Tiptoeing around religion

7 Aug, 2023 at 14:44 | Posted in Politics & Society | 8 Comments

A.C. Grayling - Freedom From Religion FoundationIt is time to reverse the prevailing notion that religious commitment is intrinsically deserving of respect, and that it should be handled with kid gloves and protected by custom and in some cases law against criticism and ridicule.

It is time to refuse to tip-toe around people who claim respect, consideration, special treatment, or any other kind of immunity, on the grounds that they have a religious faith, as if having faith were a privilege-endowing virtue, as if it were noble to believe in unsupported claims and ancient superstitions. It is neither. Faith is a commitment to belief contrary to evidence and reason …

To believe something in the face of evidence and against reason — to believe something by faith — is ignoble, irresponsible and ignorant, and merits the opposite of respect. It is time to say so.

It is time to demand of believers that they take their personal choices and preferences in these non-rational and too often dangerous matters into the private sphere, like their sexual proclivities. Everyone is free to believe what they want, providing they do not bother (or coerce, or kill) others; but no-one is entitled to claim privileges merely on the grounds that they are votaries of one or another of the world’s many religions …

Those who claim to be “hurt” or “offended” by the criticisms or ridicule of people who do not share their views, yet who seek to silence others by law or by threats of violence, are trebly in the wrong: they undermine the central and fundamental value of free speech, without which no other civil liberties are possible; they claim, on no justifiable ground, a right to special status and special treatment on the sole ground that they have chosen to believe a set of propositions; and they demand that people who do not accept their beliefs and practices should treat these latter in ways that implicitly accept their holder’s evaluation of them …

No one could dream of demanding that political parties be respected merely because they are political parties, or of protecting them from the pens of cartoonists; nor that their members should be. On the contrary. And so it should be for all interest groups and their members, without exception.

A. C. Grayling

8 Comments

  1. Classical economics/neo-classical economics is an Anglo Saxon phenomenon. It was centred in the UK in the nineteenth century, and then the US after 1945. It is a soft power tool. A softpower tool designed to make the case to open up markets or justify their forced opening up. The theory Comparative Advantage is but one example of many.

    The hard power tools used by the British during the 19th century included the sequestration of Hong Kong, the Opium Wars (where Britain forced China at gunpoint to import opium to close its bilateral trade deficit with China) or the loot of India by the British Empire which has been estimated at 48 trillion USDs.

    So if you want to know the real reason why the world studies a lunatic subject that basically now follows a dictat from MIT you have to understand such relationships it has had and has to power.

    Neo-classical economics played a major role in the
    hyper-globalisation agenda. At its heart is a justification for neo-liberalism: the deregulation and opening up of markets: the liberalisation of goods, capital, and labour markets. The debate was rooted in rational choice theory and Utilitarianism, a view that social welfare is an aggregation of individual utlities which is maximised in markets. Essentially of course, ‘society’ is absent. And its mathematicisation successfully removed any possibilities for proper critical enquirey and any sense of nuance.

    Jeffrey Sachs is an interesting character. For sure one of the most influential economists of the 1990s. And one connected with neo-liberalism: he was behind some of the disastrous ‘shock therapy’ policies (the fire sales of state assets) implemented by the IMF during that time. (Russia took this advice in good faith; China wisely turned it down.)

    But in recent years he has been a vocal critic of US foreign policy. One of the few who have not been completely silenced by the neo-conservatives – who Blair/Clinton type “Third Way” social and economic liberals are now interestingly are aligned with. Here he is talking about the incredibly dangerous situation the US and UK have created. And I think it took a hell of a lot of bravery to say this, and for sure he would have made a lot of enemies.

    Neo-classical economics, neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism are related phenomenon. And the chickens are coming home to roost. These are the most dangerous times I have seen in my lifetime. Some have noted that the propaganda surrounding the Ukraine War calling for ever military escalation and expansion of military alliances, is on a level to that which preceded before WWI.

    On the subject of Sweden, I find it extraordinary they gave up two centuries of neutrality: question for the Swedes here; was there a proper public debate about whether such move would actually decrease the possibilities of being drawn into a major, perhaps fatalistic, conflict, or increase it?

    The respect for religion vs freedom of expression debate poses another problem for neo-liberals. (Neo-liberals by the way are social liberals as well as economic liberals – and neo-liberalism does not necessarily mean austerity; it refers to freedom of markets which from the British Empire era has been conflated with notions of individual ‘rights’ and freedoms. It is pro-globalisation and cosmopolitan; and yet at the same time it sees a western style democratic market economy as the “endpoint of history”.) But its poor ontology makes one ask, ‘what rights and freedoms are we actually talking about’.

    Comment by Nanikore— 10 Aug, 2023 #

    • Nanikore, may I just report that, as a proof-of-concept of my pro-finance arguments here (and elsewhere), I just made about $11 (before fees) on two $63 puts (expiring in September, I’m still holding one) on FXY (an ETF replicating the price of dollars in yen) that I bought for $24, and just sold for $35? However, since the $3/trade fee ($0.03 SEC regulatory fee per contract, minimum buy size is 100 contracts) actually takes away $9 (I made one buy and two sells, forgetting the fee as I rushed to capitalize on a sudden jump in the put’s price), do you see how frustrated I feel by regulatory fees that do not apply to traders with accounts over $25k? Are you afraid that the system will spin out of control if little guys like me can take advantage of the same options market near-free-lunches that the big guys are exploiting?
      .
      Is the SEC incentivizing me to put more money in Robinhood to avoid the regulatory options trading fee?
      .
      Does my being able to trade yen and JGB ETFs, etc. from a Robinhood account challenge your story about domestic investment setting Japan apart? Why shouldn’t you too short the yen, or the pound, (or the Türkiye lira!) if you are sure that your story is correct? How many foreign speculators (like myself) and hedge funds are actively trading Japanese (and English) financial assets? So why shouldn’t the Fed and Bank of England use yield curve control to relax deficit constraints?
      .
      Can I just add that I completed Jeffrey Sachs’s sustanable development MOOC in 2014, but don’t think he understands the win-win possibilities in finance?

      Comment by rsm— 11 Aug, 2023 #

      • I think faith in financial technology is another form of technological utopianism which is really Post WWII era Idealism and Modernism. Neo-classical economics’ faith in the explanatory power of mathematics is another form.

        I think Gary Stephenson, formely a trader at CItibank is someone who understands the system is of the view that insiders cannot lose. He has a good channel on youtube; worth checking out.

        You need a very holistic approach to understanding capitalism. And it is not just about economics as neo-classical economists understand it. Eras of very easy money usually do not end up happily. They more often than not end up in extreme violence.

        Things go on until they really break.

        It is worth studying the 1920s and the effect of huge amounts of accumulated paper in the system. It’s unquestionably true that the response was over-deflationary. And Keynes’ work should never be not be played down: he did not use rational choice or other such nonsense to explain how a situation of permanent high rates of unemployment can arise. And he exposed a lot of the nonsense of the English classical economists (only for this to be reintroduced very shortly after by Samuelson et al.) But there is also a very important counterargument which says that these policies would not have been effective if major efforts had not been made to address the problems created after WWI first.

        Both arguments have merit, and in the end you have to take a nuanced look at each episode on a case by case basis.

        .

        Comment by Nanikore— 13 Aug, 2023 #

  2. Islam is an occasionalist religion, i.e., everything, including acts, comes from God. That means that what we call human acts are actually divine acts that channel through human beings. That includes the burning of a Qur’an. (I’d be worried why Allah is burning a Qur’an. The following might be relevant.)
    .
    At the same time that they were burning a Qur’an in Sweden, Putin walked into a mosque in Dagestan and received a Qur’an from the leader of the mosque. He said that there is actually a law in Russia against desecrating holy books. 1.8 billion Muslims took note of that, which is important considering the rising of the BRICS+ nations.
    .
    As an aside, Christianity is also an occasionalist religion and holds the same views as regards acts being divine acts. This from Thomas Aquinas.
    .
    [quote]
    Aquinas argues that there is no contradiction between God’s providence and human free will:
    .
    … just as by moving natural causes [God] does not prevent their acts being natural, so by moving voluntary causes He does not deprive their actions of being voluntary: but rather is He the cause of this very thing in them; for He operates in each thing according to its own nature.
    — Summa, I., Q.83, art.1.
    [end quote]

    Comment by Ahmed Fares— 7 Aug, 2023 #

  3. Islam recognizes freedom of speech and thought as regards polytheists, atheists, etc. An example from the Qur’an:
    .
    “And if any one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.” —Qur’an 9:6
    .
    Agitators, on the other hand, can be killed and this is in the Qur’an. This is because, unlike say an atheist who is talking to you, the agitator is not talking to you but attempting to influence the baser elements of society to commit violence against you.
    .
    Hate speech disguised as freedom of speech.

    Comment by Ahmed Fares— 7 Aug, 2023 #

  4. To revile the religion of the enemy has often come to use in war propaganda. The propaganda against Islam has been part of the civilized secularism motivating Swedish colonial warfare in Libya and Afghanistan. To propagate warfare against religious people from an atheistic position and within the home country is not new either. The nazi critique of jews for example.

    Comment by fredtorssander— 7 Aug, 2023 #

    • Does secularism motivate colonial warfare? I thought it was greed. And converting the heathen, of course.

      Comment by Crash Carson— 7 Aug, 2023 #

      • Excuse my English. I meant to say that civilizing the barbaric Talibans and Ganddafians and liberating the women was the official justification for the Swedish (neo-)colonial cobelligerence. To keep the homefront from getting anti-imperialist again. In reality the motive probably was selling more guns and military aircraft to the NATO-countries.

        Comment by fredtorssander— 7 Aug, 2023 #


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and Comments feeds.