Theocracy Discussion Thread

[Sahansahiye Iran]

Hey Lumi was there ever any serious attempt made by the Holy See to become the dominant political entity of Italy?
I mean more than just influence but territory as well.

I think so,
the Borgias.

By the way
has any seen Borgia: faith and fear?

Doesn't sound very halal. Astaghfirullah, akhi. Smh

[Publica]

Hey Lumi was there ever any serious attempt made by the Holy See to become the dominant political entity of Italy?
I mean more than just influence but territory as well.

I think so,
the Borgias.

By the way
has any seen Borgia: faith and fear?

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

[Genivaria]

I think so,
the Borgias.

By the way
has any seen Borgia: faith and fear?

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

That's more what I was asking about yes.

[Saranidia]

I think so,
the Borgias.

By the way
has any seen Borgia: faith and fear?

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

[Publica]

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

Being no worse than other medieval nobles, especially at the period you're talking about, still makes them terrible people who cheerfully murdered, bribed, blackmailed and stole for personal power and wealth.

[Saranidia]

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

Being no worse than other medieval nobles, especially at the period you're talking about, still makes them terrible people who cheerfully murdered, bribed, blackmailed and stole for personal power and wealth.

did they kill innocents? if not what do you mean by murdered? also stole what? (I am not accusing you of lying good sir/lady, I am asking for clarification)

[Genivaria]

Being no worse than other medieval nobles, especially at the period you're talking about, still makes them terrible people who cheerfully murdered, bribed, blackmailed and stole for personal power and wealth.

did they kill innocents? if not what do you mean by murdered? also stole what? (I am not accusing you of lying good sir/lady, I am asking for clarification)

Yes, I mean seriously just research the name Borgia.
They would've made Don Corleone go "Woah chill out guys"

[Sahansahiye Iran]

did they kill innocents? if not what do you mean by murdered? also stole what? (I am not accusing you of lying good sir/lady, I am asking for clarification)

Yes, I mean seriously just research the name Borgia.
They would've made Don Corleone go "Woah chill out guys"

Lol why did it make me snicker to imagine Marlon Brando scratching his chin and then throwing up his arms and saying "Whoa. Chill out, guys!"

[Genivaria]

Yes, I mean seriously just research the name Borgia.
They would've made Don Corleone go "Woah chill out guys"

Lol why did it make me snicker to imagine Marlon Brando scratching his chin and then throwing up his arms and saying "Whoa. Chill out, guys!"

It's even more funny because I literally just finished watching the Godfather a couple hours ago.

[Publica]

Being no worse than other medieval nobles, especially at the period you're talking about, still makes them terrible people who cheerfully murdered, bribed, blackmailed and stole for personal power and wealth.

did they kill innocents? if not what do you mean by murdered? also stole what? (I am not accusing you of lying good sir/lady, I am asking for clarification)

While this is going to be my last post on the topic (due to this being a fair bit of derailing), yes they did. Cesare for instance is the man about whom Machiavelli's "The Prince" was written. He murdered a bunch of people. This was normal for the time, but that doesn't mean that i'm not going to say they were terrible people.

[Genivaria]

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

Yes,

and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods

This is engaging in moral relativism which isn't really helpful.

[Saranidia]

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

Yes,

and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods

This is engaging in moral relativism which isn't really helpful.

The moral relativism isn't helpful you're right actually. Although terrible is a relative term because of degree of bad.
Also who did they rape and/or which civilians did they kill?

[Al-Zalaam]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

[Kubumba Tribe]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

Not everyone is Muslim, that's why they (the secularists) hate it.

[Al-Zalaam]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

Not everyone is Muslim, that's why they (the secularists) hate it.

I agree.

The secularists are trying to strip al-Islam of its glory.

[Herskerstad]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

Friendly reminder, mods often frown on the word kufr around here.

It can get a bit daft I know, but it probably would be safer to say. " I don't want disbelievers in the government." which is fine by site rules.

[Darussalam]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

I can get behind a theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam. We don't need muslims in our government

[Al-Zalaam]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

Friendly reminder, mods often frown on the word kufr around here.

It can get a bit daft I know, but it probably would be safer to say. " I don't want disbelievers in the government." which is fine by site rules.

Yeah, I started using disbelief instead on other posts.

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

I can get behind a theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam. We don't need muslims in our government

Islamic governments of the middle east I meant.

A theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam will be punished by Allah.

[Frievolk]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

I can get behind a theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam. We don't need muslims in our government

A theocracy, built on the worship of a syncretic mix of Norse, Hellenic, and Arabian Paganism. Now truly that would be glorious.

[Darussalam]

Islamic governments of the middle east I meant.

A theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam will be punished by Allah.

Yeah you don't need muslims in the middle east governments. They're not very good at governing. Back up murtads and zindiqs in the new Zoroastrian theocracy instead. So based I can't see why anyone would even oppose theocracy

[Al-Zalaam]

Islamic governments of the middle east I meant.

A theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam will be punished by Allah.

Yeah you don't need muslims in the middle east governments. They're not very good at governing. Back up murtads and zindiqs in the new Zoroastrian theocracy instead. So based I can't see why anyone would even oppose theocracy

Zoroastrianism is heresy.

Al-Islam theocracy is better and more civilized.

[Genivaria]

I can get behind a theocracy that aims to exterminate al-Islam. We don't need muslims in our government

A theocracy, built on the worship of a syncretic mix of Norse, Hellenic, and Arabian Paganism. Now truly that would be glorious.

With a caste system where you choose your role in life based on your patron deity.

[Herskerstad]

That was less to do with the Papacy and more to do with the Borgias being terrible people who bribed and murdered their way to power. Also, the Pope himself didn't actually own the territory, and neither did the Holy See. A better answer would likely be about the Papal States, those portions of Italy that directly answered to the Pope, and were seen as part of the Pope's temporal power, rather than being about his ecclesiastical primacy.

Terrible people? were they civilian killers or rapists or something?
As far as i can tell they helped each other(family loyalty) and were no worse than any other medieval nobles in their methods.
Besides the incest stuff wasn't proven.

Oh boy.

While not as bad as the tuscan popes, and indeed nepotism being one of their many vices. Even the Catholics look at a good deal of the borgias as ranging between unfortunate to a disgrace on the church.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

I rely dont understand y many on here r against theocracy. This is what Allah has ordained for al-Islam. We dont need kufr in our government

Not everyone is Muslim, that's why they (the secularists) hate it.

Which is a pretty good reason to hate it. It’s pretty pointless to establish an Islamic theocracy is a nation where Muslims are an overwhelming minority of the population and the vast majority of the population don’t want a theocracy to begin with. Places like Iran always exists if you want to live in an Islamic theocracy.

[Darussalam]

Yeah you don't need muslims in the middle east governments. They're not very good at governing. Back up murtads and zindiqs in the new Zoroastrian theocracy instead. So based I can't see why anyone would even oppose theocracy

Zoroastrianism is heresy.

Al-Islam theocracy is better and more civilized.

https://sites.duke.edu/timurkuran/files ... -press.pdf
https://web.stanford.edu/~avner/Greif_2 ... eloped.pdf