State Religion Unavoidable. Now Republican Secularism. Or Die

Give Me A State, I Will Show You A Religion:

Any state needs a way to tie up its citizens together again, after whatever trials and divisions they have been through. Trials and divisions there always are.

Said otherwise: having a state means having a religion. As the regime changes, so will the religion.

A clear example is Rome. In the five centuries of continual regime change, from the collapse of the Republic, to the establishment of the Frankish Empire in 507 (defeat of the Goths), Rome continually changed religions. There was the Imperial Cult, and later the cult around “Sol Invictus”. The Nicene Faith of Constantine (325 CE) was not the “Christian Republic” of the Franks (although both were outwardly “Catholic”).

Real Revolutions Need, And Are, New Religions.

Real Revolutions Need, And Are, New Religions.

[Demachy, Fete de L’Etre Supreme.]

In the USA, the de facto religion has been a mix of secularism and obsequious reverence to “Jesus Christ”, a guy supposed to say good things, whom one is supposed to love, to prove one is so good, one can go shoot the Indian heathens in full good conscience, and religious justification. Amen.

Thus, not believing in “god”, or Jesus-love, in the USA, tends to show one is not looking for justification to dispose of Indians and the like (Saddam Hussein), and thus one is treacherous to the nation.

The necessity of a state to have a religion is why, after a revolution, or serious change of regime, any really new state that fought a previous state (of things) dominated by a previous religion, establish a new religion.

An example is Henry VIII, establishing the Anglican Church, or what happened throughout German speaking lands after Luther appeared, and many local lords opted to play a game with the new religion, Reform, to further their own power. Even the French Revolution introduced the “Culte de l’Être suprême “.

This is why all significantly new regime, such as the “Socialist/Communist” regimes establish “Personality Cults”, which are religions by another name.

The vanishing of the old religions in Europe is directly related to the progressive political changes there: the Nazis hid behind “Gott”: “Gott Mit Uns” (God with us) was the motto of the SS. All other old regimes were tied to Christianism. As the regimes lost power, because of the rise of the European Union, if not outright apocalypse (Germany, Austro-Hungary, Italian monarchy, and countless smaller empires… in the “imperare” sense), the old religion lost its reason for being.

It has been replaced by a mild version of the Republican religion, which was very strong in France, ever since 1789.

The Republican religion was actually strong before that, throughout the centuries, simmering below the surface. Thus, even during the Middle Ages, republics were allowed within the Renovated (Roman) Empire. Venice was the most famous, and Charlemagne let it be (although Venice had a gigantic fleet, and the Franks very little).

This underground Republicanism is why King Louis the XVI decided to create the American republic. Yes, create: without massive French support the pathetically weak American Revolution would have failed. Louis was told by his advisers, his cabinet members, and his own brother, that he was creating a Republic, and that he would be next. He was explicitly told that he had lost his head, and that this decapitation would be made public all too soon. His brother kindly hanged the famous painting of the decapitation of the English monarch, upon Parliamentary vote (the exact same mechanism that would cost Louis his head). Louis shrugged.

Why? Louis, a deeply religious man, deep down inside himself, having tried everything else, had clearly deduced, subconsciously, that it was time for a new religion. A new way to tie the People together again. So Louis convoked the “General Estates”. The “Third Estate” (namely not the aristocracy and the Catholic Church) promptly proclaimed itself to be a Constituent Assembly (similar to the one then sieging in the USA).

Louis indeed lost his head. But he went to death very calmly, in full respect, in full faith, of the new Republic that he had contributed to create. Louis was a sort of real Jesus Christ, dying from his own mechanism.

A lot of the trouble of the European Union have to do with not having enough of a common Republic, to have faith in it. Let’s have enough faith in the Republic, for the European Union to become a new religion. Otherwise, it will fail.

And this true, worldwide.

Secularism, living in one’s age, is not new: it has been around for millions of years, for the most successful, precisely our ancestors: others died off. Secularism, living in one’s age, is part of human ethology. Fighting secularism is fighting the essence of what it means to be human.

Secularism is another word for accepting science and technology. Those have never changed faster. States which don’t adopt and create them swiftly will be left behind: China has understood this very well.

Yet, to create significantly new science and technology one needs intelligence, thus enough democracy to be called a Republic. Absent the preceding, states who are not Secular and Republican enough, will have a higher probability to lose the next big war (when push comes to shove, and the seas rise big time).

We are in the age of Republican Secularism. This is all the religion we need. But we need it bad.

Patrice Ayme’

P/S: To broach a subject I generally avoid: does the preceding mean Israel will die, as the Crusader States did? Well, any regime comparison is relative to its environment. But it sure means that “Orthodox Judaism” is a deadly danger for Israel. It certainly means the EU will die, lest it accelerates progress and democracy enough to look better than the alternative.

Tags: , , ,

10 Responses to “State Religion Unavoidable. Now Republican Secularism. Or Die”

  1. gmax Says:

    Why don’t you do to Xtianity what you did for Islam? Write down a few of the murderous insanities underlying that primitive sect? You know like when Lord Jesus Christ orders to bring non believers to him, to kill them?

    It’s in Luke something, one of the Evangels.


  2. Lovell Says:

    “A lot of the trouble of the European Union have to do with not having enough of a common Republic, to have faith in it. Let’s have enough faith in the Republic, for the European Union to become a new religion.”

    Uh-oh…coming from you Patrice, that really looks like trouble.

    Do you see that faith being shared by the Spaniards? The Germans? The Danes? How about the Brits? The Greeks?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Battery low… But yes… The Brits are far gone, though… But it does not matter


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Ok, all right. The Germans want to be like the French, they are trying hard, and, although not all the way there, they clearly are allies of the French Republic against Hitler, Prussia, the Kaiser, Luther, etc…

      This is the crux: Franco-Germania, reconstituted. The rest shall follow.
      The Brits have gone mad, but their disease can be cured. It’s mostly an Anglo-British malady, and one day I write an essay on it. In the end, it’s irrelevant because they, too, will do as the French say. (That they know, and it’s part of what drives them nuts.)

      Actually, the problem to a great extent, was Franco-French, because France pretty much does as she pleases. I posted a comment on Krugman on precisely this. I should extend it…


    • Lovell Says:

      There’s only one way for that faith to come through : a pan-European economic prosperity. But with Juncker prescribing more belt-tightening while Italian and Spanish young adults have trouble finding jobs, I’m wondering how that faith could possibly take root.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        The real problem is with France. France can decide whatever, being the core of the European Union. De facto. However, France, starting with Trichet and other crazies to do austerity and the strong Mark/Franc/Euro. That was part of a whole voodoo package, still in force.

        So that France is deciding to impose a deficit of 4.5% in the next two years (in total violation of the “Stability Pact”), is a good sign. With interest rates less than 1% on the French gov. ten year bond, it’s a no-brainer.


  3. EugenR Says:

    You said ortodox judaism is dangerous to Israel. I fully agree. To add to it, judaism as contrary to Islam and Christianity is not a missionary religion. There is kind of inside missionary system in judaism to bring back secular jews to faith. But as to gentile non jews, judaism is opened to them after learning the basis of Jewish tradition and after the orthodox rabbi is persuaded that the new convert truly excepted the jewish faith. Of course it is not an easy one. I have to add that the process of converting to judaism has nothing to do with understanding the basics of this fight.

    As to Europe, it lost its faith in itself, after realising, what harendous crimes it committed to humanity. Unfortunately exactly when Europe became human, and droped all its murderous faith systems it created, be it Christianity, Communism, fascism, Nazism, the fanatic Islam raised its murderous head, end Europe has no tools, to cope with this phenomena.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      We agree about the case of the hyper Orthodox Jews. The philosopher Isaac Berlin said after the creation of Israel: “They listened to Hitler, not to us”. I don’t agree… THEN. What “they” should have done is to read Hitler more carefully, and understand the hatred Jewish Orthodoxy elicited in a guy like Hitler. Not to excuse the part-Jewish Hitler, but to make Orthodox Jews, with their we-are-the-elected-people mien, realize they are partly responsible of the will to exterminate them. (There is much more to say on the subject: the Wehrmacht had no less than 160,000 Jewish soldiers, and many partook… in the Holocaust!!!!!!!!!!)

      The Franks knew how to deal with Islam. I kept the essay brief, to the point (I was running out of time and electric juice). But the Franks viewed Islam as a Christian sect. They applied maximum force to it (and to the Church at the same time).

      The “tool” problem is 100% philosophical. The philosophers were just not smart enough and too corrupt (Sartre, De Beauvoir and their sycophants and fellow travelers…) I feel very equipped, being half-Algerian! 😉
      My armories, as I didn’t say… 😉


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: