I kind of liked the atmosphere around the old Workers' Cultural Palace, and I'm not seduced by the identification of tall buildings with 'progress'. As for the name - "what's in a name"? Perhaps the state might ease off a bit about presenting us all with the identities that they would like us to have.

@ Tiger: as you say, for many societies. But the issue of wealth and power often seems to play a part in differing levels of religious attachment among different classes and subgroups within a 'people' as well, as well as in differing types and degrees of attachment.

Religions from 'abroad' have been accepted all over the place for a long time - e.g., the acceptance of forms of Christianity by Germans, Ethiopians, Mexicans, etc. at different times in history. The idea of climate change is different, unless you want to categorize scientific methodology itself as a religious doctrine, which can lead to an interesting philosophical argument, but I don't think we ought to go into it here.

Looks like some pretty challenging climbing - congratulations for having a go at it.

@ octobersky: OK, but the fact is that religious beliefs change over time anyway, at least partially as a function of changes in material circumstances - e.g., rain gods are just not going to remain as important to people who, in their daily lives, are decreasingly reliant on rainfall. So I don't think it can all be seen as a simple matter of native-religion-appropriate/religion-from-outside bad - it's not simply some matter of 'brainwashing' imposed from the outside, since a real 'brainwash' would require complete control over local minds etc., which is always an impossibility, even with a lot more information control than any bunch of missionaries ever had.