as during the time the individual man works for the business (i.e. code of conduct, interpersonal poltics amid employees, etc.).
These very same people would argue that capitalism is an ideology that is concerned with man’s soul & behavior, & from the logic of automatically assuming churches are, let us automatically assume capitalism is. Many conflicts arise in debate with those who equivocate “capitalism = the state”.
That has nothing to do with anything.
No, it’s still the same subject.
Historical fact. I’m afraid I can’t add anything else. Btw, you seem to have ignored my comments on your proposed libertarian religion…
Both state and church are authoritarian institutions competing for power. Sometimes they openly cooperate, on some occasions they might fight each other. So ?
Yes, and that’s nonsense. So, why bring it up ?
I find your comment kind of insulting. I know what I’m saying, as opposed to anarcho commies and their flawed philosophy.
Which is exactly why it’s necessary to remember that the state is the state. Neither the church, nor big business are the state no matter how much they have or have not benefitted from the state.