Theists worship God (i.e. an invisible man in the sky)
Capitalists worship Billionaires (i.e. a rich man in a mansion)
Socialists worship Governments (i.e. powerful men in a parliament)
Liberarians and liberals worship Freedom and Personal Autonomy. They do not bow down to any elites or 'saviours', real or imaginary.
Dolly Parton 🙏
shareShe seems nice, but honestly, I'd rather worship an imaginary invisible man in the sky than simp for *any* existing human-being. I suspect you're being funny/glib, but the point remains, that I don't think it's healthy to invest any 'faith' in any one human-being, or indeed any small collection of human-beings (it potentially breeds inferiority/self-loathing in the worshipper, and egotism and arrogance, and, at its most extreme, despotism and 'divine right', in the worshipped). Instead, we should strive for full equality and democracy, as well as the upmost personal respect and dignity (which isn't the same as supremacy/superiority, but most certainly doesn't involve putting another person on a pedastal).
shareGee, I bet you’re really fun at parties.
You’re clever to have picked up on my flippancy, but there is some truth to the fact that I have found more solace in the words and positivity of her music than I ever could in ancient religious texts that revel in judgement and telling me all the ways I’ll burn in hell for eternity. Not to mention that to my knowledge Ms Parton has not been responsible for untold suffering, religious wars, systemic abuse of children etc. etc.
Now I know that some may point to the irony that Dolly is a very religious person herself with her strong Christian faith, but to me it’s always been quite clear that she only ever promotes the loving and caring aspects of her faith and has never used it as a crutch to hate on people of various persuasions, as so many pious people tend to do. She reminds my of my own mother in that way, which is another reason I find her to be such a beautiful soul.
But no, I don’t worship her. Good pick-up 👍
Like I say, I'm no theist, but as you've observed with respect to Ms Parton, religion and theism isn't innately evil. The exploitation of religion in order to subjugate various groups, whether they be gay, trans, women, Jewish, Muslim, or some other people, is what's evil, and were it not religion, it would be some other sort of movement (after all, the Nazis were fundamentally secular, that would be exploited for such malign ends).
One either has or hasn't faith, but I can no more force a person to stop believing in God than they can force me to believe in such a thing. And as long as their faith doesn't lead them to hate and oppress other people, good for them if it makes them happy, as I suspect is the case with Ms Parton.
That said, as much as I find religion fundamentally irrational, it's precisely because God doesn't exist (as far as I am concerned) that I find the worship of God much less innately dangerous than the worship of a *real* human-being, whether they're Hitler, Trump, Lenin, Mao, or even a celebrity. A fantastical/imaginary being can't have a strop and unleash figurative hell if they're disrespected or disobeyed, and a non-existent 'deity' can't personally exploit anyone's faith.
My end-users worship me. It's pretty sweet being god-tier. 🤣🤣
shareSocialists don't worship govts or powerful parliamentarians any more than people with a Disney+ membership worship subscription fees.
Libertarians love the idea of being seen as free and autonomous. It's not as simple as they make it sound. What if you were a libertarian but you also felt drawn to or a calling to work in public service, like as a coastguard (by the way, proportionally there's not a lot of coastguards. Yet they dictate sea rescues to the rest of us, does that mean they're the elite?) , or an engineer who built bridges or other public works. Isn't their vocation taking autonomy away from people who could rescue themselves from the sea, or from those who should create their own infrastructure rather than "worship" and bow down to the "elites" who use their training and experience for these things?
I'm a libertarian socialist; certainly not a right-wing one, but as much as I believe 'big government' is often a 'necessary evil' in order to fund health-care, social care, education and other essential public services, I instinctively distrust the idea of investing power in a small number of individuals, and in my experience there are some staunch idealogues who worship the State in a figurative sense, rather than seeing it as a 'necessary evil' as I do. In other words, the State should always exist to serve the people, rather than vice-versa.
Also, coastguards and engineers may work in behalf of the State, but they aren't an extension of the State per se. They could theoretically exist within the private sector or as volunteers (not that I would personally advise either option in place of the State), but in this case, the State funds their work. And I'm 100% in favour of that. Once again, I am a libertarian socialist. I believe that the State is necessary, but that it also should be no larger than it needs to be in order to provide essential services. Not because I am anti-tax; on the contrary, I don't think the wealthy, or even the middle-class, and certainly not corporations, are taxed nearly enough right now, although I know many disagree. But because I believe that communities, rather than remote hierarchial top-down governments, should be empowered to determine their needs and interests.
As it happens, I partly work within government, albeit local government, but my interest is in ensuring that politicians are, wherever possible, delegates for their communities and electorates (except in those extreme instances where communities have been exploited by dangerous, bigoted and ill-informed populist influences, but even in those cases, it's important to be as transparent and respectful as possible to voters, rather than condescending and opaque, and make it clear that one is not innately superior to one's electorate but simply that one is acting on...
...on the advice of both the electorate's wishes *and* where necessary (e.g. climate change, public health care, minority rights) the advice of individuals who have a *particular* expertise in an area (preferably with reference to either legitimate qualifications/credentials, or some credible claim to personal experience/vested interests). I would just prefer to avoid a system in which the State, and its actors, are essentially worshipped and treated as innately superior to the people they are supposed to represent, and that's where a more libertarian socialist system, which minimises the hierarchical, top-down approach, comes in.
shareGood food and good D. 🤭🤭😁😁
shareGinsberg is my God now.
https://media.timeout.com/images/105969648/image.jpg