On Topic Discussion The Day Our Cultures Died

[Alistair]

That is an odd conclusion, or perhaps better put, selective.

Modern urban gangs are most definitely tribes, yet what virtue is there in that? The tribe advocate must defend his assertion that tribalism is inherently positive or virtuous.

I was actually thinking about that too. But my head hurts to much to come up with a coherent thought

 

[Telstra]

Have you wondered what made Greek and Roman cultures great? I think their religions with many gods with human imperfections prevented the development of an all powerful priesthood and a fundamentalist control of life and thought.

I know, but the Catholics and the orthodox destroyed it.
And left them with the pope and their orthodox preists performed weddings and christenings ..... shame shame shame

 

[NotHardUp1]

Have you wondered what made Greek and Roman cultures great? I think their religions with many gods with human imperfections prevented the development of an all powerful priesthood and a fundamentalist control of life and thought.

Fallacious syllogism. The Egyptians were polytheists with equally fragile deities, yet their priesthoods were tightly aligned with their ruling class and most certainly controlled the populace. Likewise, Native American religions were certainly polytheistic, still carved in stone in Central and South America, yet their priests were similarly aligned with the ruling elite. What a shock that power aggregates in the institutions of a social order -- duh.

It is some sort of wishful thinking that casts about and tries to find the bogeyman in modern religion. Methinks it is the sour grapes of aftermath following the delusional euphoria of the 60's that religion was dead and dying. It was too easy to dismiss the importance and sway of religion by opining about it as if it were elderly and toppling. It was a progressive and Eurocentric view that was also adopted by much of the coastal US intelligentsia. Nothing could be further from the truth.

And to this thread's stated topic, it was in part due to the fracturing of American religion, moving it away from the mainstream monolithic image and into the reality of many sects and their diverse manifestations. Protestantism evolved away from the bourgeois mainline denominations that had co-opted the vitality of religion with mere social convention, and it moved off to the burgeoning Pentecostalist and Fundamentalist sects that reshaped the face of religion in America.

Likewise, American Catholics were the driving force in the changes that culminated in Vatican II which closed in 1965. To the credit of the Papal See, the ancient church lurched forward in a hotly controversial move that is still seeing aftershocks of adjustment and rebuttal within the largest religion on the planet. The change made the institution once again adaptable to the local populations the world over, one of the traits that has in fact continued to propagate the Roman Church.

Elsewhere in the world, Islam continued to widen the divide between Sunni and Shia, an internal struggle, but important, for it reveals that Islam is not monolithic either, and mutates as it spreads, a reaction to biases on the part of cultures that adopt it. This is even more evident as one looks to Indonesia and Sufism.

Strong cultures, including religions, survive because they adapt as well as provide to their populations what their cultures demand or want. They don't stand empty in the 21st century with empty pews and coffers because no one attends. Railing against Islam or Catholicism as some sort of unique or singular actors is a bit naive. The force of dominant social institutions has always been mirrored in their religions.

 

[kallipolis]

I know, but the Catholics and the orthodox destroyed it.
And left them with the pope and their orthodox preists performed weddings and christenings ..... shame shame shame

Rome's western provinces had already been destroyed by the Huns, and the Goths leaving the remnants of Rome's previous glories to be protected by the church that worked with the barbarians to ensure that civilisation did not revert to stone age insignificance.

The Byzantine Empire...Rome's eastern provinces prospered well into the late 15th century.

You really should read a serious book, or two on the history of Europe before posting here.

 

[kallipolis]

Fallacious syllogism. The Egyptians were polytheists with equally fragile deities, yet their priesthoods were tightly aligned with their ruling class and most certainly controlled the populace. .

Well noted, Jason for also here in Greece the religious elites, worked closely with the ruling elites.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

I'm afraid the current fixation on the evils of Christianity and/or Islam is but a product of effete intellectualism that is more bent on being countercultural than being accurate or insightful.

That's easy for you to say. You are not currently growing up gay in Egypt, Pakistan, Iran or Saudi Arabia, or any other muslim-majority country that was so much more tolerant of "counter culture" (which would include queers like you and me by definition) in the 1970s than today, are you? You are not even growing up gay in 1950s Ireland, Australia, Utah or Texas. You are living today, settled comfortable, having shaken off all the baggage. Now can you look at those religions mildly. Others have not been so lucky.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

I volunteer for a NGO here in Greece interviewing Iranian, and Afghan refugees, and despite making use of an interpreter speaking Farsi (the lingua franca of Iran, and much of Afghanistan) I discovered that many of the refugees are competent in the English language.

Ah, that is so typical of those multicultural westerners: they want their foreigners to be a lot more exotic and colourful than they sometimes are. Your own use of "Farsi" is typical. "Farsi" is not an English word. The language of Iran is called Persian in English. You would never call the language of Austria "Deutsch", would you? Neither in English nor in Greek? Or would you?

 

[kallipolis]

English is the logocal and pragmatic choice as a second language as it has become the nearly universal second language, and is therefore the most useful.

Here, we agree, for it has been due to the influence of the British Empire that today, many people use English as their second language.

Here in Greece the English language is widely spoken to support our tourist industry, and ship owning industry both working closely with many nations. It should come as no suprise that English language cinema, and television programming broadcast on Greek television stations is not dubbed (sub-titled) encouraging school children to learn English....with enthusiasm.

 

[kallipolis]

Ah, that is so typical of those multicultural westerners: they want their foreigners to be a lot more exotic and colourful than they sometimes are. Your own use of "Farsi" is typical. "Farsi" is not an English word. The language of Iran is called Persian in English. You would never call the language of Austria "Deutsch", would you? Neither in English nor in Greek? Or would you?

.

The language of Iran is also known by its endonym ....Farsi, while (for political, and nationalistic reasons, in Afghanistan Farsi is called Dari)

Most Iranians who I encounter refer to their country as Iran, not Persia...unless they are referencing their country's history.

Unlike you I meet Iranian refugees two, or three days every week when interviewing them.

 

[nyctopgam]

Before this, the great dying out of ethnic cultures and their beliefs has been called the Axial Age. Many of the great thinkers rose then, leading to the Great Religions as I understand. Some time BC during Ancient Greece Rome etc.

 

[Telstra]

Rome's western provinces had already been destroyed by the Huns, and the Goths leaving the remnants of Rome's previous glories to be protected by the church that worked with the barbarians to ensure that civilisation did not revert to stone age insignificance.

The Byzantine Empire...Rome's eastern provinces prospered well into the late 15th century.

You really should read a serious book, or two on the history of Europe before posting here.

Well,
all i'm interested in is the final product.
The final product of catholic or orthodox church are they perform weddings and christenings, own schools and own many businesses ...

 

[kallipolis]

The final product is that civilisation surivived, and prospered under the church's protection, leading to The Renaissance and Europe's recovery from The Dark Ages. I recommend that you spend some time reading on The Renaissance to further your education.

 

[Benvolio]

Fallacious syllogism. The Egyptians were polytheists with equally fragile deities, yet their priesthoods were tightly aligned with their ruling class and most certainly controlled the populace. Likewise, Native American religions were certainly polytheistic, still carved in stone in Central and South America, yet their priests were similarly aligned with the ruling elite. What a shock that power aggregates in the institutions of a social order -- duh.

It is some sort of wishful thinking that casts about and tries to find the bogeyman in modern religion. Methinks it is the sour grapes of aftermath following the delusional euphoria of the 60's that religion was dead and dying. It was too easy to dismiss the importance and sway of religion by opining about it as if it were elderly and toppling. It was a progressive and Eurocentric view that was also adopted by much of the coastal US intelligentsia. Nothing could be further from the truth.

And to this thread's stated topic, it was in part due to the fracturing of American religion, moving it away from the mainstream monolithic image and into the reality of many sects and their diverse manifestations. Protestantism evolved away from the bourgeois mainline denominations that had co-opted the vitality of religion with mere social convention, and it moved off to the burgeoning Pentecostalist and Fundamentalist sects that reshaped the face of religion in America.

Likewise, American Catholics were the driving force in the changes that culminated in Vatican II which closed in 1965. To the credit of the Papal See, the ancient church lurched forward in a hotly controversial move that is still seeing aftershocks of adjustment and rebuttal within the largest religion on the planet. The change made the institution once again adaptable to the local populations the world over, one of the traits that has in fact continued to propagate the Roman Church.

Elsewhere in the world, Islam continued to widen the divide between Sunni and Shia, an internal struggle, but important, for it reveals that Islam is not monolithic either, and mutates as it spreads, a reaction to biases on the part of cultures that adopt it. This is even more evident as one looks to Indonesia and Sufism.

Strong cultures, including religions, survive because they adapt as well as provide to their populations what their cultures demand or want. They don't stand empty in the 21st century with empty pews and coffers because no one attends. Railing against Islam or Catholicism as some sort of unique or singular actors is a bit naive. The force of dominant social institutions has always been mirrored in their religions.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 ended the quota system which gave a strong preference to immigrants from Britain and Northern Europe, fundamentally changing the demographics and culture of the US. It was soon followed by the counter culture movement of the 60s which continues.

 

[Harke the Boeotarch]

^ Having been in a relationship with a man who had been a beatnik and then a hippy, I´m fairly sure the so-called counter culture in the US wasn´t initiated by immigrants from after 1965, as it had existed in some shape or form for it least a decade before that.

 

[Benvolio]

^ Having been in a relationship with a man who had been a beatnik and then a hippy, I´m fairly sure the so-called counter culture in the US wasn´t initiated by immigrants from after 1965, as it had existed in some shape or form for it least a decade before that.

I agree......

 

[NotHardUp1]

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 ended the quota system which gave a strong preference to immigrants from Britain and Northern Europe, fundamentally changing the demographics and culture of the US. It was soon followed by the counter culture movement of the 60s which continues.

What a red herring and an oblique diversion from the thread's topic.

The change in immigration hardly could have seen enough immigrants arrive before 1967 to have culminated in the hot wave that washed across the U.S. The movement had multiple origins, all of them beginning in at least the early 60's. Civil rights legislation, the assassination of the Kennedy brothers, the rejection of the Vietnam war, the rise of feminism, the explosion of recreational drugs, and the sexual revolution all began before 1965 and were not centered in the immigrant population.

 

[peeonme]

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 ended the quota system which gave a strong preference to immigrants from Britain and Northern Europe, fundamentally changing the demographics and culture of the US. It was soon followed by the counter culture movement of the 60s which continues.

I believe that the counter culture that we saw and are still seeing to a degree was the result of education, specifically college. WW2 vets had a door opened to them and many used it, the common man in America was exposed to ideas and thoughts that public education never offered.
The idea of questioning authority and exposure to atheism, Marxism, socialism has changed our landscape. Be it for good or bad remains to be seen, we are still in transition.
Before this people were taught to march in lock step, go fight that war and don't ask any questions.

 

[NotHardUp1]

That raises a new question that would make a new thread: how do millennials and whoever today's 20-year-olds are fit in the continuum of counterculturalism that has percolated since 1960?

 

[Alistair]

As Oscar Wilde said, “Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else’s opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.”

Most people, I think, are just desperately trying to find belonging in a world that masquerades homogeneity as individualism and where belonging is an empty commodity. Find your tribe. Find your purpose.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

.

The language of Iran is also known by its endonym ....Farsi, while (for political, and nationalistic reasons, in Afghanistan Farsi is called Dari)

Most Iranians who I encounter refer to their country as Iran, not Persia...unless they are referencing their country's history.

Indeed, Persia is the historic name of the country, region, and empire. Iran is the name of the nation today. Where did I say otherwise?

What I am saying is that the language is called Persian in English and not Farsi. Calling Persian "Farsi" is like calling French "français". You would never say you have a français-speaking colleague, would you?

Also, if it is known as Farsi only in Iran and as Dari in Afghanistan, calling it Farsi rather than Dari becomes almost a political stance, like calling the English language the American language. Stick with the neutral option.