The Neo-Con Religion

Doreen

Valued Senior Member
The neo-con religion focuses most on the purpose of the universe - it is to increase the power and influence of a certain class of people. The nature of the universe is that it is malleable and all component parts are interchangable. The only value is profit value to the aforementioned class.

A couple supernatural entities in Neoconism:

1)
corporations as persons - the neo cons have extended the rights of corporations to be on par with individuals and will speak of the rights of corporations.

2) third world people's debts. One great read is Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, written by a man who worked for years in the hazy corporate NSA limnal region, creating third world debts. The method was to convince dictators and other leaders to allow foreign, generally US companies to build projects that probably would not benefit most of the people in these countries. The leaders were encouraged - via vast increases in their own wealth - or threatened to take huge loans. The loans were taken. The projects were built. Then when the countries could not pay back the loans, outside organizations were able to control these countries, were they democratic or not. The delusion is that the poor in these countries somehow lost their rights to services and resources and control of their countries because owe certain organizations money. This debt is a delusional entity created not simply in bad faith, but with the intent to give foreign, neo con control of these nations.

Adherents of neo-conism do not see people outside their circles as fully human. Thus they are free to treat them in ways they themselves would consider immoral if they were on the receiving end. This belief is not supported by current science on the nature of homo sapians.

Rituals include:

The highly bizarre, cathartic floor of the stock exchange where the life work of one country's farmers can be destroyed by several minutes of chanting magical numbers.

Lobbying - priests from individual 'churches' or groups of churches in the panoply of corporations control governments in quid pro quo - note the use of Latin showing ties to Catholicism - arrangements that undermine democracy while the lobbyists and their churches extol the virtues of democracy.

This is precisely the kind of religious paradox that when contemplated can - not unlike the Zen Koan - bring adherents into states of ecstacy - like Nevada.

Apart from nod to Latin the religious language of neoconism combines business speak, orwellian speech and good old BS all dispensed by the best psychologists, lawyers, pr reps and companies that money can buy.

Religious clothing is for males the three piece suit, with the mildly self-flagellant and functionally useless TIE.

In recent years women have been allowed into the priesthood and there is some confusion about what attire is most appropriate.

There is much talk of the importance separation of Church and State, but the neo-cons have managed to keep their church out of these discussions, primarily by the purchase of representatives and PR.

Visions of the future utopia include:
immortality via uploading of complete brainscans
transhumanism with various mergers of machines and bodies
superhumanism via genetic modification
complete reshaping of Gaia
cross galaxy pilgrimmages via space ship or perhaps teleportation
a smiling, happy populace completely free to choose between competing brands when not working desperately to feed their families or begging.


re⋅li⋅gion
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
 
Are you saying the neo cons are Roman Catholics ?. It seems they are Jews and well placed in politics and everywhere .
 
Not to worry, one more world war and we could either be exterminated or back in the Stone Age. If the latter, then the poor who have learned to live off the land will have the advantage.

Trying to separate humans through some social classification means nothing. Like it or not all of us, 3rd world included, are capable of interchanging with one another. IOW if the shoe were on the other foot then it still remains status quo.
 
Are you saying the neo cons are Roman Catholics ?. It seems they are Jews and well placed in politics and everywhere .

No, I was just playing with the connection to Roman Catholics. A variety of religious groups and atheists are represented in the Neo-cons.

I do believe they are a religion and a pernicious one.
 
Not to worry, one more world war and we could either be exterminated or back in the Stone Age. If the latter, then the poor who have learned to live off the land will have the advantage.

Trying to separate humans through some social classification means nothing. Like it or not all of us, 3rd world included, are capable of interchanging with one another. IOW if the shoe were on the other foot then it still remains status quo.
So you don't mind if my group takes away your personal opportunies and property?

Are you justifying the injustice of this religion by saying that some catastrophe could balance things out?
 
Are you saying the neo cons are Roman Catholics ?

learn how to read.

It seems they are Jews and well placed in politics and everywhere .

ahh, perpetuating the fallacy that neoconservatism is a jewish cult. well, consider this:

Ahh, you might say, but what about the fact that 2/3 of neocons are Jewish? Well, Richard Posner, in his book Public Intellectuals, notes that of around 600 leading public intellectuals, approximately 50% of Jewish. 66%, then, is well within the general stats for public intellectuals, especially if you consider that Jews are going to be severely underrepresented among some categories of public intellectual, like the (Pat) Buchananites, the Phyllis Schlaflyites, left-wing anti-globalists, and others.

Jews, indeed, are often represented at levels above 66% in intellectual movements. Consider leading American libertarians between, say, 1950 and 1980. By common consent, the greatest libertarians of this time period were Rand, Von Mises, Hayek, and Friedman--3 out of 4 (all but Hayek) Jews. If you look at second-tier libertarians, the next group would have to include Nozick and Rothbard, and, in the 50s, perhaps Chodorov. Then you have the whole Ayn Rand circle (the Brandens, Greenspan, et al.), Israel Kirzner, Gary Becker, Richard Posner, Aaron Director, Julian Simon, Sam Peltzman, and so on.

I think it's fair to say that at least on the intellectual level, for quite some time libertarianism was virtually dominated by Jewish thinkers, and they are still well overrepresented in those circles (consider the authors of this blog). That doesn't make libertarianism a "Jewish movement."

For that matter, in the 1960s, about half of all leading activists (think Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin) were Jewish, but the peace movement wasn't a "Jewish" movement. The leadership of the ACLU has been at times overwhelmingly Jewish, but that doesn't make the ACLU a "Jewish" organization. If you look at Brian Leiter's list of the most cited law faculty, you will find that seven of the top eight are Jews. The same is true for the younger cohort of most cited scholars. Jews, in general, are well-overrepresented on the faculties of top law schools, and especially in the field of constitutional law. That doesn't make constitutional law a "Jewish" field.

One could go on in a similar vein, but the point by now should be clear: Jews are extremely prominent in various intellectual fields and movements, and the fact that they happen to constitute 2/3 of neoconservatives doesn't mean that neonconservatism is "Jewish" in the sense that as a movement its goal is advance specifically Jewish goals, any more than libertarianism, ACLUism, etc., are Jewish. Obviously, there are cultural and historical reasons why Jews are more attracted to libertarianism, or the ACLU, or neoconservatism, than they are, to say, Pat Buchanan-style conservatism, or Quaker-influenced peace movements. But to say that Jews are more likely to find a particular ideological movement intellectually and socially congenial is very different than saying that the movement is a "Jewish" one in any meaningful sense.
http://volokh.com/posts/1190474345.shtml

so, are you so quick to name libertarianism, peace activism, labor activism, and proper anarchism as jewish movements? rhetorical question.
 
So you don't mind if my group takes away your personal opportunies and property?

Are you justifying the injustice of this religion by saying that some catastrophe could balance things out?

Nope, I'm saying if the right opportunity arose then roll reversal is a certainty. Even the most downtrodden person on the planet could find themselves in a more advantageous position than they previously were. Depending on what they know and the circumstances, someone who at one time may have been considered dog dirt suddenly becomes worth following.

If you were shipwrecked on a deserted island with a wealthy lawyer and a poor farmer, who would you affix allegiance to?
 
Nope, I'm saying if the right opportunity arose then roll reversal is a certainty. Even the most downtrodden person on the planet could find themselves in a more advantageous position than they previously were. Depending on what they know and the circumstances, someone who at one time may have been considered dog dirt suddenly becomes worth following.

If you were shipwrecked on a deserted island with a wealthy lawyer and a poor farmer, who would you affix allegiance to?
This seems irrelevent to me. Imagine you are in a dipute with your landlord - who is treating you unfairly. Your landlord's lawyer says 'ah, well, perhaps in a few years you will be the landlord' or 'Imagine a plague is coming, you're more of an outdoorsman, so he'll being worse off than you.' All very interesting, but really beside the point, at least of this thread. We have a group with irrational beliefs, a sect, with an incredible amount of power, doing a great deal of damage.

Sure, a catastrophe might change this. But a catastrophe might change pretty much every issue discussed in many of these forums. 'Is slavery immoral?' Well a catastrophe might free the slaves....etc.
 
This seems irrelevent to me. Imagine you are in a dipute with your landlord - who is treating you unfairly. Your landlord's lawyer says 'ah, well, perhaps in a few years you will be the landlord' or 'Imagine a plague is coming, you're more of an outdoorsman, so he'll being worse off than you.' All very interesting, but really beside the point, at least of this thread. We have a group with irrational beliefs, a sect, with an incredible amount of power, doing a great deal of damage.

Sure, a catastrophe might change this. But a catastrophe might change pretty much every issue discussed in many of these forums. 'Is slavery immoral?' Well a catastrophe might free the slaves....etc.

i think the real issue is that so many are still beholden to traditions (i.e. abrahamic, etc.) which they have professedly disavowed, and these traditions tacitly sanction plutocratic and oligarchic hierarchies, and the consequent oppressive means and methods needed to maintain such. and then there are those who are simply beholden to these traditions, openly. to be concise.
 
i think the real issue is that so many are still beholden to traditions (i.e. abrahamic, etc.) which they have professedly disavowed, and these traditions tacitly sanction plutocratic and oligarchic hierarchies, and the consequent oppressive means and methods needed to maintain such. and then there are those who are simply beholden to these traditions, openly. to be concise.
Yes, this is good point, and I think it also undermines the atheist world, better world hypothesis. Some humans find excuses. Religions offer excuses but others will always be found. And 'scientific' excuses - like holding up photos of WOMD sites - work just as well it seems.
 
I've never heard of this "neo-con" religion. Do they have THEIR own institutional bible or website ?

If this thread is more of a political sarcastic take on capitalists, doen't it belong in the political or buisness boards rather than religion ?
 
I've never heard of this "neo-con" religion. Do they have THEIR own institutional bible or website ?

they have their own texts and publications, but no specific doctrine to which they appeal; though one could argue that the writings of leo strauss outline their basic principles.

that their is no singular text or "entity" to which neocons universally appeal does not invalidate neoconservatisms status as a religion, for doctrinal disputes and oppositional factions are a part of any sizable creed--especially in the formative decades of such.

If this thread is more of a political sarcastic take on capitalists, doen't it belong in the political or buisness boards rather than religion ?

well, neocons do entertain beliefs and faith in supernatural entities and in this respect one could say they are universally like-minded. whether neoconservatism can be described as a theistic religion proper is a matter for debate, as theism remains an ambiguously defined notion,
 
I've never heard of this "neo-con" religion. Do they have THEIR own institutional bible or website ?
You would think 'Wealth of Nations' but actually I think they would have some problems with that work and they are not as big on hermaneutics as other religions. A good website is....

www.newdemocracy.org

though there are many others. It has a number of branches not unlike Christianity.
If this thread is more of a political sarcastic take on capitalists, doen't it belong in the political or buisness boards rather than religion ?
There are other capitalist religions, but the neocons are not merely capitalists and they have much more influence than other religions. This is not a sarcastic take on capitalists. It is a sarcastic take on neocons, but my primary target are all the people so concerned about religions who have not noticed the most powerful religion in the USA.
 
well, neocons do entertain beliefs and faith in supernatural entities and in this respect one could say they are universally like-minded. whether neoconservatism can be described as a theistic religion proper is a matter for debate, as theism remains an ambiguously defined notion,
There are elements of paganism - see Bohemian Grove - and some are nominally Christian and Jewish, but primarily I would say they are atheist or 'don't care' and worship Mammon.
 
Back
Top