I found the above photo of Joe Stalin on Google images. It was linked to a now defunct Christian blog site. The brief discussion of this picture included this comment:
“I would have chosen Mao Zedung who also murdered millions in the cause of atheism, but I didn't suppose his face was so instantly recognisable.”
http://bcse-revealed.blogspot.com/2007/01/were-not-anti-religion-but-part-2.html
This theist propensity to equate Communism with atheism and vice versa is a function of two things; basic lack of understanding of what Communism is, and what atheism isn’t.
Joseph Stalin killed millions. A psychopath and paranoid, he embodied the strong man, iron fisted methods used by tyrants to retain power since time immemorial. One need only to think of the biblical story of the Pharaoh killing all first born Hebrews to understand. Pharaoh didn’t kill them because he was a pagan, or even because they were Hebrews. He killed them to prevent a leader from emerging who would free the Hebrews; thus to insure his powerbase and Hebrew’s continued enslavement. How do we know this? Because had it been intended to eradicate the Hebrews he wouldn’t have stopped with just the first born.
“I would have chosen Mao Zedung who also murdered millions in the cause of atheism, but I didn't suppose his face was so instantly recognisable.”
http://bcse-revealed.blogspot.com/2007/01/were-not-anti-religion-but-part-2.html
This theist propensity to equate Communism with atheism and vice versa is a function of two things; basic lack of understanding of what Communism is, and what atheism isn’t.
Joseph Stalin killed millions. A psychopath and paranoid, he embodied the strong man, iron fisted methods used by tyrants to retain power since time immemorial. One need only to think of the biblical story of the Pharaoh killing all first born Hebrews to understand. Pharaoh didn’t kill them because he was a pagan, or even because they were Hebrews. He killed them to prevent a leader from emerging who would free the Hebrews; thus to insure his powerbase and Hebrew’s continued enslavement. How do we know this? Because had it been intended to eradicate the Hebrews he wouldn’t have stopped with just the first born.
It wasn’t an issue of paganism immorality Vs. theism, it was a political imperative. How different that is from the Hebrew God’s commandment to eradicate all pagan tribes in their territorial path … men, women (except the virgins), children and live stock.
While Communism embraces atheism it does so in order to establish the State as the sole religion, it’s a substitute religion with the tyrant as its primate. It also recognized that the church had a cohesive effect on the peasantry and thus represented a threat to the State’s exclusive power. Stalin never killed in the name of “godlessness”, he killed in the name of retention of one man rule, and the omnipotent power of the State.
“Uncle Joe” didn’t just single out the religious for his murderous purges. He feared intellectuals, homosexuals, and anyone with a political perspective different from his, including differing interpretations of communism [note the similarity to the Church’s persecution targets for centuries, and its distain for rival sects like the Cathars]. He had Trotsky removed and ultimately killed among thousands of other potential rivals.
Was this because of his lack of belief in God/gods? Was his rallying cry to his faithful followers “kill the theists in the name of atheism”? Hardly. Theists weren’t even the primary concern. One may as well blame Stalin's education in a seminary for his genocidal acts.
Then theists will say: “OK fine, but Stalin, and Mao represent a lack of morality and ethics that results from the rejection of God and God’s laws.” But morality and ethics predate monotheism. The ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Chinese, and Persians had laws and a code of ethics and morality, as did every highly developed or developing civilization. And yet this scope of genocidal destruction by a King of his own people was unknown in pagan , pre Judeo-Christian times. Additionally, and more currently, we are all familiar with the Bureau of Prisons report that show criminality is much higher among US believers than non-believers, which, among other evidences, renders the claim of atheist lack of ethics and morality debunked.
Atheism is defined as “lacking belief in God or gods.” That’s all. There is no hierarchy, no belief system. Communism, like religion, has a hierarchy; it is an entire believe system with a focal point of worship (The State), a dogma, doctrine, and expectation of compliance to that doctrine with a threat of punishment for noncompliance. Communism then has much more in common with religion than it does with atheism.
To attribute Joseph Stalin’s, or Mao’s psychopathic tyrannical actions to their atheism, as opposed to their mental illness’, hunger for power, and fanatical devotion to their belief system is tantamount to attributing Edward I (“Longshanks”) murderous suppression of the Scots and Welsh to his theism (when only his persecution of English Jews can be attributed to his Christian beliefs).
This distinction and the logic it represents are largely lost on, or more precisely, ignored by religionists. After years of indoctrination that Communism=Atheism= Lack of Morality it’s an uphill battle to get them to admit the fallacy. But then understanding the facts, like understanding Evolutionary theory, doesn’t help their cause, so why should they?
Additionally, recognition of this reality wouldn’t give theists a counter argument for the many examples and millions of deaths attributable directly to religious fervor -- killing for Yahweh, or for Christ, executions of heretics, witches, et al.
No, they have no impetus to understand or reject their hackneyed Communism / atheist / morality confusion and delusion. So their self imposed stupidity marches on.
While Communism embraces atheism it does so in order to establish the State as the sole religion, it’s a substitute religion with the tyrant as its primate. It also recognized that the church had a cohesive effect on the peasantry and thus represented a threat to the State’s exclusive power. Stalin never killed in the name of “godlessness”, he killed in the name of retention of one man rule, and the omnipotent power of the State.
“Uncle Joe” didn’t just single out the religious for his murderous purges. He feared intellectuals, homosexuals, and anyone with a political perspective different from his, including differing interpretations of communism [note the similarity to the Church’s persecution targets for centuries, and its distain for rival sects like the Cathars]. He had Trotsky removed and ultimately killed among thousands of other potential rivals.
Was this because of his lack of belief in God/gods? Was his rallying cry to his faithful followers “kill the theists in the name of atheism”? Hardly. Theists weren’t even the primary concern. One may as well blame Stalin's education in a seminary for his genocidal acts.
Then theists will say: “OK fine, but Stalin, and Mao represent a lack of morality and ethics that results from the rejection of God and God’s laws.” But morality and ethics predate monotheism. The ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Chinese, and Persians had laws and a code of ethics and morality, as did every highly developed or developing civilization. And yet this scope of genocidal destruction by a King of his own people was unknown in pagan , pre Judeo-Christian times. Additionally, and more currently, we are all familiar with the Bureau of Prisons report that show criminality is much higher among US believers than non-believers, which, among other evidences, renders the claim of atheist lack of ethics and morality debunked.
Atheism is defined as “lacking belief in God or gods.” That’s all. There is no hierarchy, no belief system. Communism, like religion, has a hierarchy; it is an entire believe system with a focal point of worship (The State), a dogma, doctrine, and expectation of compliance to that doctrine with a threat of punishment for noncompliance. Communism then has much more in common with religion than it does with atheism.
To attribute Joseph Stalin’s, or Mao’s psychopathic tyrannical actions to their atheism, as opposed to their mental illness’, hunger for power, and fanatical devotion to their belief system is tantamount to attributing Edward I (“Longshanks”) murderous suppression of the Scots and Welsh to his theism (when only his persecution of English Jews can be attributed to his Christian beliefs).
This distinction and the logic it represents are largely lost on, or more precisely, ignored by religionists. After years of indoctrination that Communism=Atheism= Lack of Morality it’s an uphill battle to get them to admit the fallacy. But then understanding the facts, like understanding Evolutionary theory, doesn’t help their cause, so why should they?
Additionally, recognition of this reality wouldn’t give theists a counter argument for the many examples and millions of deaths attributable directly to religious fervor -- killing for Yahweh, or for Christ, executions of heretics, witches, et al.
No, they have no impetus to understand or reject their hackneyed Communism / atheist / morality confusion and delusion. So their self imposed stupidity marches on.
15 comments:
Well, Hump, I have to disagree with you this time in some points.
Communism seems to be some kind of forbidden word in the U.S. and I understand that. But here, in the 3rd word, we have a different perspective about it.
I agree with you, Mao and Stalin were power-mad tyrants, but their communism isn’t the only way, or at least, the way Marx idealized the communist system. The State isn’t the “god” of the system, there’s no “church” of the state, no metaphysics, no clergy. The State is a tool to achieve equality. Lenin and Trotsky had different personalities, and, although I am a historian (or were), I can only wonder: if Stalin lost the dispute? What if Lenin had governed for more time? The cult of personality isn’t exclusivity of the Communism: it happened in various capitalists nations here in Latin America: Peron in Argentina, Vargas here in Brazil. Hitler and Mussolini were leaders of capitalist nations. Hugo Chaves is a petty fool of a tyrant who uses Bolivarian communism (or whatever that crap means) to justify his actions. But he is capitalist. He barks against U.S., but sells his oil to you anyway.
The State is the “god” of the communist in the same degree that the Marketplace (is it the correct word?) is the “god” of capitalism.
Why Marx rejected religiosity? Because the religion always have been used as a way to oppress, to induce sheep-like behavior on the masses: pray and work your life out, work hard, die young and win valuable prizes in afterlife. And because work is essential to the communist system: real labor, capable of producing the necessary goods to mankind. The priest doesn’t work, he only fatten himself from the sweat of others. Prayers, hell, heaven, all that stuff don’t fill bellies. Since the Russian priests refuse to work and to give up their lands and their wealth, religion was prohibited. In China, Christians are persecuted, but other religions are tolerated. Why?
Well, I’m a commie, so I may be biased, but aren’t we all?
I get tired of atheist saying religion/theism is the root of all evil. First off....how do you define evil if all truth is subjective? I think you should read "The Black Book of Communism," that atheistic philosophy was responsible for more death and darkness in the 20th century than all centuries previous. Now I'll spare you the occultish/darwinian views that inspired Hitler. Here's my point...religion or no religion mankind will use whatever socio economic means to do evil.
Radames,
Thanks for your thoughtful and educational input.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion...and I defer to your expertise on Communism.
I suppose as a communist you see Capitalism / free market economy as some kind of God. But frankly, its a false premise, IMO. The worker in a true communist state is subserviant to the State. Workers who provide the labor and the benefit to the state, receive the life blood from the almighty state, it flows back to them doled out. It stiffles creativity and suppreses personal ambition and achievement. As a capitalist, I make my own way, and so does my neighbor. I am not beholding to the State for my existence, my education, my food, my housing. etc. If I were, I'd hold the state as the Life Giver... the god. And thats what Communism creates.
But lets not argue, since we'll never resolve that dispute. What the real point is here that to equate Stalins, or Maos acts of hideous inhumanity to their atheism their "godlessness" is simply self imposed ignorance of what communism is.
Thanks for your input.
Hump
Krutch,
There is only one belef system that kills for Christ and God. Its been doing it for almost 2000 years. I don't know ANY atheist who says religion is the root of ALL evil. If there were no religions we'd still have wars.
But a beleief that claims to represent the "price of peace", or calls itself "the religion of peace"(islam) or any religion that claims higher morality, has an aweful lot to answer to vis-avis the pain and death it has initiated through the centuries.
For theists to say "oh but look at the evil of this or that secular system..." is pretty weak, considering theism, Christianity, is suppose to hold the moral high ground. Comparing the death and disaster caused by hitler because of an Aryan Pagan Occult concept of dominance, and saying the hideous acts of christiaity over 1700 years is no worse, isn't much of a bar to set for a belief that claims it's allegence to God.
That you dont see that as patheic and an indictment of "christian morality" is attributable to your being blinded by your own sanctemoneous holier than thou mind indoctrination.
One gets aweful tired of xtians saying about the wars, torture, inquisition, witch burnings, antiesemtic killings, persecutions, liquidation of indigenous peoples by God fearing ministersof christ etc.l etc., etc., "oh, but those arent REAL christains."
But thanks for offering your input, Krutch.
Hump
OOPs:
above I said: "But a belief that claims to represent the "price of peace",
Obviously I meant "Prince of Peace".
No arguing, don’t worry. I know this is a sensitive subject to the U.S. culture. Consider it just a different point of view.
And I completely agree with you in everything else: the association of atheism with inhumanity is baseless. Inquisition, religious wars, conversion by force are unknown in secular systems. The atheist doesn’t kill for their (inexistent) beliefs; theists… well, remember this loving words:
"Kill them. For the Lord knows those who are his."
Abbot Arnold Amaury before the massacre of Béziers during the Albigensian Crusade.
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. “
Matthew 10:34 (Christ, you’re quite good at that, I must say)
"Recognisable" is the British spelling.
Great column. You have me sold!
Rademes,
Indeed. thanks for the input.
Crazydad...
damnit! You're right ... again!
I shall retract my comment. thanks.
Hump
Nice post! I'm with you completely on all your points.
We're all atheists when it comes to most of the Gods out there anyway. This bizarre treatment of atheism as a belief comes from theists inability to see past their own belief. I believe in Christianity, and you believe in atheism they think. To equate atheism with any belief (be it communism, or satanism) is missing its meaning entirely.
Who was it who said, atheism is a belief to the same extent that baldness is a hair color?
Infidel,
Thanks.
Yeah..ive used that baldness example myself. I also like "atheism is a relgion like NOT collecting stamps is a hobby."
Naturally, such analogies are often lost upon the fundies. Its over their heads.
Hump
Radames, Last night I watched the movie "Merry Christmas". It's about some soldiers durring WW1 who halted hostilities on Xmas eve and found that the 'enemy' was just like them.
There was a good part there where a bishop preached on the very verse you just quoted.
"Kill kids for Jesus" sums it up.
It was linked to a now defunct Christian blog site.
Lots of them on the net. Seems that after an initial launch, many of them peter out.
I suppose that it stands to reason because their 'audience' is fellow believers because everyone else has been insulted, condemned to hell, or harassed.
They end up talking their nonsense to each other.
Funny stuff on the fundy side of life.
Lots of communist/socialist/dictatorship chatter going on in the GOP these days as they attempt to smear and label Obama with that nonsense.
The fact is that anybody under 50 doesn't give much of a damn about those terms. It's only the funny fundies and right-wing ideologues who still have them in their active vocabularies.
I don't know why Mudrake would go to Christian sites and know them to be defunct --since he deletes me on his site for my Biblical views --what is his curiosity about religious sites? He writes about fundamentalists and evangelicals and their views all the time --like you do. Curious, that.
I think Christian websites that DO cease, do so because they have too much else to do than split hairs with non-believers who are attracted to their sites. I think many evangelicals think blogging is a waste of time --fruitless argumentation and not witness. I don't agree, but that is a possible explanation why many don't take hold as bloggers. Of course, if there are many Christian websites, they may compete for the same audience of readers. I don't have a lot of readers -- though quite a few stop in from around the world --but I like to write anyway.
For Radames: Christianity is persecuted, not just in China, but all over the world for its claim to be the only true religion, the only path to Heaven, the only Way to God. People seem to hate this Christian confidence and exclusivity --because, as Jesus said, they prefer their darkness to the light because their deeds are evil.
They don't want to hear that all of us are sinners who need to repent and come to Christ for salvation. They want autonomy in doing whatever they please. They hope there is no judgment Day --they hope they will just cease to exist when they die --but will they?
History says Jesus came back from the dead and promised that because He lives, we shall also live. All will be raised and judged, and some separated for eternal LIFE and some for damnation/extinction/
2nd death or eternal punishment. Depending on one's interpretation of scripture on that subject.
Barb,
I dont know what you find so curious about atheists who monitor or inpout into xtian sites. You afterall are posting in an atheist site.
As an anti-theist my focus on protecting the "wall of seperation" between religion and gov't is an important thing to me. So is preventing religious pseudo-science ignorance from being foistered in school rooms. In short, I have a vested interest in being sure my right of freedom FROM religion, is as strong and protected as your right to practice your beliefs.
One doesn't do that in a vacuum. One reads, explores and monitors religious fanaticism and ignorance of history and reality. Get it now?
NO barb, history says NOTHING about jesus coming back from the dread. Only the Bible says it. That you equate the bible to actual history (and probably consider it a scientificly accurate ) is simply a testament to your rejection of reality in favor of your myth.
The bible's "history" of jebus rising from the dead is as much "history" as the Koran's description of Mohammed ascending to paradise on his horse. Its as much "history" as Mithra being born of a virgin. My guess is you don't like those historical accounts, that youreject them.
No Barb, hisotry is something that can be corroborated. Its an account of fact that was documented and can be verified by eyewitness corroborating accounts; and/or archeological or anthropplogical evidence.
But this is pointless. I dont expect to change your mind. You've already relinquished your ability to think and discern history from fable, parable, myth. And thats the way it will always be with your kind. But I'll ask you not to make inane statements to this blog; please save them for your christian sites where thesimilarly impared sheep will baaa their approval.
Who ever posted a picture of Stalin is a complete moron. Stalin was raised as a Russian Orthodox Cristian; just like Hitler was raised as a Catholic.
Don't preach your idiotic religious delusions before researching your subjects. Read up some history on Catholicism - PURE CORRUPTION AND IMMORALITY FOR CENTURIES. Sorry to burst your bubble, but religious people can be quite immoral. Check stats on prisoners population before you make faulty statements!! There are not that many atheists in the US prisons - most of them are Christians!!
As for communism it is a 'neat idea'; however, people are greedy, lazy, and cheating bastards (YES, Christians ARE GREEDY, LAZY, and CHEATING BASTARDS TOO). This is why communism is IMPOSSIBLE on a large scale. It fully relies on complete honesty and integrity, and people in general are not it.
Post a Comment