(March 11, 2015 at 1:52 am)Chuck Wrote:(March 10, 2015 at 5:37 pm)Brian37 Wrote: UGGGGGG
No it was not an atheist state. It was anti competition to the state. The Asian religions never left the state.
Again the only thing China did or Stalin did for that matter was replace worship of a religion to worship of a political party.
Secular to the founders did not mean ban anything. I it merely meant not playing favorites. Setting up a litmus test based on politics or religion is SECTARIAN because it advocates special treatment to one segment of society. There is no difference to me between the monochromatic attitude of a one party state and a one religion state. Secular is the not one rule, it is the attitude of neutrality. China is as sectarian as Iran and Saudi Arabia. The only difference is one is state worship and one party rule and the other is one religion rule controlling the state.
Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Asian religion is explicitly not part of the state. State merely tolerates it on a small scale in people outside the apparatus of the state, and those inside the apparatus of the state had better not let it be known they take any religion, Asian or otherwise, with anything but contempt in their personal lives.
Your definition of sectarian would include any meritocracy. Meritocracy means litmus test on issues regarded as demonstrative of the desired merit. Any state that desire to function efficiently would therefore by your definition be sectarian. The modern Chinese state, especially after 1979, is in most way quite meritocratic. It's definition of merit is in many ways different from ours, which is why we often fail to appreciate just how substantially more meritocratic it actually is compare to many of the governments we might like or respect more. In particular, Chinese concept of merit is accepts highly effective rule through law, and does not value the western concept of the effective rule of the law.
The merits the Chinese government demands from its apparatchiks are:
1. Ability to deliver demonstrable high rate of economic growth
2. Ability to maintain social stability
Holy crap. I did not say it was part of the state, I said it never left the state. You are talking about written law, I am talking about the people living in the state. Same crap people fall for when talking about Stalin. Religion never left the Soviet Union, it was like every other aspect of society, not allowed to compete with the state.
1.By making crap and polluting.
2.You mean ability to dictate. They are not a democracy.
