the sword and the lie

Great quote from theWorld’s Shortest Libertarian FAQ

Libertarians are frequently characterized as “conservative on economic issues and liberal on personal issues.”  That’s not a bad definition, but it’s kind of like saying vodka is “half screwdriver and half white Russian.”  It implies that libertarians are being inconsistent, whereas in fact libertarianism is more consistent than either conservatism or liberalism.  I prefer to say, “Conservatives are frequently libertarian on economic issues, and liberals are frequently libertarian on personal issues.”  (I would also say that conservatives are usually authoritarian on personal issues, and liberals are usually authoritarian on economic issues.)

Those are the refreshingly direct words ofJohann Hari.

The man who introduced to humanity the idea that there was One God was Pharaoh Akhenaten, some thirty-three centuries ago. …. Akhenaten declared that the sun-god Aten was the only true deity, and all other Gods must be discredited and denied. It was a crucial moment in human history, a radical break by a “heretic Pharaoh” with all preceding superstitions. At that moment, he first formed the idea that was later refined by Moses and Mohammed and Maimonidies (and that’s just the ‘M’s) until it became humanity’s most successful superstition. But it was a lie – a political trick to maximise his power. Many Egyptologists now believe that Akhenaten only gave birth to monotheism because the priesthood of the rival god Amun was becoming too strong for the comfort of the royal house. At the very moment of its birth, monotheism was made up for the political convenience of man.

Now I don’t believe monotheism is particularly worse than polytheism. In fact, there might be a case that the simplicity of monotheism allowed for religion to become more about personal faith, and thereby less about institutional power: which I think was a good thing, because it loosened the ties between church and state, thereby making both weaker. But monotheism is the enemy at hand (Hinduism being the only major polytheistic religion left), so it’s useful to see how corrupt it was from the beginning.

The most important lesson for young people shoud be to make their own lessons. The only dogma that should be stomached in education is to question all dogmas. The most tempting dogma a person will face in her life will be that of salvation through religion. Most people are completely unarmed in the face of such a powerful lie, because they are not allowed to much discuss religion in their state-run schools for fear of a political backlash. Contrary to the beliefs of those who think state schooling is the only way to promote and protect secularism, the only way students can get the intellectual training they need to stay intellectually honest in the face of heavenly promises is through private schooling, like that on offer at the budding ‘Sunday schools for atheists’ covered recently by Time Magazine. Here’s a sample of the kind of open, frank discussion of faith and beliefs that you’ll never find in a state-run school:

Down the hall in the kitchen, older kids engaged in a Socratic conversation with class leader Bishop about the role persuasion plays in decision-making. He tried to get them to see that people who are coerced into renouncing their beliefs might not actually change their minds but could be acting out of self-preservation–an important lesson for young atheists who may feel pressure to say they believe in God.

(Cross-posted at Edutheria.)

My theory is that the chief motivating factor behind both the state and religion is aggrandizement. The more one can control the actions of others, the more one can exploit them. And the two most effective ways of controlling others is (1) through force and (2) by convincing people to uncritically believe what you say: in other words, through the sword and the lie. Secular and spiritual authority figures always give lofty reasons for their positions: security, stability, and prosperity in this world and the next. But these justifications are masks for self-interest. Rulers have always prospered more than the ruled: a fact that is often recognized. What is neglected is, especially in earlier times, the material comfort of spiritual authorities in relation to their “flock.”

Dear reader, I am a 29 year old educator based in the San Francisco Bay area. I have a great many ideas: about education, politics, economics, history and philosophy. In order to communicate and refine my ideas, today I am launching four blogs. The blogs will each have a central thesis, around which most of the posts will center. My intention is for each blog to be like a book, ever in progress: what I term a “perpetual book.” The perpetual books and their respective theses are the following: The Sword and the Lie That the state and religion are chiefly vehicles for aggrandizement through violence and deceit. The Starving Edge That liberty provides prosperity for all, particularly the poorest among us, and coercion engenders suffering. Edutheria That we as a society and as individuals could achieve so much more if education were not strangled by the state. The Sensible Synthesis This blog is intended to provide a philosophical underpinning for the other three. It will largely be about epistemology and ethics. Best Regards, Daniel Sanchez