« For openness | Main | Seeing what we want »

May 28, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451cbef69e200d8354956e953ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Religion in egalitarian politics:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Neal Hockley

Broadly agree, but not with point 2.

Egalitarians can believe that some people have greater knowledge of "the truth". If i'm ill, i consult a doctor, not the average-bloke-in-the-street.

Egalitarianism is about believing that everybody matters, not that they are all equally right, or insightful.

Cheers

Neal

Roger Thornhill

If religion is not hijacked by beards wanting to impose rules (I say "if", but it pretty much always is) then the moral guidance would be just that - guidance. Therefore, if Brown followed a true religious tack with regard to redistribution he would make it VOLUNTARY and for the private conscience of the individual.

Being a Socialist/Communist and Statist, Brown cannot contemplate private choice and will, so he will join with the beards and impose it as a rule.

Chris

"Being a Socialist/Communist..."

I think you need to re-read the definition of Socialist and Communist

Niko

The idea Brown is a "Socialist/Communist" is hilarious! Is this satire?

gracchi

Good point Chris- I always find religious arguments quite weak.

What is interesting though is that of the possible political arguments in the New Testament people chose not to use the egalitarian one- that I think is an interesting reflection of our political culture- but I agree I'd prefer arguments to be couched in terms open to all for refutation.

dearieme

You take your allies where you find them. Hell, liberals have accepted Roman Catholics as allies when Marxists are the foe. Or Marxists when Nazis.

Roger Thornhill

Scratch a Socialist and you will find a Communist.

Mark Wadsworth

"Scratch"? Why not "kick"?

Shuggy

Hmmm - I don't like religious justifications of political ideas either but the idea that one party has 'superior access to the truth' isn't an exclusively religious phenomenon. Remember how the Marxists used to roll their eyes at those of us who failed to understand the Laws of History? Yet they claimed to be egalitarians. Or were you one of them? ;-) Also lefties referred to the writings of Marx in much the same way Christians quote the prophets - in an equally un-open to argument kinda way.

P.S. Can someone tell Johann him he's got the wrong end of the stick with the whole 'jot and tittle' thing?

Thom

Also, a 'christian' sense of morality could drive one to helping some members of society more than others

Niko

"Scratch a Socialist and you will find a Communist."

Yeah, Gordon Brown, Kim Jong Il... all the same under the skin.

Phil

Shuggy -

"lefties referred to the writings of Marx in much the same way Christians quote the prophets"

I've never met a leftie that did, but maybe I've just been lucky. But this one observation that I don't agree with suggests two points I do agree with. Firstly, everyone gets their ideas from *somewhere*; even a pragmatic common sense conservative could probably name their favourite interpreter of pragmatic common-sense conservatism. I don't see any fundamental difference between referring back mentally to Raymond Williams and Rowan Williams. Secondly, in practical terms there's not a lot of difference between
"I don't believe in money-lending, although I may be wrong" and "I believe that the teachings of Jesus (or Marx) call for opposition to money-lending, although I may be wrong". Dogmatism and religion can go together, but either one can exist without the other.

Phil

Shuggy -

"lefties referred to the writings of Marx in much the same way Christians quote the prophets"

I've never met a leftie that did, but maybe I've just been lucky. But this one observation that I don't agree with suggests two points I do agree with. Firstly, everyone gets their ideas from *somewhere*; even a pragmatic common sense conservative could probably name their favourite interpreter of pragmatic common-sense conservatism. I don't see any fundamental difference between referring back mentally to Raymond Williams and Rowan Williams. Secondly, in practical terms there's not a lot of difference between "I don't believe in money-lending, although I may be wrong" and "I believe that the teachings of Jesus (or Marx) call for opposition to money-lending, although I may be wrong". Dogmatism and religion can go together, but either one can exist without the other.

red sole

Ban on women driving should be considered world wide... :-) I would never allow my wife driving my car.. :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad