Attention Atheists

[benlehman]

Attention atheists who say "atheists don't do horrible things in the name of their religion."

Please go read a book about the cultural revolution.

Comments

[chris-goodwin.livejournal.com]

Ben, if you have an argument to make, then by all means make it, and cite your sources. Why should we do your homework for you?

[chris-goodwin.livejournal.com]

Okay, I did read the Wikipedia article. I'll admit it was pretty vile. On the other hand, it looks to me like it was one faction of Chinese Communism doing vile things in the name of Communism, or at least in the name of "not sharing authority over other people". If you have a source that says otherwise, I'd appreciate hearing about it.

[redcrosse.livejournal.com]

Ben, I love you. Just for being you.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

I love you too.

[anarchangel23.livejournal.com]

Shall we call that the anti-Crusades gambit?

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

Sure! Or the "power hungry bastards inspire tribalism based on religious differences for their personal gain, even if those religious differences are 'believes in religion' and 'doesn't believe in religion'" argument. A better analogue to the CR would be the Salem witch trials or the inquisition, though.

yrs--
--Ben

[ornithoptercat.livejournal.com]

My favorite is "no one who is intelligent/a scientist can believe in God". Usually coupled with a statement about how atheists base all their arguments on evidence.

You know what I have to say to that?

[indie-insurgent.livejournal.com]

Albert Einstein didn't believe in a god in any sense that most people use the word. This is a quote from The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins:

"One of Einstein's most eagerly quoted remarks is 'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' But Einstein also said,

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

Einstein may not be the best argument (there are some excellent theistic physicists: I'll try to dig up some names for you.) Einstein seemed to not as much believe in God, or not believe in God, so much as believing in fucking with people's preconceptions of him.

Also, tangent.

[yeloson.livejournal.com]

Wait Ben, you're saying there isn't a simple system of thought to which if the whole world subscribed, we'd live in a perfect world free of pain and disharmony?!?

*Head Explodes*

Panaceas come in all forms, sadly, they're all placebos, too.

[locke61dv.livejournal.com]

I heard good things about Panacea-derived pills! There's even a treatment now to take the panacea plant and remove the minerals and impurities and placebos from it. The FDA won't approve it, but you can still get it at Whole Foods.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

No, we just haven't found it yet :D

[misuba.livejournal.com]

Religion is a way of thinking.

[evilmagnus]

...and so was Maoist Communism. Both killed lots of people. ;-p

[evilmagnus]

So you missed off Stalin and (Godwin!) Hitler, too. Although both of them, and Mao, were raised in religion. And all of them placed their political desires ahead of whatever religious beliefs, or lack thereof, they happened to subscribe to.

So, yeah. Did you get gang-banged by Richard Dawkins or something? :)

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

See, this I actually know about. As far as I know, Stalin was just an atheist who did bad things, in which case, whatever. I happen to know that the Cultural Revolution was an action instigated by an official Atheist government (it's in their constitution, natch) in order to, among other things, destroy elements of their society that were not atheist.

The perpetrators of the Cultural Revolution were (by and large) raised atheist, and acted under a banner of "destroying the old society, raising up the new society."

To answer the question, I'm just grouchy. And displeased with moral superiority arguments.

[wickedthought.livejournal.com]

The cultural revolution had nothing to do with atheism or Communism. It was (and is) a dictatorship. A foul, ruthless tyranny hiding behind various masks. But in the end, it is still a tyranny.

The reason the revolution attempts to destroy religion is because it wants its people to worship the state. No authority is higher than the state. If you have any religion at all in that environment, you have dissent. China doesn't want dissent, it wants pure and blind obedience.

China is not a good example to use in this context. It hasn't performed any action "in the name of atheism;" it performed actions in the name of a small number of men who wanted power at all costs. That isn't atheism, that's tyranny.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

The cultural revolution had nothing to do with atheism or Communism

That's a lie.

Except if you're willing to, by the same brush, say that the Crusades, the Inquisition, and 9/11 had nothing to do with theism, because they don't have to do with theism that you like during the modern day within your culture.

[wunderworks.livejournal.com]

I have to agree with benlehman on this one. TONS of people were killed in China SPECIFICALLY because of their religious beliefs.

I'm not saying that the motivation of the GOVERNMENT (and those directly in power) was a pure, "KILL THE THEISTS!" That was just their propaganda to tighten their oligarchical control over the nation (Mao didn't run everything). HOWEVER, the lower levels of the Communist Party bought it, and on a local level just about everywhere went atheist and killed people who would not.

Just because the Wizard behind the curtain doesn't believe in his powers doesn't mean that the people of the Emerald City don't believe in his powers.

[lumpley.livejournal.com]

Your reason and your historical- and worldly perspective can't reach me. I'm angry at God.

[benlehman.livejournal.com]

If you're angry at God -- and want to stay angry at God -- reading a book on the cultural revolution would be a great recommendation anyway.

yrs--
--Ben

[matt-rah.livejournal.com]

Preach it, brother. :-)

Matt

[dj-clawson.livejournal.com]

Great post.

[funwithrage.livejournal.com]

Heh. Thank you.

Most belief systems which have been at all coherent for any length of time are responsible for the death of innocents, I think. (Neopaganism hasn't been, but that's because a) we invented it in the last fifty years, contrary to what people on the Internet who think they're dragons will tell you, and b) we're nowhere near cohesive enough. Certainly historical pagan cultures were just as kill-crazed as anyone else.)

(Also: proselytizing atheists are JUST AS FUCKING BAD as proselytizing anything-the-hell-else in modern culture. I believe in Stuff. If you want to believe that I'm stupid/wicked/going to hell because you disbelieve Stuff, or believe Other Stuff, well, fuck you, but you get to think that. Try to convince me, though, and I'll unload on you with both barrels.)

[l-the-fangirl.livejournal.com]

Ben, while we're on it.

To all the Mr. Dawkins of the world...

"Fundamentalist Atheism" exists. It's beleiving that religion itself is, how you say, heretical, anathema, when you look at the world.

Rather than mainstream athiesm, which is just the reasonable belief that the evidence points to no religion being correct, and forswearing religion.

I'm raised Jewish, and mostly Buddist. Jews and Buddhists don't scare me.

Chasids and Pure Land Buddhists, on the otherhand...

[indie-insurgent.livejournal.com]

Dawkins actually has a scale for this, where one pole (which he does not count himself in) is "absolutely sure there is no god." He puts himself in the "Does not believe there is a god, and lives his life as though there was not one." That's a position most scientists who are atheists would take, I believe.