Thanks for the comment: there is a lot to commment on here, and re: posting at the Gurdjieff Con am half mad, so I will reflect on this counterpunch article which I haven’t even finished reading, and list a set of possible posts:
How does secularism deal with ghosts of dead buddhas trying to create fascism, a clear violation of church and state?
the definition of the secular in terms of my model of history
the possible confusions in separating church/state
the false-flag issue and the confused indictment of innocent moslems
Harris’ Israeli ambiguity and the Islamophobia issue
the illiberalism of religion, and of the older revolutionary/leninist left
is it possible to pray to the spirits of Marx/Engels for guidance, or does historical materialism rule this out?
and from there a look at my new Enigma of the Axial Age with its implications (possible, multiple) that ‘modernity’ contains the seeds of a deeper secularism that is beyond ‘sacred/secular’ as a replacement of religion, and yet also potentially its successor. This brings a dialectical style to the composition of opposites in the early modern and the way these can mediate the tendency to reduce secularism (a la Harris) to scientism, darwinism, positivism, and behaviorism, etc…
In many ways the ‘modern transition’ is an advance on the now almost primitive seeming Israelite Axial Age that spawned so much of the later confusion over ‘jihad’ and much else.
But ‘modernists’ have a hard time understanding their own modernity.
A lot to say here…again, good comment
One issue here is the realization that early Reformation Xtianity generated revolutionary communism, which then switched over in the era of Marx to its materialist version. This muddle is a ‘beaut’, and I have, after multiple posts on Munzerian Xtianity, moved on to a simple idea for a church of Historical Memory: what is the real status of Xtianity (and Islam) giving the failure of both Xtian and secular thought to really understand it, etc…