Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

shanoxilt wrote

the term "materialism" doesn't just describe a physical one-substance monism, or else it would have popped up in philosophical language a lot earlier than the late 17th century.

But it does, and it did. The fact that whites overlooked it in Asia and suppressed it in Europe doesn't change the fact of its existence.

you're wrong that this should mark them as irreligious,

They specifically call out the priestly caste as a fraud.

"Spells, incantations, rituals, even the duties of the four varnas [castes] - all these are nonsense, invented for the livelihood of those destitute of knowledge and manliness. If a beast slain in the Jvotistoma rite [Vedic ritual] goes straight to heaven, why doesn't the sacrificer offer his father instead? If offerings to priests can feed ancestors in heaven, how is it that that person standing on top of a house cannot be gratified by food served inside? They cannot - because all such long-distance gratification is buffoonery!"

this does not mean we should throw around terms like "religious privilege" as if muslims of colour experience the same kind of social advantage in the us as white evangelical christians,

But they do, in historically Muslim areas.

Atheist bloggers in Pakistan have been murdered for "blasphemy".

3

[deleted] wrote

2

shanoxilt wrote

European materialism starts with Epicurus, not Diderot. Please, learn this.

only if colonialism never happened? only if imperialism is not still with us?

All Abrahamic religions were spread by the sword. This predates European exploitation of the Middle East.

unless you think atheists in the west experience a harsher degree of discrimination than muslims or jews this can't be something you can defend.

You've clearly never talked to an infidel of color, so I think you should end this conversation here.

3