God doesn’t kill people, Governments do.


maxresdefault

 

 

 

 

 

Religion, regardless of the extent to which you acknowledge its validity, has historically been misrepresented as a source of conflict. Piety and ethos are often the VESSEL chosen by GOVERNMENTS to justify oppression or conquest.

Pope Urban II, a governmental figure paraded as religious symbol, declared the first “Crusade” in 1080 AD under the guise of “liberating the holy land”. This was a border conflict given a similar religious pretext to that of his dictatorial seat. Muslims were progressing into Europe and threatened the overall impact of the Catholic church. Challenging this progress wasn’t a religiously driven decision,  rather one made by kings and cardinals for the sake of their own political existence.

The record of Spanish conquest throughout Meso and South America have a similar ring. While spreading Catholic virtue is often the cited rationale, their own tragic documentation shows an unapologetic resource grab grounded largely in Isabella’s thirst for personal power and wealth. Gold, silver and the clinical narcissism of European monarchy drove this genocide – god had nothing to do with it.

For a modern example we can examine any number of 21st century Islamic states. A young Muslim living in Syria joins ISIS because he is poor, under-educated and angry, not due to any authentic fundamentalism. Disgruntled, privileged youth flee Oxford, not in search of Muhammad’s grace or 40 virgins, but for rather a silly and mundane excuse – their parents allowed them so little hardship they rashly travel in search of it. Maniacal imams understand this brand of despair and capitalize on it like some desert version of a Wall Street suit playing the market.

We repeat the errors of antiquity because we so often don’t understand – or flatly deny – their true origin. Spirituality, a valuable and healthy human process, too often takes a fall in place of man’s true arch-nemesis – melancholy and powerful states.

Advertisements

Syrian intervention represents a historical cul-de-sac.


julius caesarIt’s sad how often the idea of “moral high ground” has been manipulated to justify the selfish initiative of tyrants and theological enslavement of nations. To our clear detriment, the ploy is effective more often than not.

Sunni clerics employ it to subjugate woman and justify 10 year-old suicide bombers. Joseph Smith spawned a Mormon religion whose perplexedly outrageous tenets are only over -shadowed by its congregation’s sheepish acceptance of them. Isabella tortured, maimed and dispossessed her own people as well as those a continent away.

Julius Caesar marched on Rome and her Republican Government, touting that the poor must be “freed from the tyranny and wickedness of aristocracy”. He failed to mention what he was marching back from- the slaughter and sale of 250,000 “poor” Gauls. Napoleon claimed monarchy amoral and conquered Europe on those grounds, only to crown himself emperor for life at Notre Dame.

Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Lenin and Stalin used the morality of “economic fairness” to win the admiration of their people – an avenue then exploited to genocide a generation of scholars, philosophers, poets and painters.

History has given us too many examples to count. Blaming these misguided acts on inherent wickedness seems too simple, a cheap method of shifting responsibility onto man as a whole. If collective responsibility rests anywhere it may be in the opposite mentality – a natural sheepishness. Those among us who possess the traits of Caesar, Mao or Lenin – a deeply narcissistic sense of personal value relative to others and the willingness to exploit it – are few and far between. Our true plight lies in a devastating side product of these rare personality flaws in conjunction – that they often lead to power.