| vlad321 said: Maybe I didn't get it across clearly so maybe it's my fault, but the problems I have are with the fact that the crusades would not have happened if there was no religion, the popular support for the crusades would not have been there at all if it wasn't for the leaders telling them about the heretics across the sea. Religion is simply a tool to rule over and manipulate the masses through out history. The easiest way to gain popular support for a war is through the cross, sickle, or star of david. Thankfully things are now changing for the better than they used to be. Coincidentally the world is also more secular now that it has ever been. |
Except they would have.
Instead of the Catholic Church there would of been some other body chosen to unite europe... and the same things would of happened.
Maybe they wouldn't of went for Jerusalem. Maybe instead they would of went for the Byzantian empire.
Either way, the events would of played out the same. It was all about power and security.
Increasng their power and security. The people would of went along with it as well... since there was much for them to gain in the crusades... monetary wise.
Well those that went... not many people outside nobels did go... except for the poor trying to make money.
There are plenty of secular reasons to suggest the crusades would of happened in an atheist world. Assuming the world was set up exactly as the religious world was.
There is no real change. People don't fight wars for religion. They fight wars because they have something to gain from it/have a pack mentality.
If it wasn't religion, it'd be patritisom, xenophobia or greed.
