Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Another kind of “creationism”
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO “MASTER INTELLECTS” CREATORS OF THE “RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENT DESIGN” AND THE “POLITICAL/SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENT DESIGN”?
Many people are so fascinated in attacking “creationism” and “intelligent design” that they are not paying attention to another kind of “creationism” that is taking place in the world today. This “new creationism,” however, may be more “intrinsically absurd” than that one of Dr. Robert Melamede of the University of Colorado.
Fears about religious creationism essentially spring from an argument that maintains that the universe and all things were produced, and continue to exist only through the decision, plan and action of a supernatural agent (God). And that kind of knowledge, our scientists and other frightened adherents say, is a “threat” to science education and should have no place in the scientific community. Fine!
What about that kind of knowledge, presumably “scientific,” that from our political SCIENCES departments in universities teaches us that ”democracy is the best form of government,” and that only through the decision, plan and action of a superpower or imperialist super agent (U.S.A) imposing such best “intelligent design” in the world, it would be a better place to live? I am not using the words “imposing” and “best” arbitrarily. Let us see a simple illustration from State Department spokesman Sean McCormack who recently, while denying an U.S. invasion in Venezuela, said: “Our issue is with states that don’t govern in a democratic manner.” Are you with me?
Well, you would argue that religion and politics are quite different matters, and I agree. But, as we know, analogies are scientific tools used precisely to generate scientific knowledge between quite different matters. All I am doing here is offering an analogical argument between what I see as “political/scientific creationism” and “religious creationism.” Is there any significant difference between the God’s “intelligent design” and the superpower’s “intelligent design” (“best form of government”)?
I am not saying that “democracy” is something “bad” or that this political system lacks causes for pride. The issue is that we, as a superpower, are institutionalizing this “best form” of government in the world as the product of a “scientific design” through electoral politics, social engineering, wars, market equilibrium, and not as the human action of authentic and immediate actors. If not, why have we made an issue with other societies that historically have undertaken “different forms” of government (Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Iraq, etc,)?
The answer is simple: Those “different forms” of government cannot be “intelligent designs.” Why not? Because, according to the imperialist plan, those nations cannot have an independent “purpose” except be part of the world capitalist structure that sociologists like Immanuel Wallerstein have called “world-system”?
What is the difference, then, between the two “master intellects” creators of the “religious intelligent design” and the “political/scientific intelligent design”?
--Wilfredo Gutiérrez.
-----------/
Fears about religious creationism essentially spring from an argument that maintains that the universe and all things were produced, and continue to exist only through the decision, plan and action of a supernatural agent (God). And that kind of knowledge, our scientists and other frightened adherents say, is a “threat” to science education and should have no place in the scientific community. Fine!
What about that kind of knowledge, presumably “scientific,” that from our political SCIENCES departments in universities teaches us that ”democracy is the best form of government,” and that only through the decision, plan and action of a superpower or imperialist super agent (U.S.A) imposing such best “intelligent design” in the world, it would be a better place to live? I am not using the words “imposing” and “best” arbitrarily. Let us see a simple illustration from State Department spokesman Sean McCormack who recently, while denying an U.S. invasion in Venezuela, said: “Our issue is with states that don’t govern in a democratic manner.” Are you with me?
Well, you would argue that religion and politics are quite different matters, and I agree. But, as we know, analogies are scientific tools used precisely to generate scientific knowledge between quite different matters. All I am doing here is offering an analogical argument between what I see as “political/scientific creationism” and “religious creationism.” Is there any significant difference between the God’s “intelligent design” and the superpower’s “intelligent design” (“best form of government”)?
I am not saying that “democracy” is something “bad” or that this political system lacks causes for pride. The issue is that we, as a superpower, are institutionalizing this “best form” of government in the world as the product of a “scientific design” through electoral politics, social engineering, wars, market equilibrium, and not as the human action of authentic and immediate actors. If not, why have we made an issue with other societies that historically have undertaken “different forms” of government (Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Iraq, etc,)?
The answer is simple: Those “different forms” of government cannot be “intelligent designs.” Why not? Because, according to the imperialist plan, those nations cannot have an independent “purpose” except be part of the world capitalist structure that sociologists like Immanuel Wallerstein have called “world-system”?
What is the difference, then, between the two “master intellects” creators of the “religious intelligent design” and the “political/scientific intelligent design”?
--Wilfredo Gutiérrez.
-----------/
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$40.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
In the case of Christianity, to promote a patriarchal authoritarian deity, the belief in which sets people up to accept in turn the whims of the patriarchal authoritarian HUMANS (1st century CE Romans) who hashed this one up out of several traditions for precisely this purpose.
In the case of "democracy," this same beneficiary class is always on the lookout for any half-believable pretext for expanding their gigantic personal fortunes, aka empires, and this is merely the current variation of the all-time classic: "civilizing the savages," "checking the advance of tyranny," etc. ad pyookeum.
If the formulation called "American democracy" were really about egalitarianism or popular sovereignty, I'd be all for it, but it's just a heinous manipulative parody of all that. First the beneficiary class bribes and cons and blackmails everybody into accepting their own demented preferences, and then ONLY after they're SURE this has worked do they let you anywhere near the ridiculous token ritual called 'voting.' An HONEST dictatorship would be preferable in one way, at least: those with a clear sober understanding of things could at least find some like-minded company.
Thank you for your insightful comment. I agree with you — there is no difference. This is the second time I learn something definitely interesting as reaction to my article “Another kind of ‘creationism.’” The first time that someone responded to it, I learned more about the importance of my analogy, in which I tried to show how this new era of imperialism, or new era of creationism, which is the same as the old creationism, is sold to us disguised as scientific.
-- Wilfredo.