Modern ideologies (such as marxism, libertarianism, MAGAism, etc) have, in reference to the massive success of religious ideologies and their framework, constructed themselves as if they are religions.
What do I mean by this?
An all encompassing nature - religion is so sturdy because it attempts to provide a framework for every interaction between you and the rest of the world. Every person you meet, every word you hear from someone else, every thing you experience, you filter through your “belief framework”. In the past, this was basically limited to morality judgements “is this thing righteous or not?”
So even if your religious book(s) didn’t explicitly mention the scenario you find yourself in, religions offer enough “structure” such that any experience you undergo can be fed to this structure and an answer can be produced.
Modern political ideology has come to understand this, and has constructed itself such that now your political ideology can supplant your religious ideology, as your political ideology now can encompass your religious ideology and all the structure and function it provides (atleast, the political ideologies attempt this, I don’t think they’ve yet succeeded, which imo is why people who solely exercise a political ideology seem so schitzophrenic and unanchored in their beliefs/opinions).
These people are no different than “super fans” who go to “cons” to “LARP”, except the Harry Potter nerds have some slight degree of plausible deniability.
“It’s actually canon that Hermione was a black jewish transgender woman! ROWLING TWEETED IT YOU BIGOT!” - justification through text
“ACKSHULLY, 007 has always been a code name, that’s canon, so it makes total sense to recast him as a black woman” - retconning your way to “internal consistency”
“My daughters name is Daenayrs, I identify as 1/12th Dothraki” - identity through projection onto text
Idk, this isn’t the easiest idea to express but it’s one I had recently while looking at some 100,000 entry wiki for a video game series lol. People treat Halo and Harry Potter like they’re real, if maybe just out of their reach...and I can kind of get it... so many view their “religion” as an extension of their public facade/public identity, if they even profess a religion, given how many today claim some perverse, ever shifting “identitarianism” (in the sense of using beliefs as a filter for the things you will interact with or even consider)
It's a complicated idea, but I think I can see where you're coming from and mostly agree. I would venture a step further though and say that those who adhere to increasingly fringe mass political movements, and those who become extremely obsessed with fictional universes, are both subsets of the same trend. Which is, people are trying to find some kind of meaning, some kind of ingroup to belong to, and something to "fight' for, in a world that has become more and more sterile, homogeneous, and devoid of actual struggle. Basically what you said- they want a framework and a group of likeminded people to help them in life, and in lieu of religion they find other things.
You would probably really like Ted Kacyzinski's book "Industrial Society and its Future". Ted notes many of the same things you note- the breakdown of "traditional" ways of organizing and viewing society, like religion and the family unit. And that people have tried to fill this void in other activities, with varying degrees of success.
His manifesto isn't directly related to what you are talking about- it's ultimately about how he believes technological development is causing most of the social and mental problems in modern people, because technology leads to changes in the structure of society that people are not psychologically equipped to handle. But his discussion on "surrogate activities" that people use to find meaning when they don't have any real struggles, touches on some of the same points that you talk about.
Edit: the book itself can be read online for free, don't bother buying it.
Thanks for sharing this, and you’re right, while I have never read the whole book, I’m partial to some of the “ted-posting” of its core ideas that occurs in other sections of this site, and think he may have been questioning similar things.
Modern ideologies (such as marxism, libertarianism, MAGAism, etc) have, in reference to the massive success of religious ideologies and their framework, constructed themselves as if they are religions.
What do I mean by this?
An all encompassing nature - religion is so sturdy because it attempts to provide a framework for every interaction between you and the rest of the world. Every person you meet, every word you hear from someone else, every thing you experience, you filter through your “belief framework”. In the past, this was basically limited to morality judgements “is this thing righteous or not?”
So even if your religious book(s) didn’t explicitly mention the scenario you find yourself in, religions offer enough “structure” such that any experience you undergo can be fed to this structure and an answer can be produced. Modern political ideology has come to understand this, and has constructed itself such that now your political ideology can supplant your religious ideology, as your political ideology now can encompass your religious ideology and all the structure and function it provides (atleast, the political ideologies attempt this, I don’t think they’ve yet succeeded, which imo is why people who solely exercise a political ideology seem so schitzophrenic and unanchored in their beliefs/opinions).
These people are no different than “super fans” who go to “cons” to “LARP”, except the Harry Potter nerds have some slight degree of plausible deniability.
“It’s actually canon that Hermione was a black jewish transgender woman! ROWLING TWEETED IT YOU BIGOT!” - justification through text
“ACKSHULLY, 007 has always been a code name, that’s canon, so it makes total sense to recast him as a black woman” - retconning your way to “internal consistency”
“My daughters name is Daenayrs, I identify as 1/12th Dothraki” - identity through projection onto text
Idk, this isn’t the easiest idea to express but it’s one I had recently while looking at some 100,000 entry wiki for a video game series lol. People treat Halo and Harry Potter like they’re real, if maybe just out of their reach...and I can kind of get it... so many view their “religion” as an extension of their public facade/public identity, if they even profess a religion, given how many today claim some perverse, ever shifting “identitarianism” (in the sense of using beliefs as a filter for the things you will interact with or even consider)
It's a complicated idea, but I think I can see where you're coming from and mostly agree. I would venture a step further though and say that those who adhere to increasingly fringe mass political movements, and those who become extremely obsessed with fictional universes, are both subsets of the same trend. Which is, people are trying to find some kind of meaning, some kind of ingroup to belong to, and something to "fight' for, in a world that has become more and more sterile, homogeneous, and devoid of actual struggle. Basically what you said- they want a framework and a group of likeminded people to help them in life, and in lieu of religion they find other things.
You would probably really like Ted Kacyzinski's book "Industrial Society and its Future". Ted notes many of the same things you note- the breakdown of "traditional" ways of organizing and viewing society, like religion and the family unit. And that people have tried to fill this void in other activities, with varying degrees of success.
His manifesto isn't directly related to what you are talking about- it's ultimately about how he believes technological development is causing most of the social and mental problems in modern people, because technology leads to changes in the structure of society that people are not psychologically equipped to handle. But his discussion on "surrogate activities" that people use to find meaning when they don't have any real struggles, touches on some of the same points that you talk about.
Edit: the book itself can be read online for free, don't bother buying it.
Thanks for sharing this, and you’re right, while I have never read the whole book, I’m partial to some of the “ted-posting” of its core ideas that occurs in other sections of this site, and think he may have been questioning similar things.
I mean, people nerding over fictional worlds is the same escapism video games were or are.