so. like. in my post about nihilism, i use the theological worldview of chrisitanity as a way to counter some of the ideas.

this was actually purposeful. many of us have histories of violent conversion. such that, like in the PH, the majority of us are ‘catholic” or, more broadly, christian. this is simply the reality of the world we live in today.

imo decolonization is meaningless if it fails to take this into account. if you propose a theory and path to liberation that, at its core, basically asks that ppl abandon their gods, you”ll not only have a hard time selling to ppl of faith but it is unlikely that you”ve adequately managed to ground your theory in anything resembling reality for a lot of ppl.

yes. there is something to be said here, as well, about indigenous spiritualities and worldviews, but i didn”t actually take this approach bc some of the advocates for this theory are Indigenous.

the choice of something imposed violently via colonialism was definitely intentional.

while. sure. i imagine that there are ppl out there who think that the One True Path™ to decolonization means a rejection of our colonizer”s religion… i have my doubts that this is true. but even if it is? then i think decolonization is doomed to fail.

some of us have nothing to ‘go back to”, in that the violence of colonialism has either been totally or mostly successful in erasing/destroying/whatever our traditional beliefs. that maybe they only live on in the ways that we took a tool of violence (religion) and made it into something of our own (like the folk catholicism of the philippines).

and i think you need a better argument than ‘i don”t believe in the christian god, thus he couldn”t have made us the way we are, thus there is no pre-discursive body”.

yeah. and this is exactly the sort of thing that academic theories always fail to take into account. you know. actual ppl and our lives.

(and i haven”t even said anything about how completely fucked up it is to make atheism – or some variation – a precondition to liberation.)