Reply #17: I'm thinking more in terms of memes for the 'evolution' of religions

[muriel_volestrangler]

and I can't remember if Diamond thinks in those terms, or if I just developed that thought myself, after reading him. It was he who argued (the first time I saw the argument, anyway) that religion allows the growth beyond 'tribal' level. I was talking about religious memes evolving when those that help the survival of a society reproduce, while those that don't die out, along with their believers.

So, if you say "mass communication sure as hell doesn't allow for a DEMOCRATIC state to exist without religion", you are contending that religion is still vital for a democratic state? I think that mass communication is vital for citizens to be informed about the condition of their state. Word of mouth just doesn't cut it. There's no way a state of millions of people could be democratic without any newspapers, radio, TV or internet - and it probably wouldn't work for groupings of even thousands. And if you don't know what's going on, you can't make proper decisions. There are plenty of modern democratic states in which religion doesn't play a large part - I think they would fail if you banned all of the media from them.

Mass communication isn't pushing us towards a totalitarian state - before it existed, all states were totalitarian (even Greek democracy excluded women and slaves, and it didn't last long).

"without religion we'd have nobody pushing for a non-statist society"? I'm not sure what you mean. The only significant advocates for a non-statist society have been communists (as in final stage communists), as far as I know, and they were non-religious. Are you saying there are religions that want a society with no states? I think people can develop a common set of values without it being imposed in a Straussian manner by some arbitrary religious power.