Culture with atheism as center?

[CapelDodger]

Sorry CD, I needed a tongue-in-cheek smiley for that post.

It was dead serious. (In fact, I'm notoriously humourless.) A deeper discussion would probably be a derail; suffice to say that the repression of heresy is endemic in Christianity but only sporadic in Islam and Judaism, the other monotheistic religions.

 

[CapelDodger]

hey, i'd generally agree with you on that one, even though i do believe that the concept of democratic choice in this society is 95% illusory... its basically flipping a switch every 5 years between two non-choices who are funded by corporate/state power in order to portray the illusion of freedom and choice.... the bastards

I blame it on universal suffrage, the bastards' fall-back plan. When the critical class got the vote they opened the floodgates to swamp them with easily manipulated proles. Thus the circus known as the "US Presidential Elections".

I take the long view (history is one of my things) and the trend is positive. Automatic entitlement to a vote will be recognised as the poison pill it is. We're living in the days that will prove that point.

 

[Hokulele]

It was dead serious. (In fact, I'm notoriously humourless.) A deeper discussion would probably be a derail; suffice to say that the repression of heresy is endemic in Christianity but only sporadic in Islam and Judaism, the other monotheistic religions.

I understand that your response was serious, it was my original comment that was less so. My point was that with theocracies in general, the suppression of heresy, as well as other religions, has been dependent more on the politics of the government than on the religion. This was in response to the argument that governments based on atheism were oppressive. (Note - I am not agreeing that the governments in question have been based on atheism, just countering the general point.) In other words, any type of government can be guilty of restriction of religious freedom.

 

[plumjam]

Safe-Keeper, then you're also saying it isn't the religion to blame, but the people involved.

Precisely

 

[Tricky]

Precisely

Would you also agree then that it isn't the lack of religion that is to blame for anything, but the people involved?

 

[JoeEllison]

Would you also agree then that it isn't the lack of religion that is to blame for anything, but the people involved?

I smell hypocrisy!!

 

[Tricky]

I smell hypocrisy!!

We shall see, should plumjam choose to answer that question.

 

[articulett]

Regimes are about the ideals (beliefs etc.) that unite people--not about what they don't believe in. How many people who don't believe in astrology have killed other people? How many non-Scientologists? Religion proffers this idiocy and the faithful are so used to not thinking that they just say, "yeah--atheism promotes evil and people who believe like I do are the most moral!"

I don't know if religion makes you stupid or if the stupid are drawn to religion, but damn I wish the woo didn't spawn so much. Woo woo are the vectors in which woo is spread. The selfish woo.

 

[JoeEllison]

We shall see, should plumjam choose to answer that question.

 

[CapelDodger]

I understand that your response was serious, it was my original comment that was less so.

This is why you should use smilies, for the sake of humourless types such as me .

My point was that with theocracies in general, the suppression of heresy, as well as other religions, has been dependent more on the politics of the government than on the religion. This was in response to the argument that governments based on atheism were oppressive. (Note - I am not agreeing that the governments in question have been based on atheism, just countering the general point.) In other words, any type of government can be guilty of restriction of religious freedom.

True. There's just not enough of it around, IMO. I like the German take on Scientology, for instance.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

OK, so the logic here is that:

• The Communists were atheists.
• The Communists killed people who were not atheists.

Therefore, the Communists did what they did because they were atheists.
​

Nice logic. Let's see where it gets us when we apply it to other scenarios:

• The European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR were led by white people (Hitler, Stalin, English queens, etc.).
• The European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR killed and enslaved people who were not white.

Therefore, the European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR did what they did because they were led by white people.
QED.
​

• The Third Reich and the USSR were led by men with dark hair and mustaches.
• The Third Reich and the USSR killed people without mustaches.

Therefore, mustaches are to blame for the atrocities of the Third Reich and USSR.
​

Need I go on? Oh, and can you give me one single document or otherwise that states that what the USSR did was done 'in the name of atheism'? Your strawman is looking more and more tired by the minute.

Safe-Keeper, then you're also saying it isn't the religion to blame, but the people involved.

You still don't get it.

Religious wars: Caused by violent religions.
Communist atrocities: Caused by Stalinist communism (as opposed to atheism).

Of course, you're welcome to use 'guns don't kill people, people do'-style logic here, or be more general and say that doctrines based on blind loyalty to a supreme leader, be it God or Stalin or a feudal king, is a bad thing. Do with it as you wish.

 

[Taffer]

Communist China is another atheist state, which keeps religion in its control, without banning it altogether (which would be quite impossible).

China is pretty far from being communist. In fact, I would argue that it never really was.

 

[Taffer]

Of course, there's China, but maybe that's the exception that proves the rule.

Again, China is not, and probably never really was, communist. It was/is a dictatorship, not unlike every other dynasty in its history.

 

[Taffer]

you mention 5 examples.

My 2 examples - the USSR under Stalin and China under Mao - these periods, totalling only 25 years and 27 years respectively, in only 2 nations, far outnumber your 5 examples in the number of people killed for ideological/religious
reasons, including all the people killed in all religious wars in known human history.

As I've stated above, China was never properly communist, it was a military dictatorship (remember, the People's Party gained power through a military coup and civil war). Further, you would have to show that the number of deaths during these periods were because of atheistic ideals, and not simply a byproduct of the will for absolute power and control over the population.

 

[Taffer]

they based their rule on communist ideology, which is positively anti-religious. Hence Stalins persecution of the church, imprisonment of Christians..etc, and Mao's persecution of Tibetan monks, destruction of monasteries etc..

The persecution of the Tebetan monks by China has absolutely nothing to do with athiems or any theistic ideology whatsoever. It is completely a political goal. The monks were, and are, persectued because they were the focus of national identity for tibet, and the largest group who might go against Chinese rule.

 

[Taffer]

Stalin was Secretary of the Communist Party from 1922, but this position only became the effective leader from 1928.. and then he ruled till his death in 1953.
Yes, I could have chosen the USSR for its whole duration.. which would have been 61m of its own citizens killed instead of Stalins 43m figure. I could have chosen China, where mid-range estimates are about 40m, but go all the way up to 106m (less is known about China than the USSR, as the political system there has somewhat endured). Estimates for Mao are around 38m of his own people killed.

So, that's an estimated total of 81m for Stalin and Mao, and this does not include deaths from external aggressive wars, nor internal rebellions.
Most of the wars in history have not been primarily religious, but economic/imperial. The worst figures I can find for a primarily religious war are about 7.5m for the Thirty Years War. After that are the French Catholic/Huguenot wars totalling 3m.

So that leaves another 70.5m deaths that need to be found in primarily religious wars in history, just to outdo Mao and Stalin. I'd be interested if anyone could manage this.

If we were to include all communism then mid-range estimates are 110m of their own citizens killed, excluding wars and rebellion.. an average superseding more than 1 million people per year.

some figures are available here http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM

Firstly, I would seriously doubt these figures, but I have no evidence so I won't go on about this point. Secondly, you need to show that all these deaths were because of atheistic ideology. I posit that they were, instead, because of political reasons, and reasons of control.

 

[Taffer]

The Chinese, for as long as history records.

Well... most of the dynasties did actually endorse a state religion. In fact, almost every dynasty, there would be serious persecution of religious leaders, works and locations. The Cultural Revolution lead to the destruction (including the burning of books) of many religious works (something which is utterly unforgivable, personally). However, IIRC these were mainly Buddhist works, and not Daoist works (although I could be remembering that wrong, since also IIRC the KMT was predominantly Daoist). Further, I would argue that the state "religion" of communist China would be "Maoism". That being said, the persecution of religion during the Cultural Revolution is, almost certainly, a political goal and not related to any real atheistic ideology. In particular, I would argue that the Communist Party pushed Marxism-Leninism and Maoism solely for a political agenda. Surely if Chinese history has shown us nothing, it is that the most effective way to control a large population is by controlling their religion. Other dynasties did so by replacing one religion with another (including the murder of many thousands of "thinkers" and rival-religious figures in each dynasty), while the People's Party replaced the state religion with ideologies of Maoism and Marxism. It should be pretty clear that China has shown a history of politically-directed suppression of religion.

Unless you meant that Chinese Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism aren't really religions in the sense of a Great Big Sky Daddy, in which case nevermind.

(Certainly the latter two, Daoism and Confucianism historically aren't religion, per se. Neo-Confucianism, perhaps, is, however. And this is not counting the many, many, smaller religious traditional practices which vary greatly throughout China, and are generally nature and ancestor worship.)

 

[CapelDodger]

Totalitarian regimes do not - cannot - tolerate alternative power-bases, of which an independent religion is one. A state-sponsored religion that's hand-in-claw with the powers-that-be is tolerable, but never really trusted.

The Shah's Iran would have suppressed Islam if it could have, and for good reason as time has told. The Burmese regime would suppress Buddhism if they could - and perhaps they can. It's in mosques and monasteries that resistence coalesces and revolution is organised.

 

[articulett]

OK, so the logic here is that:

• The Communists were atheists.
• The Communists killed people who were not atheists.

Therefore, the Communists did what they did because they were atheists.
​

Nice logic. Let's see where it gets us when we apply it to other scenarios:

• The European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR were led by white people (Hitler, Stalin, English queens, etc.).
• The European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR killed and enslaved people who were not white.

Therefore, the European Empires, the Third Reich, and the USSR did what they did because they were led by white people.
QED.
​

• The Third Reich and the USSR were led by men with dark hair and mustaches.
• The Third Reich and the USSR killed people without mustaches.

Therefore, mustaches are to blame for the atrocities of the Third Reich and USSR.
​

Need I go on? Oh, and can you give me one single document or otherwise that states that what the USSR did was done 'in the name of atheism'? Your strawman is looking more and more tired by the minute.

You still don't get it.

Religious wars: Caused by violent religions.
Communist atrocities: Caused by Stalinist communism (as opposed to atheism).

Of course, you're welcome to use 'guns don't kill people, people do'-style logic here, or be more general and say that doctrines based on blind loyalty to a supreme leader, be it God or Stalin or a feudal king, is a bad thing. Do with it as you wish.

Could I point out that having a Y chromosome makes a person much more likely to kill someone than not having one... and probably is a much closer correlation than religion or lack thereof when it comes to "evil regime torture infliction"... (I figure I'd use plumjams logic to blame people like him for the evils of the world...) Plumjam, you can save the world my sacrificing your nads.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Totalitarian regimes do not - cannot - tolerate alternative power-bases, of which an independent religion is one. A state-sponsored religion that's hand-in-claw with the powers-that-be is tolerable, but never really trusted.

The Shah's Iran would have suppressed Islam if it could have, and for good reason as time has told. The Burmese regime would suppress Buddhism if they could - and perhaps they can. It's in mosques and monasteries that resistence coalesces and revolution is organised.

Iraq as well. The only thing that kept him from attempting to crush Islam was his knowledge that he would have been declaring war on the whole of the Muslim world. As it was he permitted it but closely monitored it, quickly removing individuals among the Muslim clergy whom he felt posed a threat. He also took advantage of the opportunity to make public appearances acting "The Good Muslim".