Trump as president again?
- This topic has 432 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 12 hours, 43 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Protestantism was the ideological vehicle used by the English capitalists to develop and establish capitalism in
England and the USA, and most of them were Calvinists, and the Puritan which were the ones who emigrated to the US, were Calvinists too.In that historical period, Calvinist Protestantism, in some way, was more ideologically advanced than catholicism and Lutheranism, and capitalism was more advanced than feudalism
Luther never abandoned Catholicism completely; even more, the Lutheran church is known as catholic like, the calvinists were completely against Catholicism, and luther continue supporting the cult of the Virgin Mary. Lutheranism was not the proper ideological vehicle to be used by the bourgeoisie class
Germany was not the founder of Protestantism ( they were part of the Reformation); they were the English calvinists
Marx Capital indicated that when the English church expropriated the catholic church, one of the first original accumulations of capital took place, and capitalism needed an original ( primitive ) accumulation of capital since the very beginning
Catholicism did not provide the economic and ideological basis for the foundation of capitalism; it was the english calvinists protestantism, catholicism was a religion attached to feudalism, and the capitalists were anti-feudalists, which is one of the reasons why Spain was one of the last European countries to establish capitalism.
Protestantism is not the product of one man; it was a historical process. In some way, Max Weber explained that
This research on Historical materialism shows how most religions were attached to a mode of production
https://www.marxists.org/archive/keracher/1929/how-gods-made.htm. How the gods were made
Friedrich Engels argued that modern materialism was born in England, identifying 17th-century philosopher Francis Bacon as its real progenitor and noting that Duns Scotus posed early questions about materialist thought. Engels argued that this materialism became ingrained in British thought, eventually influencing socialist doctrine and the analysis of industrial class struggles.
Key aspects of Engels’ view on the origins of materialism:
The Progenitor: Engels considered Francis Bacon the founder of English materialism, emphasising sensory experience and induction as the basis for science.
Early Roots: He traced materialistic tendencies in British philosophy back to schoolmen like Duns Scotus, who asked if matter could think.
Development: Engels described materialism as the “natural-born son of Great Britain” and later argued that this English materialism was essential for the development of scientific socialism, which he and Marx developed.
Historical Context: In his work The Condition of the Working Class in England, Engels analysed the material realities of the industrial revolution, linking economic conditions (materialism) to social outcomes.Germany was not the founder of materialism, which dates back to ancient Greek philosophers like Democritus. However, Germany was pivotal in developing 19th-century scientific and historical materialism, primarily through Ludwig Feuerbach and Karl Marx, who rejected idealism to focus on material conditions, biological, and economic factors.
Ancient Roots: Materialism originated with pre-Socratic Greek thinkers like Democritus (5th century BCE), who proposed that the world consists of atoms.
19th Century German Materialism: In the 1840s, German intellectuals reacted against Hegelian idealism. Ludwig Feuerbach (“Father of German Materialism”) introduced anthropological materialism, while Karl Vogt and Ludwig Büchner pushed a biological/scientific form.
Marx and Historical Materialism: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels developed historical materialism, shifting focus to economic development and class struggle as the engines of history.
Context: Unlike British or French traditions, which had earlier materialist roots, German materialism was a 19th-century movement aimed at dismantling idealistic philosophy and modernising society.Key proponents such as Feuerbach and Marx sought to “turn Hegel on his head,” arguing that existence determines consciousness, not the other way around.
Spain was the first nation-state and became the first superpower. Its bishops and its inquisition were autonomous of the Popes, and their first loyalty was to the monarch.
The Catholic Counter Reformation was actually the Catholic Reformation. It did away with the medieval Church and created a new organisation, streamlined and useful as a colonial force. You cannot equate Catholicism everywhere with the feudal system, like medieval Catholicism.
In France the Church also enjoyed autonomy and under Richelieu it led state centralisation demolishing regional defences and increasing the power of the throne.England was relatively late on the colonial scene and dependent on piracy on Spanish and Portuguese shipping. These Catholic kingdoms were the superpowers, already with vast empires – not possible for feudal states.
The evolution of the nation-state spans over the religious sects. Where Catholicism retained control did not mean feudalism did. Mercantile capitalism thrived in both Catholic and Protestant countries, and both amassed colonial territories and wealth.
There were protestant feudal rulers, in Germany and central Europe. The powerful Nadasdy-Bathorys in Hungary for instance.
TM – The English protestants used a hybrid of many of the sects available. I think it was Cranmer who tried to get them to unite only to find that it was like trying to herd cats. However getting back to the main point it was the Puritans (another loose coalition) that provided the ideology for the English merchants and emerging capitalists to launch the first bourgeois revolution and that would not have been available to them without Luther and his protector. I can’t remember what this has got to do with Fascism? It was only one of your many straw men that I had to burn when you said I thought Luther was bourgeois. Of course other capitalist revolutions used other ideologies, the Enlightenment in France and, ironically, something called ‘Marxism’ in Russia. So I don’t think the ideology chosen is that important. As for the rise of the nation state you make a good case but you must know this subject is highly debated among historians. After all this do you still believe that most Germans in the 1930’s were anti-Semitic?
CDM – As fascinating as your history of materialism is, and I mean that sincerely, I’m at a loss to know what it’s got to do with this thread? Also the Reformation only came up because I had to refute one of TM’s many straw-men to the effect that I thought Luther was ‘bourgeois’. As far as I can see nobody has said that the reformation was the work of one man – quite the reverse in fact. As I said there were several Like Hus and Wycliffe who started the criticism of catholicism a lot earlier but because they were relatively unprotected they were suppressed violently. Protestantism was born when rulers found the ideology convenient for political purposes. Getting back to Fascism do you see no historical parallels with the beginnings of the ideology in the 1930s?
English protestantism was Calvinist. Within this grew a plethora, beginning with Puritans within the Church of England wanting to “purify” the Church of its Catholic rituals. Unhappy with bishops, the Nonconformists left the Church and themselves divided into Presbyterians and Independents, both strict Calvinists. Never was Lutheranism on the English scene.
The proto-communists you associate with the Puritans, like the Diggers and Ranters, owe more to the Anabaptists than the Puritans. Anabaptists, and Quakers are not protestants and were persecuted by the established churches and by the Puritans. They may have been splinters from the Reformation but their kind are pre-protestant too, and owe more to the Waldensians and such groups.
I was tracing the Nazis back to both Luther’s anti-semitism and to the fossilization of the German princedoms caused by Luther’s revolt – a fossilization which put a 20th century Germany in conflict with the colonial powers of Britain and France.
I never said all or most of the German proletariat were anti-semitic, but a majority were, and responded as expected to the scapegoating of the Jews.
TM – ‘The proto-communists you associate with the Puritans, like the Diggers and Ranters,..’
Yet another straw man, when did I say anything like that in this debate?
‘I never said all or most of the German proletariat were antisemitic, but a majority were, and responded as expected to the scapegoating of the Jews.’
I don’t think that’s correct. I know Goebbels launched a massive questionnaire asking people about this subject and had to repress the results because they did not confirm his hope of mass support for the state’s antisemitic policies.CDM – As fascinating as your history of materialism is, and I mean that sincerely, I’m at a loss to know what it’s got to do with this thread? Also the Reformation only came up because I had to refute one of TM’s many straw-men to the effect that I thought Luther was ‘bourgeois’. As far as I can see nobody has said that the reformation was the work of one man – quite the reverse in fact. As I said there were several Like Hus and Wycliffe who started the criticism of catholicism a lot earlier but because they were relatively unprotected they were suppressed violently. Protestantism was born when rulers found the ideology convenient for political purposes. Getting back to Fascism do you see no historical parallels with the beginnings of the ideology in the 1930s?
————————————————————————————————————————
Neither this thread about religion has anything to do with Donald Trump, either; we are off-topic. Why did I mention materialism? Because all religions had a materialistic origin, and they were related to a mode of productionIn Iran, Trump Gives China the Opportunity to Win Without Firing a Shot in the Middle East
China played a decisive role in brokering the ceasefire with Iran even as it backed Tehran’s efforts to close the Strait of Hormuz. It seeks to protect its economic interests and consolidate its image as a counterweight to U.S. hegemony.Facing Defeat in Iran, Trump Is Weaker Than Ever
Trump started one of the most unpopular wars in U.S. history and now he is paying the price.Ximena Goldman
April 10, 2026
Just one day passed after President Trump announced the ceasefire with Iran before the cracks in the fragile agreement began to show. For now, no one can say for sure what course the war will take, but more than a month after it began, it has already severely damaged both Trump’s administration and U.S. legitimacy internationally, exposing the vulnerabilities of an Empire in decay.
Trump must now grapple with the political costs of having started one of the most unpopular wars in U.S. history, just a little more than half a year before the midterm elections, where his party could face serious defeats. The fallout of the war is also contributing to the already simmering discontent among the masses. From the revolt against ICE in Minneapolis to the massive No Kings rallies, which had a strong anti-war sentiment, opposition to Trump and the Far-Right is continuing to grow.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.