Of slaves, religions and history

Can anyone doubt that we are still living with the consequences of history? Of course, this is true in many ways, but I'm thinking predominantly of the effects of religion--namely, the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). Before you click the 'next' button, I'm not here to rant about religion today, but more to wonder on how similar events and circumstances can effect different peoples in so dramatically different ways.

More precisely, I'm interested in how two groups of people, enslaved and mistreated throughout recorded history--namely, Jewish and African peoples--can have had such a different effect on the world. While the differences can be seen in many areas, simple observation has to suggest that, while Africans and their descendants have had a relatively minor effect on the world (outside of their more recently achieved domination in sports and music), the Jewish people have been at the center of events and ideas that have, and continue to, crucially effect the world--I'm speaking, of course, about their creation of a monotheistic religion, it's progenitors, and the conflicts that has spawned throughout the world.

There can be little argument that both groups spent a significant part of their early history enslaved (by the likes of the Egyptians, Romans and many others). However, while Africans continued to be enslaved by various groups until quite recently, the Jews liberated themselves from the Egyptians and then fought the Romans for freedom (something that, unfortunately, led to the creation of Christianity and further prosecution for the Jewish people). So, what interests me is what is the difference between the two groups that led to vastly different responses and outcomes to their persecution.

We can guess from the Torah (old testament) that the Israelites had already developed a sense of community, a loose nationality at the time they were enslaved by the Egyptian pharaohs. They already felt themselves 'a people'. Moses, or which ever person or group he might represent, was able to draw on this sense of community, forging it, through the bonds of religion, into a unified cause. A cause that has held the Jewish people together throughout time and distance in the millennia since.

Africa, to state the obvious, is much larger than Israel. In the early world, this would undoubtedly mean that the peoples and communities likely existed in much smaller, more independent forms. It's quite likely that, because of the vastness of distance, the richness of the nature and relative abundance of food, and the absence of competing neighbours (at a distance they could appreciate) there was little reason for a 'sense of community' or the larger concept of a 'people' to develop quickly. Thus, when the first empires invaded, seizing the people for slaves, there was no sense of a nation about which to form a resistance. Hence, the African people continued to be enslaved with relatively little trouble for thousands of years, accepting this lot with a fatalistic view but otherwise causing little trouble.

An analogy to the African people can likely be found in the indigenous people of North and South America. These people also lived on large continents in similarly nature-oriented communities. Of course, these North American peoples did develop strong loyalties toward their communities, their nations, but one could argue that they quite likely had many more thousands of years over which to develop this before the Europeans invaded. So when the Europeans did finally invade, the indigenous nations fought (and where, of course, slaughtered due to the greater technology of the Europeans).

I believe this idea of the influence of community can further be bourne out by following the plight of African slaves brought to America. Again their was little resistance amid the enslaved peoples as they were largely kept separate, unable to communicate or develop a greater sense of disenfranchised community. Once the civil war ended, however, African-American were more free to form communities through the US, although they were clearly still treated as 2nd or 3rd class citizens. However, from the end of the civil war it took only about a century until the event that lead to the rising of the African-Americans themselves and the granting of greater 'equality'.

Thus it appears, to me at least, that the sense of belonging to 'a people / a nation' has been a significant force in shaping the events of history right up to the modern world. It's amazing to think how the world would be different if the Jewish people had been enslaved before they had developed their own identity, or if the African people had been enslaved after they had developed their identity.

Hmm, I smell some interesting alternative history stories in the making.

I'm An Atheist...

I'm an Atheist, which means I have nothing to die for.


It's true, regardless of how you view it. Unlike the majority of the world (almost 40% claim to be a member of an Abrahamic religion with another almost 20% being Hindu), I have no reason to want to die. There is no heavenly host waiting for me, there are no 40 vestal virgins, no past and future loved ones after I shed the mortal coil. I have nothing to die for. Conversely, that means I have everything to live for.

Yes, that's right. Contrary to what religion teaches, atheists have everything to live for. We accept that there is only one life--for us or for anyone else. Somehow, religion has twisted this idea into the suggestion that atheists should therefore be violent and untrustworthy. The very opposite of what would be expected of most atheists. After all, if you only have one life, you don't want to screw it up.

Of course, everyone needs a scapegoat and, besides members of other religions, theists commonly choose the rationalists or non-joiners. After all, we're 'different' and most people consider 'different' as strange at best, bad at worst.

The funny thing to me...and that's funny 'on no!', not funny 'ha, ha', is that it is really the theists who are to be feared in life. At least, the true believers. After all, there are no reasons that I can see for any good Christian or Muslim not to rush immediately to the afterlife. What do they have to gain by staying on Earth? Furthermore, I can see no reason for any true believer to justify their staying on Earth. After all, who in their right mind wouldn't want to go to heaven, and both those major religions provide easy ways to get there.

The west is currently facing an onslaught of devout Muslims eager to ascend in service of their Lord. They are the true believers, the ones who are certain there is something waiting for them. Fortunately for the world, there are many less devout Christians these days (their days were spent in service of fighting the Roman Empire and during the Crusades, etc). I leave it to your imagination to visualize the horror of 1 billion soldiers on either side of a modern war eager to reach their just rewards in the sky.

I suppose I should back up a moment because I hear the outraged cry of countless Christians screaming in my ears 'we are good Christians! just because we don't want to go to heaven yet...'. Well, my point is actually that, in my opinion, most Christians don't really believe in a heaven and thus aren't really 'good' Christians. I mean, the evidence is all around you...ever been to a Christian funeral? What's all that about? When a good friend goes on vacation to a great place for a few months I, and I'm sure most people, don't start bawling their eyes out and crying 'I'll miss you so much!' Instead, they congratulate the person 'you lucky dog! I wish I was going with you.' For a good Christian, death is only a stepping stone to the next life. Regardless of what you've done in this one, as long as you accept Jesus as your savior, you're set. So what's the problem? Why aren't you happy when a good Christian friend dies? Funerals should be grand events with lots of celebration, music, dancing and generally good times. After all, in the big scope of eternity, a few years wait to see them again is nothing. Hell, if I really thought there was something that great up there, I'd be game to get there as quick as possible. If only the anti-abortionist activists really believed! Then they could spend as much time killing themselves as they do other people.

So, I'm forced to understand that most Christians don't really believe. Which also, fortunately, explains why they're not throwing themselves at the terrorist horde. Oh, and there's no use claiming that suicide is a sin in Christianity. You, conveniently, have a 'get out of hell free' card in Jesus's crucifixion. There's no point in claiming otherwise, the logic doesn't stand. Either his death forgives all sins if you believe, or it doesn't. Anyway, I'm sure you've committed other sins in a premeditated fashion--ever steal stationary from the office? download mp3s or movies you didn't own...you get the idea. A different scale, you say? I don't recall the 10 commandments specifying which theft or which murder. And Jesus didn't put limits on the sins he was dying for. Which all brings us back to the fact that most Christians don't really believe.

Now, if only they were willing to admit it to themselves we could get on with the business of fixing the world without everyone holding their collective breath for their magic flying pasta monster to save them.