The Spiritual Basis of The Republican Ideology

[Leonardo17]

I am someone who believes in the absolute separation of religious affairs and state affairs. But I am also a true believer in the need for truly spiritual people to start being more political and these are my arguments:
 

---

 
   First there is the famous “Eye of Providence” Which is a symbol that is used by freemasons but has been used by Christianity as well. The meaning is simply “God is watching over us”. He watches over our deeds / He is guiding us.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence
 
   This is not a new symbol. Actually it belongs to the Old kingdom of Egypt (2800 BC - 2200 BC). In that era the pyramids were not simply seen as piles of stone. On top of each pyramid they had a Pyramidion or Pyramid cap stone. A good example is the Pyramidion of Anemmehat II from 1800 BC (Middle Kingdom of Egypt 2050 BC-1650 BC). It was made of better quality limestone and what is says is: “The Pharaoh, who is now among the Gods, is watching over our land” it also contains a Wadjet or “Eye of Horus / Eye of Ra”, which was also a symbol of the all-seeing God that sees our deeds and sees within our hearths and provides guidance and protection.


 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramidion...nemhat_III
 
In the Old-Kingdom it is possible that these pyramid caps were made of much more precious and shiny materials that reflected sunlight like a lighthouse in the middle of the desert that reminded people of their moral obligations before a higher reality.
 
   So the Eye of providence has to be some sort of “renaissance”. Meaning that the founders of the republican Idea were not all atheists at all. Most of them where freemasons with a “different” perhaps less dogmatic and more spiritual interpretation of religion.
 
   Second; there is the declaration of Independence (1776). In the second paragraph it says:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
 
In a way that is parallel the article 1 of the UN Charter of Human Rights says:
 
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
 
What I am arguing here is that, - Yes, these are ideas that are the direct results of the philosophers of renaissance and enlightenment. But there is also a spiritual element here that nobody can deny:

- All men are created as equals in the eye of God?
- All men are endowed with reason and conscience?
- All men must act in a spirit of brotherhood? As in in “Love thy neighbor?”
 
I think that these are very crucial principles that should not be allowed to be the rhetoric of dogmatic institutions that are always ready to misuse them for their own ego-centered and completely twisted goals or ideologies.
 
So again, I think there is value here. Also, It is not true that republican movements of freedom and equality have always been the work of non-religious / completely rational minded people. Marthin Luther King was a Baptist Minister, The Kennedy’s were Catholic Christians, Gandhi was a Hindu Mahatma (a Yogi), all of the principal personalities of our independence movement were devout Muslims + my favorite Muslim Scholar Y.N. Öztürk is a true supporter of secularism and a fervent opponent to the politicized Wababi / Salafist interpretation of Islam.
 
So while I see great value in more scientific / Rational approaches to life, I am also a little critical of those in this respect:
 
When I say “All men are equals in the Eye of God” a typical capitalist can simply answer me by asking “Yes but why? I just want my new sports car or whatever, I don’t care if (for instance) people are discriminated on the basis of their skin color in some other place, so why do I care?”
 
And true spirituality is an answer to that. In fact last Year Pope Francis did say that the current capitalist economy could not be defined as a system that is “moral” in any way. So pure materialism does not care about polar bears in the North Pole. It only cares about taking ultra-rich people to Antarctica or even to the ISS as long as somebody is able to fill his/her pockets.
 
And that’s why we need the Wadjey or the Eye of Horus to be put back on the top of the Pyramid. Basically it is there as a reminder. It says: “Yes but, I thought you might also want to know that….” Ex: free education for our children, Green transition, Gender equality, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and so forth and so forth.
 
Because the purely materialist ego cannot see value in these things. Ex: “As long as I can sell my oil, who cares about the end of the world?”
 
So maybe That’s what happening in our time, and that’s one of the elements we must remind ourselves.
 

---

[The Grand Nudger]

What's wrong with all people being equals regardless of any eye of any god? Think about this. If we're only equals in the eye of god..and there is no god - then we cannot be equals in that way. Equality is a lie, as expressed. As it so happens, it's never been the case in the history of god beliefs that everyone has been equal before them, anyway.

That makes for a rough setup. We've never actually been equal in the eyes of the various gods, and if those gods don't exist, we aren't even equal inasmuch as they described. Long story short, this is an absurdly bad foundation for human equality. I can't actually think of a worse one.

Why not premise the equality of human beings on something to do with human beings, which definitely do exist and are demonstrably similar in a great many ways.... rather than something to do with the gods existence and various shitlists?

The superstitious are offering the disease as though it were the cure, and all you have to do is look around you to see it's effects to understand why this has always been a very bad idea. At best gods are a third party whose function is to affirm and legitimize those human values that human beings already assert.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I really don't care about what an ancient symbol adopted by modern wankers has to say about how we should treat each other. If we cannot treat each other right, well, that's shitty. If you need a symbol to make you think a deity is watching you in order to behave, by all means, please believe it matters.

Meanwhile, spiritually-aware folks don't need surveillance cameras -- or the insinuation of such. That shit is childish and should be beneath you.

[Leonardo17]

   What I mean is this: A philosophical attitude can also lead you to very right conclusions. Most of the well-known climate activists for instance are scientific minded atheists. Paul Watson for instance (the founder of Sea Shepherd) is very critical of the religious view of nature. He says it’s the belief that “God gave nature to Adam to use it in any way he wants” (this is a Biblical quote and has parallels in other monotheistic religions) that is our main problem. In his non-theistic view, we simply don’t have the moral right to kill whales for instance. Because they are the inhabitants of this planet just as we are.
 

---

 
   So as I said before, a moral approach toward life does not have to be religious or even non-religious. It is basically a choice we are making.
 
   But the point on which I am going to insist is this: Philosophy says that humans are like other human beings, in fact we are very much like other living organisms on this planet. So this simple observation should be enough to make us respect one another and other human beings as well. So this is how monarchy and aristocracy is gone. No one can be born as something superior to others. This simply doesn’t make any sense anymore. And that’s the events of the 18th / 19th century.
 
   But look at what’s happening now. When Noam Chomsky was young, he had access to free college education. Today, if you don’t have cash, you may need to send your kid to public education which is considered by many as completely ineffective. Institutions are being eroded as well. The NRA is putting money into lobby groups so kids with war weapons are killing other kids with legally acquired weapons. And there has been similar wake-up calls in Europe too. The French had to rethink their institutions and their approach to republican ideas after the attacks of Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan etc. and in my country they have a great religious tool they can use to undermine all the acquisitions of the Turkish Republic.
 
   So what is happening is different now. They say: “Yes no one is born as superior to others, but I still want to be superior to others”. They say (He says) “… the American democracy, I want to be the president for another term”. Or “…. Public education. My kids are in private schools anyway”. Or “… freedom + the rule of law I believe in God”. Or even “Yes all men are born as equals. But Women are not born like men so why should they have the right to decide over their own bodies?”.
 
   To me this is the Ego mind talking. To an atheist it can be something else, I’m not saying that atheists cannot be opposed to such ideologies in fact I believe in the opposite. But for me this Wedjat or Udjat, Eye of Horus / Eye or Ra is quite something anyway. In my way of thinking (for instance) it is there to remind me than I am not bigger than anyone else. The typical consumer society believes in superiority not in a way that is based on birth, but in a way that is “I have a better car than this guy”, “I went to college, this guy did not” or (in the middle-east for instance) “I am a man / You are a woman” for instance. This Wedjat is there to tell me “You are a piece of the Universe. All of God’s children are special / None of Gods children are special, SO you might want to check your attitude toward this person, or this horse / Dog whatever once again”.
 
  So there is this deeper dimension of spirituality. And what I am trying to say is that, I think the fundamental republican principles are very spiritual in their essence. Yes, they are very philosophical too. But I kind of see some sort of deep spiritual dimension in them as well.
 
Anyway:
Here is the Wedjat. It is still worn by many women in the middle-east as a protection against the evil eye. This is the eye of Horus. The Falcon-God:


 

---

[FrustratedFool]

What does truly spiritual mean to you?

[Bucky Ball]

The Charter on Human Rights says nothing about any gods.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'd also point out that Republican ideology is largely not driven by spirituality, but the drive to seize and retain power.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I’m unconvinced that including the Kennedy family as an example of high-minded spirituality is the best idea.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

You're using god as a third party to affirm your own assertions, which you've acknowledged do not need gods to be made. That's not deep, it's as shallow as shallow gets.

Wanna go deep? Maybe we should discuss why you have such a pervasive sense that someone or some thing is watching you? Why it seems like it's a good idea that matters and would work. Personally, I'd suggest we feel that way because someone is watching us, all the other people (and ourselves) - that it's a good way to keep tabs on people (and other animals) and to avoid getting shot and/or eaten while gathering berries.

[Leonardo17]

What does truly spiritual mean to you?

   It’s a concept. And the more you are into these things (I mean spirituality) the more you can understand it. And I am not avoiding the question. It’s simply not a philosophical concept.
 
   So let’s say: “Something that is related to true spirituality / true faith or religion”
 

---

 
Bucky Hall:
 
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
 
No, the word “God” is mentioned only in:
 
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
 
(The American declaration of Independence. 1776)
 
I mean saying that in an age of Kings, emperors, slaves, serfs, landlord and God-King has to be somehow spiritual. Yes, it’s mainly the philosophers of enlightenment. But all I say is that I am seeing a parallel with the core meaning of the main spiritual traditions as well.
 
Thumpalumpagus: That’s the anarchist + communist interpretation. “The power has been taken from the aristocracy and has been given to the bourgeoisies instead of the people itself.”
 
But I don’t agree with this ideology anymore. This was not meant to be like that. At least not in the end of the 18th / 19th century where people where truly struggling. (See movie “Les Misérables” (Anne Hathaway et al. 2012).
 
There was a shift in understanding. Truly: people did not want a new king or something like that. They wanted real change. To me, that’s a change in the energy or the consciousness of the general population.
 
It cannot be science and philosophy alone. Because looks what has happened 100 years later: Consumerism happened. The nobility of the past was gone. The Bourgeoisie of the early 20th century was also gone. We created new elites who started to erode all of our democratic gains in the name of economic growth and consumerism.
 
Right now I’m at Kate Raworth’s article in The Climate Book. She’s a professor of Economics at Oxford University. I don’t know about her faith. But she is demonstrating how the principle of “I shop therefore I am” is actually ruining our lives. According to this the richest 10% of the world have to reduce their consumption to a tenth of what it is today if we are to stay below 1.5 degree of global warming. Also the propaganda apparatus of the capitalist system has to stop pushing people to buy things and then more things and then other things. The propaganda apparatus of the consumerist society is actually doing this so that rich people can make profit and then more profit, and then more profit. It tell women for instance that cigarettes were “their torches of freedom”. And this system is filled with all sorts of craziness. Like 1/10th of our clothes are wasted before they are even sold. Then 73 % ends in landfills and perhaps 1 % of it gets to be recycled. This is all based on a model of a human being that want, and wants, and then wants even more. Which is scientifically incorrect. Because objects cannot replace things like health, family, friendship, finding meaning in one’s job (and that’s another Marxist principle), being respected by other people, living in a healthy social environment, having access to art, literature and some of the small pleasures of life. So then Kate Raworth is coming with new solution like discarding all mega-yatches and privet jets. Using electrical trains instead of air travel. Creating a free public health system that serves everyone and has a lower carbon footprint (European public health systems are said to have a third of the completely privatized US health system), switching to a circular economy that limits the excessive consumption of some and promote the adequate level of consumption of others. She calls this “switching to a 1,5 C lifestyle” and you can go here for more:
 
https://takethejump.org/
 
So, this is an economist who uses her knowledge in economy to get to some conclusions. Now that she said it it’s scientific knowledge. But Hello, we have been saying these same things since when? 1400 Years? 2000 Years? 4000 Years? (or even more).
 
So the same applies to the Constitution of the US for instance. If it was all science and philosophy (and/or reason) than why are some people working so hard to dismantle all of it and turn the US into some sort of plutocracy?
 
Again, My answer: The separation of powers is there to limit the ability of the human Ego. Those who designed it were aware of this fundamental weakness of the human nature so they gave different powers to different elected individuals who would always keep one another in check.
 
My theory: The people behind these schemes, had to be aware of at least some of the basic principles of spirituality.
 
And also: Equality, freedom and liberty for all, spirit of brotherhood etc. That was a huge ideological revolution at the time it emerged. And it is still like “a dream” we are chasing after and trying to protect today. So it has to be spiritual in its essence. Or at least that’s how I see it.
 
Another quote from Raworth: “Possessing less and sharing more can turn out to be liberating. It simply feels good.”
 
This is 2023 and scientific books are saying this. But again: we’ve been trying to say these things for centuries. Nobody listened
 

---