Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 00:19:47 -0700
From: Lisa Rogers <eqwq.lrogers-AT-state.ut.us>
Subject:  Re: the Christian Coalition and the NOI, again -Reply


I didn't say 'religious revival'.  I was responding to ChrisB's talk
of "anomie" and a mobile population's need for community.

If a sense of belonging and social connection was the problem, it
seems to me that joining the Unitarians would be a sufficient cure.

You may well be right that the "dynamics that lead to revival are
conducive to oppression."  I think that Chris was asking something
about what those current conditions are.  I disagreed with his
suggested reasons for the 'appeal' of the christian right in US.  I'm
more interested in what you think.  

What are those "dynamics" and do you think they are operating now,
and in what form?

Lisa

>>> Rahul Mahajan <rahul-AT-peaches.ph.utexas.edu>  2/16/96, 06:10pm >>>

Lisa:
>I don't think anomie is enough.  A turn to 'religion' per se does
not >necessarily need to take the oppressive and intolerant form of
the >christian/islamic rightwing in the US.

Do you really think so, Lisa? Give us an example of a religious
revival that has not taken an oppressive form. I can hardly think of
any, from
Calvinism in Holland to Methodism in England to the Great Awakening
in the
U.S. to the rise of Islam in Iran after 1979 to the Hindu resurgence
in
India from mid-80's to the rise of Catholicism in Poland after the
"fall of communism." And, of course, there are the examples you
pointed out.
Theoretically, I can imagine a nonoppressive religious revival, but
practically I don't expect to see one in my lifetime. Lib theology
doesn't count, of course; the religion was already alive and kicking
there.

This does not, of course, mean that every structure of religion is
inherently oppressive, or anything of the kind. I just think that the
dynamics that lead to revival are conducive to oppression.

Rahul




     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------