It's not Christianity itself, it's just the piece of the superstructure that won out and became the prevalent cultural religion tied to feudalism/capitalism in the West. Obviously there was feudalism in other parts of the world that weren't Christian. So it's a thing that is bad in this particular moment of spacetime, but not throughout all of spacetime.
However, if we're going to indulge the usage of religious culture to get a point across, I suggest we oppose it on the same terms and embrace the "evil" side. Because the evil side isn't actually evil, it's the good side that's materially bad.
You can't fight it on its own terms because it axiomatically defines one side as good and one side as evil. Acts are pious because God loves them and God loves them because they are pious. It's obvious circular logic. Cleansing the uncivilized hordes in the name of God was good because it was done in the name of God. Materially it was bad.
As leftists we have material reasons to oppose colonialism, feudalism, capitalism, imperialism. The immaterial version of that is challenging God's authority which falls in the realm of Satan. Historically it wasn't only Satanists who opposed Christianity. But I'm talking about theologically, we go with Satan. We don't let them pass on the idea that Christians who do bad things aren't real Christians, but possessed by evil. We know evil doesn't materially exist, but on their terms it does. But it's not actual evil.
What I'm getting at is a delicate dance between material reality and idealistic nonsense. You do the nonsense, but you do it knowingly and for material reasons. It's a synthesis.
Now Pagans did oppose Christianity, but they were once the dominant cultural power. This goes back to the dialectical thing of recognizing a moment in spacetime. If this were per-Christian Europe, I wouldn't be championing Pagans, at least not all of them. They would hold a similar spot as Christians do now. In that moment of spacetime, things are different and you do different things.
Idk, Christianity has been particularly responsible for a lot of horrors and I don’t think it’s just because Christianity was the tool that was there at the time, but because of the specific tenets of that religion and how it encourages it’s adherents to act.
Now Pagans did oppose Christianity, but they were once the dominant cultural power
Ngl I largely think they were correct to do so. Did they oppress Christianity because they were the dominant cultural power and that’s what dominant cultural powers do? Or did they oppress Christianity because they correctly understood it to be dangerous?
I do support your material-anti-Christianity though, “God is real and he’s evil and Christians are the servants of objective evil” is a great hit and also the second half is objectively true
It's not Christianity itself, it's just the piece of the superstructure that won out and became the prevalent cultural religion tied to feudalism/capitalism in the West. Obviously there was feudalism in other parts of the world that weren't Christian. So it's a thing that is bad in this particular moment of spacetime, but not throughout all of spacetime.
However, if we're going to indulge the usage of religious culture to get a point across, I suggest we oppose it on the same terms and embrace the "evil" side. Because the evil side isn't actually evil, it's the good side that's materially bad.
You can't fight it on its own terms because it axiomatically defines one side as good and one side as evil. Acts are pious because God loves them and God loves them because they are pious. It's obvious circular logic. Cleansing the uncivilized hordes in the name of God was good because it was done in the name of God. Materially it was bad.
As leftists we have material reasons to oppose colonialism, feudalism, capitalism, imperialism. The immaterial version of that is challenging God's authority which falls in the realm of Satan. Historically it wasn't only Satanists who opposed Christianity. But I'm talking about theologically, we go with Satan. We don't let them pass on the idea that Christians who do bad things aren't real Christians, but possessed by evil. We know evil doesn't materially exist, but on their terms it does. But it's not actual evil.
What I'm getting at is a delicate dance between material reality and idealistic nonsense. You do the nonsense, but you do it knowingly and for material reasons. It's a synthesis.
Now Pagans did oppose Christianity, but they were once the dominant cultural power. This goes back to the dialectical thing of recognizing a moment in spacetime. If this were per-Christian Europe, I wouldn't be championing Pagans, at least not all of them. They would hold a similar spot as Christians do now. In that moment of spacetime, things are different and you do different things.
Idk, Christianity has been particularly responsible for a lot of horrors and I don’t think it’s just because Christianity was the tool that was there at the time, but because of the specific tenets of that religion and how it encourages it’s adherents to act.
Ngl I largely think they were correct to do so. Did they oppress Christianity because they were the dominant cultural power and that’s what dominant cultural powers do? Or did they oppress Christianity because they correctly understood it to be dangerous?
I do support your material-anti-Christianity though, “God is real and he’s evil and Christians are the servants of objective evil” is a great hit and also the second half is objectively true