The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
A Brief History of Russian Religiosity
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

There’s been some discussion in the previous thread over whether or not Russian religiosity has increased since the end of the USSR, when for obvious reasons people weren’t polled on these questions.

It’s quite obvious to me that religiosity has increased.

1. Personal observations: Church services in provincial Russia 15 years ago – almost all elderly woman; today – still mostly elderly woman, but now joined by elderly men, middle-aged women, some families.

Commenters such as jbwilson24 and Big Red Scary concur so I don’t think I’m imagining things.

2. More and more churches are getting built.

3. The rise of Russian religiosity has been observed in many sociological works. It is not exactly a controversial theory.

Still, I agree that we need hard numbers.

Fortunately, the World Values Survey does “waves” of opinion polls once every five years across a broad swathe of the world’s countries on all sorts of questions.

Here are Russia’s results in comparative perspective.

Belief in God

1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Belarus 36.4% 67.9% 84.9%
Poland 92.2%
Romania 92.3% 92.3%
Russia 35.2% 60.1% 73.3%
Sweden 48.2% 46.6% 50.3%
Ukraine 64.7% 87.8%
UK
USA 93.8% 94.2% 87.7%

Percentage of Russians believing in God has more than doubled since the early 1990s.

Importance of God in your life (/10)

1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Belarus 4.15 5.97 6.51
Poland 8.73 7.95
Romania 8.03 9.17 8.93
Russia 4.00 5.39 6.12 6.68
Sweden 3.94 4.10 3.91 3.65
Ukraine 5.96 7.23 7.18
UK 5.26 5.59
USA 8.78 8.14 8.47 8.22 7.77

On average, Russians went from rating the importance of God from 4.0/10 to 6.7/10 from 1992 to 2012, an almost three point increase. In contrast, the United States – which has become markedly more secular in the past decade according to both my observations and opinion polls – only dropped by one point between 1992 and 2012 (though I suspect the fall has continued and maybe even accelerated since 2012).

In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).

Anyhow, I think we can consider this question answered.

 
Hide 28 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).

    It’ll be interesting to see whether Poland or India legalises gay marriage first. The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis. The ruling Hindu nationalist party didn’t object. India is converging with the West a lot faster culturally than it is economically.

    It’s worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a ‘third gender’ already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    While we conceive the West as more liberal than the Orient, this is a historical inversion. Homosexuality was not always frowned upon in these socities before European contact, and many of the anti-homosexuality laws were often the result of either European colonisation or cultural influence. So, it isn’t necessarily the case that India is doing this purely to ape the West. Same can be said of Poland. We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn’t do in the bedroom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    Do you think it is inevitable that tolerance of homosexuality must lead to Gay Marriage? To me Gay Marriage is one of those crazy Western fads, such as Diversity! or the Holocaust. Perhaps, India is reverting to norm, but without adopting Western craziness?

    Meanwhile in Russia:

    https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1039455821866913792
    , @DFH

    The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis.
     
    My favourite part of the ruling;


    Shakespeare through one of his characters in a play says ―What‘s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet‖. The said phrase, in its basic sense, conveys that what really matters is the essential qualities of the substance and the fundamental characteristics of an entity but not the name by which it or a person is called. Getting further deeper into the meaning, it is understood that the name may be a convenient concept for identification but the essence behind the same is the core of identity. Sans identity, the name only remains a denotative term. Therefore, the identity is pivotal to one‘s being. Life bestows honour on it and freedom of living, as a facet of life, expresses genuine desire to have it. The said desire, one is inclined to think, is satisfied by the conception of constitutional recognition, and hence, emphasis is laid on the identity of an individual which is conceived under the Constitution. And the sustenance of identity is the filament of life. It is equivalent to authoring one‘s own life script where freedom broadens everyday. Identity is equivalent to divinity.
     
    The globohomo cargo-cultism in the document as a whole is stunning.
    , @anonymous coward

    We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn’t do in the bedroom.
     
    Presumably, you never had laws to stop someone from raping geese to death or eating boiled cow turds either.

    Cannibalism is never mentioned in the Bible. That doesn't mean it is sanctioned by God, only that the idea is so marginal and disgusting that there's no point to even talk about it.

    , @Toronto Russian

    It’s worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a ‘third gender’ already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.
     
    This is for the Hijra, an age-old group of eunuchs that exists in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Yes, eunuchs are still made today by illegal home operations. They're rejected by society and reduced to beggar life, but somehow also considered sacred, giving blessings at weddings and births - that's all really bizarre stuff.
    https://youtu.be/F36ht-Iujx0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. OT

    My great-grandfather was a POW somewhere in Siberia. He married a local girl there. My grandmother was born there, in a village called Poperechnaya (Поперечная), which she claimed belonged to Tomsk. (I thought Tomsk oblast, but it was probably Tomsk governorate.) After a lot of futile searches, I managed to locate a place which is called Poperechnoye (Поперечное): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B5_(%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C)

    My mom thinks that it’s the same, because Poperechnaya is feminine, while Poperechnoye is neutral, and after some thinking my mom determined that the Russian word for “village” (деревня – according to my mom) is a feminine word, while the word for “place” (место – according to my mom, she can speak some Russian, I can’t) is neutral, and so maybe they changed the name when it was made part of another (bigger) village. (So it’s now merely a locality part of a bigger village, and not a separate village.)

    Is there a way to find it out if it really happened, i.e. if it really was called the feminine version before?

    I don’t know what the next steps should be, but it’d be nice if I could perhaps locate a few relatives there. (Maybe some of them could speak some English..? At least the younger ones.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. @Polish Perspective

    In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).
     
    It'll be interesting to see whether Poland or India legalises gay marriage first. The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis. The ruling Hindu nationalist party didn't object. India is converging with the West a lot faster culturally than it is economically.

    https://i.imgur.com/l4qUyyg.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/fAHpHVS.jpg

    It's worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a 'third gender' already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    While we conceive the West as more liberal than the Orient, this is a historical inversion. Homosexuality was not always frowned upon in these socities before European contact, and many of the anti-homosexuality laws were often the result of either European colonisation or cultural influence. So, it isn't necessarily the case that India is doing this purely to ape the West. Same can be said of Poland. We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn't do in the bedroom.

    Do you think it is inevitable that tolerance of homosexuality must lead to Gay Marriage? To me Gay Marriage is one of those crazy Western fads, such as Diversity! or the Holocaust. Perhaps, India is reverting to norm, but without adopting Western craziness?

    Meanwhile in Russia:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Holy shit, if this is the kind of clown in leadership in the Russian military, Russia had better acquiesce to any commands of the U.S. military in Syria because I think U.S. military commanders would make quick and punishing work of this kind of stooge. It’d be like the current UFC heavyweight champ fighting a kid in a wheelchair with cerebral palsy. Is this the military Martyanov could stand up to U.S.??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. DFH says:
    @Polish Perspective

    In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).
     
    It'll be interesting to see whether Poland or India legalises gay marriage first. The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis. The ruling Hindu nationalist party didn't object. India is converging with the West a lot faster culturally than it is economically.

    https://i.imgur.com/l4qUyyg.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/fAHpHVS.jpg

    It's worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a 'third gender' already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    While we conceive the West as more liberal than the Orient, this is a historical inversion. Homosexuality was not always frowned upon in these socities before European contact, and many of the anti-homosexuality laws were often the result of either European colonisation or cultural influence. So, it isn't necessarily the case that India is doing this purely to ape the West. Same can be said of Poland. We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn't do in the bedroom.

    The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis.

    My favourite part of the ruling;

    Shakespeare through one of his characters in a play says ―What‘s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet‖. The said phrase, in its basic sense, conveys that what really matters is the essential qualities of the substance and the fundamental characteristics of an entity but not the name by which it or a person is called. Getting further deeper into the meaning, it is understood that the name may be a convenient concept for identification but the essence behind the same is the core of identity. Sans identity, the name only remains a denotative term. Therefore, the identity is pivotal to one‘s being. Life bestows honour on it and freedom of living, as a facet of life, expresses genuine desire to have it. The said desire, one is inclined to think, is satisfied by the conception of constitutional recognition, and hence, emphasis is laid on the identity of an individual which is conceived under the Constitution. And the sustenance of identity is the filament of life. It is equivalent to authoring one‘s own life script where freedom broadens everyday. Identity is equivalent to divinity.

    The globohomo cargo-cultism in the document as a whole is stunning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    WTF

    Are these people Indians or Europeans?

    From German statesman Johann Wolfgang von Goethe to William Shakespeare, the five learned judges of the Supreme Court delved deep into world history and philosophy to pick up appropriate arguments in their historic verdict that decriminalised consensual homosexuality in India.

    "I am what I am, so take me as I am," - the quote from Goethe, an 18th-century German scholar sets the tone of the 493-page judgement in its opening paragraph.

    The second line comes from the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer - "No one can escape from their individuality". Schopenhauer was among the first thinkers in western philosophy to share and affirm significant tenets of eastern philosophy like asceticism, having arrived at similar conclusions, as the result of his own philosophical thinking.
    As they began reading out their judgements, the judges quoted 19th-century British thinker John Stuart Mill - "But society has now fairly got the better of individuality, and the danger which threatens human nature is not the excess, but the deficiency of personal impulses and preferences."

    Next comes William Shakespeare.

    "Shakespeare through one of his characters in a play says - 'What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.' The phrase, in its basic sense, conveys that what really matters is the essential qualities of the substance and the fundamental characteristics of an entity but not the name by which it or a person is called," says the verdict, in its interpretation of the famous quote.

    While dealing with the doctrine of progressive realisation of rights in the Constitution, the judges quoted the Anglo-Irish philosopher, statesman and orator Edmund Burke - "A Constitution is ever-growing and it is perpetually continuous as it embodies the spirit of a nation. It is enriched at the present by the past experiences and influences and makes the future richer than the present."

    Subsequently, they quoted 20th century British lawyer and public servant Lord Roskill who suggested that it was not only the interpretation of the Constitution which needed to be pragmatic, due to the dynamic nature of a Constitution, but also the legal policy of a particular epoch must be in consonance with the current and the present needs of the society, which were sensible in the prevalent times and at the same time easy to apply.

    The five judges also quoted British Prime Minister Theresa May who in her speech at the Commonwealth Joint Forum on April 17, 2018, urged the Commonwealth Nations to overhaul outdated anti-gay laws, and expressed regret regarding Britain's role in introducing such laws.

    "Across the world, discriminatory laws made many years ago continue to affect the lives of many people, criminalising same-sex relations and failing to protect women and girls. I am all too aware that these laws were often put in place by my own country. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now. As the UK's prime minister, I deeply regret both the fact that such laws were introduced and the legacy of discrimination, violence and even death that persists today," she had stated.
     
    https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/deccan+herald-epaper-deccan/sec+377+judges+delve+into+world+history+philosophy-newsid-96312250
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Mitleser says:
    @DFH

    The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis.
     
    My favourite part of the ruling;


    Shakespeare through one of his characters in a play says ―What‘s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet‖. The said phrase, in its basic sense, conveys that what really matters is the essential qualities of the substance and the fundamental characteristics of an entity but not the name by which it or a person is called. Getting further deeper into the meaning, it is understood that the name may be a convenient concept for identification but the essence behind the same is the core of identity. Sans identity, the name only remains a denotative term. Therefore, the identity is pivotal to one‘s being. Life bestows honour on it and freedom of living, as a facet of life, expresses genuine desire to have it. The said desire, one is inclined to think, is satisfied by the conception of constitutional recognition, and hence, emphasis is laid on the identity of an individual which is conceived under the Constitution. And the sustenance of identity is the filament of life. It is equivalent to authoring one‘s own life script where freedom broadens everyday. Identity is equivalent to divinity.
     
    The globohomo cargo-cultism in the document as a whole is stunning.

    WTF

    Are these people Indians or Europeans?

    From German statesman Johann Wolfgang von Goethe to William Shakespeare, the five learned judges of the Supreme Court delved deep into world history and philosophy to pick up appropriate arguments in their historic verdict that decriminalised consensual homosexuality in India.

    “I am what I am, so take me as I am,” – the quote from Goethe, an 18th-century German scholar sets the tone of the 493-page judgement in its opening paragraph.

    The second line comes from the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer – “No one can escape from their individuality”. Schopenhauer was among the first thinkers in western philosophy to share and affirm significant tenets of eastern philosophy like asceticism, having arrived at similar conclusions, as the result of his own philosophical thinking.
    As they began reading out their judgements, the judges quoted 19th-century British thinker John Stuart Mill – “But society has now fairly got the better of individuality, and the danger which threatens human nature is not the excess, but the deficiency of personal impulses and preferences.”

    Next comes William Shakespeare.

    “Shakespeare through one of his characters in a play says – ‘What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.’ The phrase, in its basic sense, conveys that what really matters is the essential qualities of the substance and the fundamental characteristics of an entity but not the name by which it or a person is called,” says the verdict, in its interpretation of the famous quote.

    While dealing with the doctrine of progressive realisation of rights in the Constitution, the judges quoted the Anglo-Irish philosopher, statesman and orator Edmund Burke – “A Constitution is ever-growing and it is perpetually continuous as it embodies the spirit of a nation. It is enriched at the present by the past experiences and influences and makes the future richer than the present.”

    Subsequently, they quoted 20th century British lawyer and public servant Lord Roskill who suggested that it was not only the interpretation of the Constitution which needed to be pragmatic, due to the dynamic nature of a Constitution, but also the legal policy of a particular epoch must be in consonance with the current and the present needs of the society, which were sensible in the prevalent times and at the same time easy to apply.

    The five judges also quoted British Prime Minister Theresa May who in her speech at the Commonwealth Joint Forum on April 17, 2018, urged the Commonwealth Nations to overhaul outdated anti-gay laws, and expressed regret regarding Britain’s role in introducing such laws.

    “Across the world, discriminatory laws made many years ago continue to affect the lives of many people, criminalising same-sex relations and failing to protect women and girls. I am all too aware that these laws were often put in place by my own country. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now. As the UK’s prime minister, I deeply regret both the fact that such laws were introduced and the legacy of discrimination, violence and even death that persists today,” she had stated.

    https://m.dailyhunt.in/news/india/english/deccan+herald-epaper-deccan/sec+377+judges+delve+into+world+history+philosophy-newsid-96312250

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. @Polish Perspective

    In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).
     
    It'll be interesting to see whether Poland or India legalises gay marriage first. The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis. The ruling Hindu nationalist party didn't object. India is converging with the West a lot faster culturally than it is economically.

    https://i.imgur.com/l4qUyyg.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/fAHpHVS.jpg

    It's worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a 'third gender' already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    While we conceive the West as more liberal than the Orient, this is a historical inversion. Homosexuality was not always frowned upon in these socities before European contact, and many of the anti-homosexuality laws were often the result of either European colonisation or cultural influence. So, it isn't necessarily the case that India is doing this purely to ape the West. Same can be said of Poland. We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn't do in the bedroom.

    We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn’t do in the bedroom.

    Presumably, you never had laws to stop someone from raping geese to death or eating boiled cow turds either.

    Cannibalism is never mentioned in the Bible. That doesn’t mean it is sanctioned by God, only that the idea is so marginal and disgusting that there’s no point to even talk about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?
    , @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Jon0815 says:

    [MORE]

    It’s quite obviously to me that religiosity has increased.

    typo alert

    AK: Thanks

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Dmitry says:

    I haven’t read answers in the other post yet.

    But we have official statements (whether to believe or not) each year on church attendance for any services Easter and Christmas. Easter is the most important data, for church attendance in general, as the most important one.

    Official numbers in a general decline each year over the decade, but with a large regional variation. Overall, for Easter, it was 2.7% across the country this year attend any service.

    For example, in Chelyabinsk region only 0,8% people attend at church during Easter. But in Sverdlovsk region, it’s 2.7%. And in North Ossetia (I can’t remember number exactly) it was many times higher).

    2.7% looks like a lot of people if you see tens of thousands of people, but not when you compare them to the number of people totally.

    Attendance for Christmas services this year was around 1.7%.

    elderly men, middle-aged women, some families.

    Everyone should go one time in their life, especially as children.

    The rise of Russian religiosity has been observed in many sociological works. It is not exactly a controversial theory.

    During 1990s this was a phenomenon. In the boom year of 1992, for example.

    Now, amongst self-identifying orthodox, monthly communion attendance around 1.2%.

    https://takiedela.ru/2017/04/takaya-rossiya-cerkov/

    Belief in God Importance of God in your life

    I would say this is quite a separate topic to anything with church.

    If you give me this questionnaire. My answers for “belief in afterlife?” – it would be “certain” (but without rational knowledge, just intuitive knowledge).

    My answer for “belief in God?” – it would also be “strong, but rationally unsure”.

    -

    But my answers are not indication I support the church doctrines or doctrines of an organized religion.

    On the contrary, I would say their doctrines are distant from the reality of the world, and of God for those who are believing. God is of course something far stranger, sublime (in Kant’s conception) and much more alien to human ordinary conception, than they – apart from the religious mystics – show their parishioners.

    At the same time, church is useful consolation and psychological help for people especially, after they experience disasters in their life.

    It can also be aesthetically good to give you an certain atmosphere.

    question answered.

    ? https://takiedela.ru/2017/04/takaya-rossiya-cerkov/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. Nznz says: • Website

    Maybe Tasha can opine (requesting reinforcements), but without theistic arguments, the secular arguments around such sexual taboos like homosexuality, bisexuality among males,
    and incest, basically revolve around the yuck factor right? Thing is liberals have been very good at picking apart these arguments as being emotional in nature, and thus irrational. People may disagree, but the polling numbers seem to indicate otherwise, and yes you may complain about the powers that be and their propaganda, but at the end of the day no one is putting a gun to people’s heads and forcing them to watch sexually degenerate media right? So something about how the way that liberals package their message must be effective, especially since there are no shortage of socially conservative media in the US to watch over the years, and yet people still choose to watch media that endorses pro-LGBT values.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:

    How much of this is due to Muslim demographic changes in Russia? And I’m not including Litvinenko, piss be upon him, because he converted to Islam on his deathbed. In the 90’s there were 300 mosques in Russia. Today there are 8000 mosques in Russia. Today there are more Muslims in Moscow than the total inhabitants of Boston or D.C.

    Let’s hope the return to region in Russia is to the only true religion of Christianity. Islam is merely a revolutionary movement by you-know-who.

    http://www.culturewars.com/2018/Gardinerreview.htm

    The Jewish Origins of Islam

    Edouard-Marie Gallez, Le Messie et son prophète: aux origines de l’Islam. Paris: Studia Arabica, dirigée par Marie-Thérèse Urvoy. Tome I: De Qumran à Muhammad. 4th edition, 2012. 523 pp. 35 Euros. Tome II: Du Muhammad des Califes au Muhammad de l’histoire. 2010. Pp 574. 39 Euros.

    Reviewed by Anne Barbeau Gardiner

    In his groundbreaking book, Le messie et son prophète: Aux origines de l’Islam, Edouard-Marie Gallez lifts the veil and lets us see the historical roots of Islam. He shows it originating in a vast movement of messianic Jews called “Ebionites” or “Nazareens.” These non-rabbinical Jews accepted Jesus as the messiah, but not as the divine Logos. Gallez shows how the scrolls and fragments found in the Qumram caves by the Dead Sea and in the vicinity of Massada illuminate the ideology behind this movement of Jews, who were eager and willing to follow the messiah into holy war, believing they would thereby save the world. Unlike rabbinical Jews, who looked to the past, these men looked forward to an earthly utopia that would come only after mass exterminations. Like the later Muslims, they believed that the messiah had not died on the Cross but had been taken up alive into heaven and was ready, whenever the conditions were right (i.e., when Palestine was no longer in the hands of the impious and the Temple had been rebuilt), to return to the Mount of Olives and lead them to the subjugation of the entire world. The Nazareens, like the Muslims, forbade pork and wine
    The first tome of this magisterial work of about a thousand pages deals with the Essenes, the Qumram documents, and the Jewish Messianic movement from its rise in the 2nd-century B.C. to its culmination in 7th-century Islam. The second tome is devoted in large part to the birth of Islam, the attempt to erase the Nazareen legacy, and the traces of it that remain in the Qur’an, which started as a compilation of Nazareen lectionaries (“qery’n,” to which the Arab word qur’an corresponds). These lectionaries were initially given to the Arab Qorechites to indoctrinate them into the messianic ideology and engage them in the conquest of Palestine.

    Read the rest: http://www.culturewars.com/2018/Gardinerreview.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Nznz says: • Website
    @anonymous coward

    We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn’t do in the bedroom.
     
    Presumably, you never had laws to stop someone from raping geese to death or eating boiled cow turds either.

    Cannibalism is never mentioned in the Bible. That doesn't mean it is sanctioned by God, only that the idea is so marginal and disgusting that there's no point to even talk about it.

    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it’s persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    I'm not secular and I'm not "conservative". Nobody with half a brain is "conservative". (As everybody knows, "conservative" means "conserving the progressive values of when I was 25".)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Nznz says: • Website
    @anonymous coward

    We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn’t do in the bedroom.
     
    Presumably, you never had laws to stop someone from raping geese to death or eating boiled cow turds either.

    Cannibalism is never mentioned in the Bible. That doesn't mean it is sanctioned by God, only that the idea is so marginal and disgusting that there's no point to even talk about it.

    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it’s persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral
    It has absolutely zero to do with arguments and everything to do with (((who))) controls the megaphone. You can blare basically ANY narrative long enough and eventually people will conform to it, any by ANY I include cannibalism, incest, pedophillia, human sacrifice, genocide, eating shit, anything you can possibly think of.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Values we see as "progressive" appeal to the autonomy seeking desire of humans; however that appetite, like other appetites, can be harmful in excess. Pushing back is merely the need to demonstrate that gluttony both of the caloric and demotic varieties is sinful as well as maladaptive.
    , @AaronB
    Its because the Liberal message is fundamentally and basically correct and appeals to all our spiritual and moral intuitions. It is also old as mankind. All the great religions are Liberal.

    Conservatism, Right Wingism, is basically wrong, and appeals to our small minded, selfish, and stupid animal selves.

    The problem is today's Liberalism is a heavily corrupted version of the Great Message.

    Conservatism, right wingism, etc - has never historically succeeded anywhere except for brief periods. It is based on short term animal selfishness.

    The sensibility of people on this blog will be a mere footnote in history, if that.

    What will eventually happen is a faction will arise within Liberalism itself, young intelligent men and women of an idealistic bent - i.e by definition not Right Wingers - and will "repair" Liberalism - which is nothing more than the Perennial Tradition in heavily corrupted form - purify it, and restore to its its proper foundation in supernaturalism.
    , @Jaakko Raipala
    I was disgusted by homosexuality even when I used to be a liberal individualist but I would say "consenting adults should have the right to do what they want in the privacy of their homes."

    Increasingly, this is not good enough and you are completely wrong if you think that liberals are winning on the homosexual question. No, it's modern Red Guards taking over now and they think that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. My individualist liberalism was good enough ten years ago but now you can't just say that you're willing to tolerate homosexuals without risking your job. We're heading towards obligatory participation in gay pride and liberalism is dying.

    I increasingly believe that history is a cycle. As generations pass, people forget the reasons why traditions and institutions were set up the way they originally were and conservatives are increasingly stuck just defending tradition for the sake of defending it without being able to paint a plausible picture of the consequences of choosing liberalism and dismantling tradition and institutions. Conservative eras turn into liberal eras as time passes.

    People growing up under conservative eras have a poor grasp of just how far the radicalism would go if the traditional and institutional restraints were dismantled. Liberal eras allow radicalism to grow unchecked and even once liberal leaders start realizing what is happening they're unable to resist since they're committed to the idea that "authoritarian" measures are unnecessary. Liberal eras turn into radical eras as time passes.

    Radical eras are a struggle over the political direction and the right to control the discourse to the point where the next generation won't even remember that there used to be differing opinions. One faction eventually wins, imposes its system on society by creating a set of institutions and traditions that cancel the liberalism and kick away the ladder that allowed them to climb to the top so that no one else can do the same. Radical eras turn into conservative eras and the cycle begins again.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:
    @Felix Keverich
    Do you think it is inevitable that tolerance of homosexuality must lead to Gay Marriage? To me Gay Marriage is one of those crazy Western fads, such as Diversity! or the Holocaust. Perhaps, India is reverting to norm, but without adopting Western craziness?

    Meanwhile in Russia:

    https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1039455821866913792

    Holy shit, if this is the kind of clown in leadership in the Russian military, Russia had better acquiesce to any commands of the U.S. military in Syria because I think U.S. military commanders would make quick and punishing work of this kind of stooge. It’d be like the current UFC heavyweight champ fighting a kid in a wheelchair with cerebral palsy. Is this the military Martyanov could stand up to U.S.??

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean
    Does this come before or after they prance about in high heels?
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Doesn't Russia have pretty significant overrepresentation among UFC championships?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Anonymous
    Holy shit, if this is the kind of clown in leadership in the Russian military, Russia had better acquiesce to any commands of the U.S. military in Syria because I think U.S. military commanders would make quick and punishing work of this kind of stooge. It’d be like the current UFC heavyweight champ fighting a kid in a wheelchair with cerebral palsy. Is this the military Martyanov could stand up to U.S.??

    Does this come before or after they prance about in high heels?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Anonymous
    Holy shit, if this is the kind of clown in leadership in the Russian military, Russia had better acquiesce to any commands of the U.S. military in Syria because I think U.S. military commanders would make quick and punishing work of this kind of stooge. It’d be like the current UFC heavyweight champ fighting a kid in a wheelchair with cerebral palsy. Is this the military Martyanov could stand up to U.S.??

    Doesn’t Russia have pretty significant overrepresentation among UFC championships?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. neutral says:
    @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    It has absolutely zero to do with arguments and everything to do with (((who))) controls the megaphone. You can blare basically ANY narrative long enough and eventually people will conform to it, any by ANY I include cannibalism, incest, pedophillia, human sacrifice, genocide, eating shit, anything you can possibly think of.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    eventually people will conform to it, any by ANY I include cannibalism, incest, pedophillia, human sacrifice, genocide, eating shit, anything you can possibly think of
     
    That's a bit too strong. People will conform if there are penalties, but when no one is listening, they will grumble about these things among close friends or family members.

    I talked to an owner of a cottage in a tourist destination who rents it out to tourists, and told me that all the German tourists were complaining about the refugees and the idiocy of their own government and media. Which is similar to what you see in German language anonymous comment sections. On the other hand, when among people they don't trust (among each other in public settings), they don't say anything against it, nor do they vote against it. That's pretty similar to what they did during the holocaust, when they knew something terrible was going on, and according to the Gestapo, kept complaining about it, but they did nothing and outwardly conformed to the official ideology.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    I’m not secular and I’m not “conservative”. Nobody with half a brain is “conservative”. (As everybody knows, “conservative” means “conserving the progressive values of when I was 25″.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    Values we see as “progressive” appeal to the autonomy seeking desire of humans; however that appetite, like other appetites, can be harmful in excess. Pushing back is merely the need to demonstrate that gluttony both of the caloric and demotic varieties is sinful as well as maladaptive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @neutral
    It has absolutely zero to do with arguments and everything to do with (((who))) controls the megaphone. You can blare basically ANY narrative long enough and eventually people will conform to it, any by ANY I include cannibalism, incest, pedophillia, human sacrifice, genocide, eating shit, anything you can possibly think of.

    eventually people will conform to it, any by ANY I include cannibalism, incest, pedophillia, human sacrifice, genocide, eating shit, anything you can possibly think of

    That’s a bit too strong. People will conform if there are penalties, but when no one is listening, they will grumble about these things among close friends or family members.

    I talked to an owner of a cottage in a tourist destination who rents it out to tourists, and told me that all the German tourists were complaining about the refugees and the idiocy of their own government and media. Which is similar to what you see in German language anonymous comment sections. On the other hand, when among people they don’t trust (among each other in public settings), they don’t say anything against it, nor do they vote against it. That’s pretty similar to what they did during the holocaust, when they knew something terrible was going on, and according to the Gestapo, kept complaining about it, but they did nothing and outwardly conformed to the official ideology.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. AaronB says:
    @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    Its because the Liberal message is fundamentally and basically correct and appeals to all our spiritual and moral intuitions. It is also old as mankind. All the great religions are Liberal.

    Conservatism, Right Wingism, is basically wrong, and appeals to our small minded, selfish, and stupid animal selves.

    The problem is today’s Liberalism is a heavily corrupted version of the Great Message.

    Conservatism, right wingism, etc – has never historically succeeded anywhere except for brief periods. It is based on short term animal selfishness.

    The sensibility of people on this blog will be a mere footnote in history, if that.

    What will eventually happen is a faction will arise within Liberalism itself, young intelligent men and women of an idealistic bent – i.e by definition not Right Wingers – and will “repair” Liberalism – which is nothing more than the Perennial Tradition in heavily corrupted form – purify it, and restore to its its proper foundation in supernaturalism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Pot isn't a basis for society.
    , @Talha

    All the great religions are Liberal.
     
    In proper historical context...there is no escaping conclusion.

    Note to Mr. Karlin; thanks for looking up the stats on the important questions that were raised in the previous thread. Much appreciated.

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @AaronB
    Its because the Liberal message is fundamentally and basically correct and appeals to all our spiritual and moral intuitions. It is also old as mankind. All the great religions are Liberal.

    Conservatism, Right Wingism, is basically wrong, and appeals to our small minded, selfish, and stupid animal selves.

    The problem is today's Liberalism is a heavily corrupted version of the Great Message.

    Conservatism, right wingism, etc - has never historically succeeded anywhere except for brief periods. It is based on short term animal selfishness.

    The sensibility of people on this blog will be a mere footnote in history, if that.

    What will eventually happen is a faction will arise within Liberalism itself, young intelligent men and women of an idealistic bent - i.e by definition not Right Wingers - and will "repair" Liberalism - which is nothing more than the Perennial Tradition in heavily corrupted form - purify it, and restore to its its proper foundation in supernaturalism.

    Pot isn’t a basis for society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Society is not an ultimate value.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. AaronB says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Pot isn't a basis for society.

    Society is not an ultimate value.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Talha says:
    @AaronB
    Its because the Liberal message is fundamentally and basically correct and appeals to all our spiritual and moral intuitions. It is also old as mankind. All the great religions are Liberal.

    Conservatism, Right Wingism, is basically wrong, and appeals to our small minded, selfish, and stupid animal selves.

    The problem is today's Liberalism is a heavily corrupted version of the Great Message.

    Conservatism, right wingism, etc - has never historically succeeded anywhere except for brief periods. It is based on short term animal selfishness.

    The sensibility of people on this blog will be a mere footnote in history, if that.

    What will eventually happen is a faction will arise within Liberalism itself, young intelligent men and women of an idealistic bent - i.e by definition not Right Wingers - and will "repair" Liberalism - which is nothing more than the Perennial Tradition in heavily corrupted form - purify it, and restore to its its proper foundation in supernaturalism.

    All the great religions are Liberal.

    In proper historical context…there is no escaping conclusion.

    Note to Mr. Karlin; thanks for looking up the stats on the important questions that were raised in the previous thread. Much appreciated.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Agree: AaronB
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Nznz
    Do secular conservatives have anything better than the it is icky argument? Because that seems to be falling flat on its face Vs. Liberal propaganda, now you do not have to like it, but you cannot deny it's persuasive power Vs. Conservative discourse. Basically why have liberals been so much better at packing their arguments, in a way that is psychologically palatable to people, Vs. Conservatives? Why are liberals so much better at understanding basic human psychology conservatives, otherwise the liberal message would not have been as successful as they as it is now? I mean even Sweden had a disfavorable view of homosexuality until the end of the 80s, what are the core reasons why conservatives lost the battle for hearts and minds Vs. Liberals?

    I was disgusted by homosexuality even when I used to be a liberal individualist but I would say “consenting adults should have the right to do what they want in the privacy of their homes.”

    Increasingly, this is not good enough and you are completely wrong if you think that liberals are winning on the homosexual question. No, it’s modern Red Guards taking over now and they think that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. My individualist liberalism was good enough ten years ago but now you can’t just say that you’re willing to tolerate homosexuals without risking your job. We’re heading towards obligatory participation in gay pride and liberalism is dying.

    I increasingly believe that history is a cycle. As generations pass, people forget the reasons why traditions and institutions were set up the way they originally were and conservatives are increasingly stuck just defending tradition for the sake of defending it without being able to paint a plausible picture of the consequences of choosing liberalism and dismantling tradition and institutions. Conservative eras turn into liberal eras as time passes.

    People growing up under conservative eras have a poor grasp of just how far the radicalism would go if the traditional and institutional restraints were dismantled. Liberal eras allow radicalism to grow unchecked and even once liberal leaders start realizing what is happening they’re unable to resist since they’re committed to the idea that “authoritarian” measures are unnecessary. Liberal eras turn into radical eras as time passes.

    Radical eras are a struggle over the political direction and the right to control the discourse to the point where the next generation won’t even remember that there used to be differing opinions. One faction eventually wins, imposes its system on society by creating a set of institutions and traditions that cancel the liberalism and kick away the ladder that allowed them to climb to the top so that no one else can do the same. Radical eras turn into conservative eras and the cycle begins again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    One faction eventually wins, imposes its system on society by creating a set of institutions and traditions that cancel the liberalism and kick away the ladder that allowed them to climb to the top so that no one else can do the same.
     
    Leninists and Bioleninists: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2018/01/21/leninism-and-bioleninism/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @Jaakko Raipala
    I was disgusted by homosexuality even when I used to be a liberal individualist but I would say "consenting adults should have the right to do what they want in the privacy of their homes."

    Increasingly, this is not good enough and you are completely wrong if you think that liberals are winning on the homosexual question. No, it's modern Red Guards taking over now and they think that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. My individualist liberalism was good enough ten years ago but now you can't just say that you're willing to tolerate homosexuals without risking your job. We're heading towards obligatory participation in gay pride and liberalism is dying.

    I increasingly believe that history is a cycle. As generations pass, people forget the reasons why traditions and institutions were set up the way they originally were and conservatives are increasingly stuck just defending tradition for the sake of defending it without being able to paint a plausible picture of the consequences of choosing liberalism and dismantling tradition and institutions. Conservative eras turn into liberal eras as time passes.

    People growing up under conservative eras have a poor grasp of just how far the radicalism would go if the traditional and institutional restraints were dismantled. Liberal eras allow radicalism to grow unchecked and even once liberal leaders start realizing what is happening they're unable to resist since they're committed to the idea that "authoritarian" measures are unnecessary. Liberal eras turn into radical eras as time passes.

    Radical eras are a struggle over the political direction and the right to control the discourse to the point where the next generation won't even remember that there used to be differing opinions. One faction eventually wins, imposes its system on society by creating a set of institutions and traditions that cancel the liberalism and kick away the ladder that allowed them to climb to the top so that no one else can do the same. Radical eras turn into conservative eras and the cycle begins again.

    One faction eventually wins, imposes its system on society by creating a set of institutions and traditions that cancel the liberalism and kick away the ladder that allowed them to climb to the top so that no one else can do the same.

    Leninists and Bioleninists: https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2018/01/21/leninism-and-bioleninism/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Polish Perspective

    In the longterm, I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s, which is to the contrary secularizing (and becoming more socially liberal).
     
    It'll be interesting to see whether Poland or India legalises gay marriage first. The Indian supreme court (re)legalised gay sex one week ago, after the Delhi High Court initially did it in 2009. This time it was done on an unanimous basis. The ruling Hindu nationalist party didn't object. India is converging with the West a lot faster culturally than it is economically.

    https://i.imgur.com/l4qUyyg.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/fAHpHVS.jpg

    It's worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a 'third gender' already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    While we conceive the West as more liberal than the Orient, this is a historical inversion. Homosexuality was not always frowned upon in these socities before European contact, and many of the anti-homosexuality laws were often the result of either European colonisation or cultural influence. So, it isn't necessarily the case that India is doing this purely to ape the West. Same can be said of Poland. We never had any laws under a free and sovereign rule restricting your sexuality or using the monopoly of state violence to regulate what people could or couldn't do in the bedroom.

    It’s worthwhile pointing out that India legalised transsexuals as a ‘third gender’ already back in 2014, long before the current trans craze in the West really got going.

    This is for the Hijra, an age-old group of eunuchs that exists in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Yes, eunuchs are still made today by illegal home operations. They’re rejected by society and reduced to beggar life, but somehow also considered sacred, giving blessings at weddings and births – that’s all really bizarre stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Anon 2 says:

    “I expect Russia’s figures to converge with Poland’s”

    Doubtful. In 2017 about 37% of Poland’s Catholics went to mass regularly
    (Poland is 93% Catholic). Attendance at Christmas and Easter would be
    much higher. This is to be compared with Dmitry’s figures of 2-3%.

    Because of its strength the Catholic Church was effectively the opposition
    party under Communism (1945-1989). No wonder that the overthrow
    of Marxism-Leninism began in Poland, first with the Solidarity movement
    in 1980-81, and then with the Round Table talks in early 1989. The most obvious
    Marxist lie was its materialism. I’d say that Poland is more spiritual than
    religious. If you are spiritual, then you perceive the Divine radiance
    indwelling in all things around you. But then Aldous Huxley already said
    that in The Doors of Perception. He needed psychedelics to realize this
    truth but that’s better than nothing.

    What is striking is Poland’s extremely low rates of social dysfunction
    (murder, abortion, rape, drug addiction, HIV, school shootings, etc),
    even compared to Western Europe. I think there is a correlation here
    with Poland’s spirituality. For example, many people believe that the
    dead are observing us and praying for us, maybe not continuously but
    often. So it’s not just Jesus Christ who is observing us and guiding us
    but our ancestors as well. This is known as the Communion of the
    Saints. Poland’s social dysfunction rates are so low they approach
    the Japanese levels, which is gratifying because as a pragmatist I believe
    that the main function of religion is to reduce social dysfunction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I am speaking of the percentage of people who believe in God. I expect those figures will converge with time. In fact, I would not be surprised if they are already equal between young Poles and Russians.

    Attending regular Orthodox services is much more demanding than attending Catholic ones, so they are not too comparable.

    Ethnic Russian dysfunction is primarily a function of the sovok era alcoholization epidemic, which is fading away.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @Anon 2
    "I expect Russia's figures to converge with Poland's"

    Doubtful. In 2017 about 37% of Poland's Catholics went to mass regularly
    (Poland is 93% Catholic). Attendance at Christmas and Easter would be
    much higher. This is to be compared with Dmitry's figures of 2-3%.

    Because of its strength the Catholic Church was effectively the opposition
    party under Communism (1945-1989). No wonder that the overthrow
    of Marxism-Leninism began in Poland, first with the Solidarity movement
    in 1980-81, and then with the Round Table talks in early 1989. The most obvious
    Marxist lie was its materialism. I'd say that Poland is more spiritual than
    religious. If you are spiritual, then you perceive the Divine radiance
    indwelling in all things around you. But then Aldous Huxley already said
    that in The Doors of Perception. He needed psychedelics to realize this
    truth but that's better than nothing.

    What is striking is Poland's extremely low rates of social dysfunction
    (murder, abortion, rape, drug addiction, HIV, school shootings, etc),
    even compared to Western Europe. I think there is a correlation here
    with Poland's spirituality. For example, many people believe that the
    dead are observing us and praying for us, maybe not continuously but
    often. So it's not just Jesus Christ who is observing us and guiding us
    but our ancestors as well. This is known as the Communion of the
    Saints. Poland's social dysfunction rates are so low they approach
    the Japanese levels, which is gratifying because as a pragmatist I believe
    that the main function of religion is to reduce social dysfunction.

    I am speaking of the percentage of people who believe in God. I expect those figures will converge with time. In fact, I would not be surprised if they are already equal between young Poles and Russians.

    Attending regular Orthodox services is much more demanding than attending Catholic ones, so they are not too comparable.

    Ethnic Russian dysfunction is primarily a function of the sovok era alcoholization epidemic, which is fading away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Follow from *akarlin.com* and/or this *feed*. You can also comment with *your money*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS