Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

[The Big Dog]

At last! If you used this descriptor from the start this thread would have been much shorter, not acrimonious and no doubt no fun for you. But at least a start. Yes, it is the Chinese authorities who are persecuting its citizens.

and lionking, can you tell us why they are doing it?

Hint:

UNYIELDING MARXIST ATHEISTS

Roger gets it!

 

[lionking]

and lionking, can you tell us why they are doing it?

China is a totalitarian state. Intolerant of “dissidents”. Did you only just notice?

 

[The Big Dog]

Ugh, some anti-religious can only see in black and white, which is why they can so easily hand wave away atrocities from their fellow travelers.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Ugh, some anti-religious can only see in black and white, which is why they can so easily hand wave away atrocities from their fellow travelers.

Way to avoid all the questions.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Ugh, some anti-religious can only see in black and white, which is why they can so easily hand wave away atrocities from their fellow travelers.

When you speak in an echo chamber and hall of mirrors, careful what you might be describing. In years of trying, you have yet to draw any meaningful distinctions among the words tossed into your salads, conflating atheism with Marxism.

 

[Tommy Jeppesen]

Ugh, some anti-religious can only see in black and white, which is why they can so easily hand wave away atrocities from their fellow travelers.

Atheism is a single factor negative from which nothing else follows. That I don't believe in gods, doesn't not make me responsible for other humans belief beside them being atheists nor does it make me responsible for them being atheists.
I reject all claims of Objective Authority whether in the name of Science, Philosophy or Religion.
So I denounce all forms including yours, but not just yours.

 

[dann]

Not this atheist - I welcome it. Kudos to the Chinese for not being afraid to take the bull by the horns...

Did you follow the thread? Are you aware that they favor some religions and persecute others?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

I think the first one is that people in this thread are not so much denying but rather excusing or minimising the CCP's repression, and that certainly seems to be the case. They're just running education camps for a million people teaching popular science, no doubt by Beilu Nai the Science Guy!

The second one is the question that I am interested in: how much of the repression is due to the CCP's official stance of atheism? What are the ramifications of the metaphysical implications of such a stance? I suggest that there is some impact, hinted by the People's Daily's use of the phrase "the struggle between atheism and theism", etc. I'm happy to have that discussion, but it hasn't gone further than "it's false!" I think we can do better than that.

What do you think the People's Daily's use of "the struggle between atheism and theism" signifies, when issued by the official mouthpiece of the CCP?

Look back a few pages. I already provided you with a pointer. This is propaganda. Unfortunately, many in the thread have fallen into attempting to deal with the narrative at face value, so kudos and points to you in your propaganda campaign. I'll make it easy for you: the reasoning the Chinese use is faulty. They are transparently misappropriating statements intended for other contexts, statements which cannot be used to affirm or debunk the validity or reasonableness of Marxist ideology as the Chinese pretend. Fig leaves, jingling car keys and malicious misdirects do not make for sound reasoning.

Quite the convincing display, however, of the fact that supposed "perfect truths" will always lead to self-aggrandizing claims, efforts to grab the mantle of supreme authority, and eventually violence. In this, you, the Chinese, and all major Abrahamic religions across history are equals.

Words that delude: "Historically inevitable." "Racially pure." "Divine and absolute." All part of the temptation to find a Big Truth, become a Big Man, and Lord that swollen ego and belly over others.

Bah, humbug.

 

[GDon]

Look back a few pages. I already provided you with a pointer. This is propaganda. Unfortunately, many in the thread have fallen into attempting to deal with the narrative at face value, so kudos and points to you in your propaganda campaign. I'll make it easy for you: the reasoning the Chinese use is faulty. They are transparently misappropriating statements intended for other contexts, statements which cannot be used to affirm or debunk the validity or reasonableness of Marxist ideology as the Chinese pretend. Fig leaves, jingling car keys and malicious misdirects do not make for sound reasoning.

Quite the convincing display, however, of the fact that supposed "perfect truths" will always lead to self-aggrandizing claims, efforts to grab the mantle of supreme authority, and eventually violence. In this, you, the Chinese, and all major Abrahamic religions across history are equals.

Words that delude: "Historically inevitable." "Racially pure." "Divine and absolute." All part of the temptation to find a Big Truth, become a Big Man, and Lord that swollen ego and belly over others.

Bah, humbug.

I have no idea what you are talking about. You are obviously much more intelligent than I am. I do like your thumb-nail though. "The Quiet Man" is my favorite John Wayne movie.

 

[GDon]

They sure as hell aren't Marxist atheists in the sense that they have understood and now practice the kind of atheism that Marx represents in his writings. I think I've proved that a couple of times in this thread. Unlike what TBD seems to think, Marx never recommended persecution of religious believers. On the contrary, he pitied them.

That raises a good question: the role of Marx and Marxism, and how the CCP adopted and changed Marxism in all this.

I found the following article on Wiki about 'Marxist Leninist atheism' where similar atrocities in the old Soviet Union are described, similar to what has been happening in China:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist–Leninist_atheism

The Bolshevik government's anti-religion campaigns featured propaganda, anti-religious legislation, secular universal-education, anti-religious discrimination, political harassment, continual arrests and violence.[40]

Initially, the Bolsheviks expected that religion would wither away with the establishment of socialism, hence after the October Revolution they tolerated most religions, except for the Eastern Orthodox Church who supported Tsarist autocracy.

Yet by the late 1920s, when religion had not withered away, the Bolshevik government began anti-religion campaigns (1928–1941)[41] that persecuted "bishops, priests, and lay believers" of all Christian denominations and had them "arrested, shot, and sent to labour camps".[42]

In the east, Buddhist Lamaist priests "were rounded up in Mongolia, by the NKVD in concert with its local affiliate, executed on the spot or shipped off to the Soviet Union to be shot or die at hard labor in the mushrooming GULAG system" of labour camps​

It would be fascinating to outline the philosophies behind these actions, and what contribution (if any) Marxist developments and atheism played in what has been happening.

 

[David Mo]

Would it be reasonable to ask how much Christianity influences the actions of a Christian totalitarian state against Islamist policies? I think it would be. What would you think of a Christian who dismissed the idea out of hand?

Besides, examples don't just include CCP actions against the Muslim Uigyurs. In this thread you can see examples against Buddhists, Falun Gong, etc.


Yes, pretty much: to flatly even entertain the question, when it is a reasonable question.

I put you an example:
The Spanish Monarchy persecution against Jews. There was no problem with the loyalty of Jews. Some of them were even advisors of the same Monarchy. The persecution had a direct religious cause. A Jew could not to continue being a Jew in Spain although he promised loyalty to the king. A Uighur is released if he learn Chinese and promises loyalty to the State and his leader.
This is an example.

If you and I agree on the facts –the bomb attack caused ten victims– but disagree on who launched it, I don't see that I can say that you are minimizing the facts. This has no sense. Perhaps you want to say other that you say. Nobody here is denying that Chinese government is responsible of an awful repression!

 

[David Mo]

If you can't account for the statement that it is a struggle of atheism against theism, then does that not suggest your explanation is not explaining the data available? Isn't that how a hypothesis is invalidated?

But do you not see that the implications behind stating that it "is a strange atheist policy"? What would a "non-strange" atheist policy be in this regard? What you are saying about atheism in that you can define "strange" atheist policies, and how could we expect that to influence officially avowed atheist governments?

But you are starting from the belief that the repression of Uighur people is due to atheism!
An atheist given support to buddhism and ancestor's spirits? It would be a strange atheist.

You ask a lot of questions. Answer this one, please.
Do you distinguish between a thing being a necessary condition and a necessary and sufficient condition? In other words: Do you distinguish between being related to and being a cause of?

 

[David Mo]

That raises a good question: the role of Marx and Marxism, and how the CCP adopted and changed Marxism in all this.

I found the following article on Wiki about 'Marxist Leninist atheism' where similar atrocities in the old Soviet Union are described, similar to what has been happening in China:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist–Leninist_atheism

The Bolshevik government's anti-religion campaigns featured propaganda, anti-religious legislation, secular universal-education, anti-religious discrimination, political harassment, continual arrests and violence.[40]

Initially, the Bolsheviks expected that religion would wither away with the establishment of socialism, hence after the October Revolution they tolerated most religions, except for the Eastern Orthodox Church who supported Tsarist autocracy.

Yet by the late 1920s, when religion had not withered away, the Bolshevik government began anti-religion campaigns (1928–1941)[41] that persecuted "bishops, priests, and lay believers" of all Christian denominations and had them "arrested, shot, and sent to labour camps".[42]

In the east, Buddhist Lamaist priests "were rounded up in Mongolia, by the NKVD in concert with its local affiliate, executed on the spot or shipped off to the Soviet Union to be shot or die at hard labor in the mushrooming GULAG system" of labour camps​

It would be fascinating to outline the philosophies behind these actions, and what contribution (if any) Marxist developments and atheism played in what has been happening.

If you focus on the China case it will be easier to discuss. The topic of Russia has already been discussed at length in another thread of this forum.
By the way, in the last 20 there were no Bolsheviks in Russia. Bolshevik was a denomination that lasted as long as the struggle between Mensheviks and Bolsheviks lasted. In the last 20 it is an anachronism.

 

[GDon]

If you and I agree on the facts –the bomb attack caused ten victims– but disagree on who launched it, I don't see that I can say that you are minimizing the facts. This has no sense. Perhaps you want to say other that you say. Nobody here is denying that Chinese government is responsible of an awful repression!

When I offered the website where an alleged witness to the re-education camps claimed that she was taught to repeat "There is no God. I don’t believe in God", you wrote "You are willing to believe an anonymous informant who appears on a website rather than an Amnesty International report. I cannot do nothing with your credulity." Despite the fact that the 'website' belonging to a major newspaper of 150 years standing who did the interview and hid the woman's name for her protection. That falls under the heading of 'minimizing'.

But you are starting from the belief that the repression of Uighur people is due to atheism!

No, I am giving data that supports the idea that atheism may be one of the driving forces. I've given the quote from the People's Daily earlier stating there was a struggle between atheism and theism, which you don't know what to do with. Perhaps that's more denial than minimizing.

An atheist given support to buddhism and ancestor's spirits? It would be a strange atheist.

What would a non-strange atheist do?

The CCP allow religious worship by the public under certain conditions, those conditions being that they put the CCP first. They allow Muslims to worship. They currently have a million Muslims in re-education camps. They allow Catholics to worship. They are tearing down churches and Christian monuments. They allow Buddhists to worship. Thousands of Buddhist monks have been killed and sent for re-education. For CCP members themselves, they are not allowed to be involved in superstitious activities, as per the article I quoted from earlier.

That to me is a pattern. That they believe that there is a struggle between atheism and theism in China suggests that part of the motivation comes from their atheism. How much, I can't say. That's the question I'm asking.

You ask a lot of questions. Answer this one, please.
Do you distinguish between a thing being a necessary condition and a necessary and sufficient condition? In other words: Do you distinguish between being related to and being a cause of?

I have no idea. What is the correct answer? Should one distinguish between being related to and being a cause of? Or is that a trick question relating to hill-billy family relationships?

 

[GDon]

If you focus on the China case it will be easier to discuss. The topic of Russia has already been discussed at length in another thread of this forum.
By the way, in the last 20 there were no Bolsheviks in Russia. Bolshevik was a denomination that lasted as long as the struggle between Mensheviks and Bolsheviks lasted. In the last 20 it is an anachronism.

So what? I'm giving an example of Marxist/atheism in my response to that poster, wondering how that influenced the Bolshevik's actions back then. You'll be happy to note that I won't categorize your response this time as 'minimizing' or 'denial', but rather under 'missing the point'.

 

[David Mo]

When I offered the website where an alleged witness to the re-education camps claimed that she was taught to repeat "There is no God. I don’t believe in God", you wrote "You are willing to believe an anonymous informant who appears on a website rather than an Amnesty International report. I cannot do nothing with your credulity." Despite the fact that the 'website' belonging to a major newspaper of 150 years standing who did the interview and hid the woman's name for her protection. That falls under the heading of 'minimizing'.


No, I am giving data that supports the idea that atheism may be one of the driving forces. I've given the quote from the People's Daily earlier stating there was a struggle between atheism and theism, which you don't know what to do with. Perhaps that's more denial than minimizing.


What would a non-strange atheist do?

The CCP allow religious worship by the public under certain conditions, those conditions being that they put the CCP first. They allow Muslims to worship. They currently have a million Muslims in re-education camps. They allow Catholics to worship. They are tearing down churches and Christian monuments. They allow Buddhists to worship. Thousands of Buddhist monks have been killed and sent for re-education. For CCP members themselves, they are not allowed to be involved in superstitious activities, as per the article I quoted from earlier.

That to me is a pattern. That they believe that there is a struggle between atheism and theism in China suggests that part of the motivation comes from their atheism. How much, I can't say. That's the question I'm asking.


I have no idea. What is the correct answer? Should one distinguish between being related to and being a cause of? Or is that a trick question relating to hill-billy family relationships?

So what? I'm giving an example of Marxist/atheism in my response to that poster, wondering how that influenced the Bolshevik's actions back then. You'll be happy to note that I won't categorize your response this time as 'minimizing' or 'denial', but rather under 'missing the point'.

I am sorry but on the basis of a single anonymous informant you can manufacture the news that you want. True or false?
I have work fifteen years in a NGO. Even with elemental cautions, my organization “killed” Ibrahim Rugova on the basis of one or two informants. Some days before that Rugova maintained a controversial interview with Miroslav Milosevic and I was very embarrassed with local media.

I note that you commit the same mistake that your friend the Big Dog. The million of imprisoned people doesn’t refer to current prisoners, but the total figure of people that has been through internment camps from its beginning in 2014. Even so, the figure is awful and doesn’t need your manipulated informations to be absolutely condemnable. I suppose that you have personal reasons. They are not mine.

You present the facts in a biassed form: “Muslims” in the camps are not only Muslims, but the minority of Turkish Muslims. “Catholics” persecuted are not simply “Catholics”, but the underground Catholic churches. I don’t know what “hundred of Buddhist killed” are you speaking but I suppose you are speaking of Tibetan Buddhists. If you avoid the qualification of these Muslims Catholics and Buddhists you are giving the false idea that they were only persecuted for their religion. If you present the situation in a precise way you see that the problem is those Muslim, Catholic and Buddhist that challenged the control of the Chinese government.

Take in consideration what have in common the Tibetan Buddhists, the sect Falun Gong and the secular demonstrators for Human Rights? Not theism. They have challenged the omnipotent state. Call you “Communist dictatorship”, “state totalitarian” or as you want but your “struggle between atheism and theism” only exists in your head.

This is how you can distinguish between a relative condition and a main cause. Mill’s inductive method and this kind of things. “Atheist ogres eating pious theists” is a Fairy Tale or worse.

 

[Crossbow]

Way to avoid all the questions.

Indeed so!

'The Big Dog' has a long and well established history of constantly avoiding questions that are put to him.

 

[lionking]

Way to avoid all the questions.

And it was a very reasonable question. It seems that TBD has only just noticed China’s suppression of people deemed to be dissidents. It’s been happening for centuries, but TBD suddenly sees suppression of minorities he likes, so “evil Athiests” rather than “evil totalitarian Chinese Communists”.

Equally laughable and pathetic. Not the plight of the victims, of course, but TBD’s posts.

 

[The Big Dog]

Yeah, already posted comprehensive third party sources that destroy your arguments because that the Chinese crackdown applies to all groups, and pointed out that defending a despicable crackdown on any group is absolutely appalling.

Y’all see folks they are just cracking down on Dissidents. That is the best argument, sure multiple human rights groups point out that is the most aggressive assault on human rights since the cultural revolution, but Marxist atheists are “only” cracking down on “dissident groups”, so give the atheist ************ a break.

Criticizing the Marxist atheist crackdown on religious is “hate speech.”

Firm Marxist atheists just cracking down on “dissidents.”

And it was a very reasonable question. It seems that TBD has only just noticed China’s suppression of people deemed to be dissidents. It’s been happening for centuries, but TBD suddenly sees suppression of minorities he likes, so “evil Athiests” rather than “evil totalitarian Chinese Communists”.

Equally laughable and pathetic. Not the plight of the victims, of course, but TBD’s posts.

another person hand waving away the human rights abuses from Unyielding Marxist Atheists by declaring the victims to be dissidents.

Lionking? You would be well served to read the thread, my post from almost two months ago destroying that argument.

Plus another person refusing to consider that totalitarian Chinese Communists ARE Unyielding Atheists.

It is amazing how powerful that argument has proved to be in this thread, really remarkable that people just keep saying totalitarian while ignoring th atheist part

 

[MRC_Hans]

That raises a good question: the role of Marx and Marxism, and how the CCP adopted and changed Marxism in all this.[/qutoe]

Well, the system in China has very little to do with Marxism, despite what they call it.. Hence one is free to speculate exactly what comprises their atheism, despite what they call it.

I found the following article on Wiki about 'Marxist Leninist atheism' where similar atrocities in the old Soviet Union are described, similar to what has been happening in China:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist–Leninist_atheism


Yet by the late 1920s, when religion had not withered away, the Bolshevik government began anti-religion campaigns (1928–1941)[41] that persecuted "bishops, priests, and lay believers" of all Christian denominations and had them "arrested, shot, and sent to labour camps".[42]

*snipped for brevity*

It would be fascinating to outline the philosophies behind these actions, and what contribution (if any) Marxist developments and atheism played in what has been happening.

Well for one thing, by the late 1920s, Joseph Stalin had come to power (from 1922). As you may know Stalin was suspicious of ANYTHING, with the possible exception of his own shadow. It is easier to count groups and movements that were NOT persecuted under Stalin, than those that were.

So was Stalin an atheist or not? Well, it is hard to say. While having studied to be a priest, he seems to have denounced religion when he became a Marxist. However, later in his life, he did maintain some connection with the church.

Hans