militant atheism?

[punisa]

Recently I was watching a debate where Richard Dawkins defended atheism when someone threw at him that Stalin was an atheist and a murderer.
He said that if Stalin was indeed a murderer it had nothing to do with him being an atheist.

Ok, that is true and I agree with that statement.
But is that hard to hypothetically imagine "militant atheism"? I'm not saying that I would endorse it, but could it come about?
Or - even better question - was there any such situation in history before?

Militant theists (Christian, Islam) already exists and their ideas are rather simple. Destroy the opposite ones.

But "militant atheism"? Would they then have all theists against them as enemies?

How about a more "hard-line atheism", any examples?
Thanks for your input.

[Imposter Marxist]

Yes, Millitant Atheism does exist, and I am part of it. The way most MA's are described as someone who disapproves of all Religions, and activily speaks out against them. (And wants to remove them from any public activity, such as revoking the Chruch's Tax exemption status.)

[Rjevan]

Yes there were such situations in history before, e.g. the Culte de la Raison (Cult of Reason) during the first years of the French Revolution. But most notably is socialist Albania which declared itself "the first atheist state in the world". Religious institutions were forbidden, their property was nationalised, the churches and mosques were turned into culturals centres, religious influence in education was fought, foreign clericals were expelled from the country and in 1977 "religious propaganda and the production, distribution, or storage of religious literature" was penalised with prison.
Hoxha believed that religion was inherently reactionary and harmful to the proletariat so that "the struggle for socialism cannot be separated from the struggle against religion", a statement which I fully subscribe to.

There can be found a lot of horror stories about the "godless" struggle against religion in Albania, mostly spread by Catholics from Italy and the USA who are now massively evangelising in Albanian and celerating the new boost of faith there, reason enough to take their "historical facts" with a big pinch of salt.

[punisa]

But most notably is socialist Albania which declared itself "the first atheist state in the world".

Indeed, how could I forget. Thanks for reminding me :)
I actually know some people who lived in Albania during that time. Some say it was horrible, while others will admit it was pretty good :)

As for militant atheism today. Is it always related to leftist ideology or could be set apart from political views?
Again Richard Dawkins comes to mind (great archive channel btw: http://www.youtube.com/user/dawkinschannel) - he is very "aggressive" towards dismantling religion on basis of scientific facts but he's also very reluctant to declare himself on either part of the political spectrum.

[Sogdian]

I think Uzbekistan is the only Muslim country to ban children under 18 to attend mosques or wear hijab. This should be universally accepted by every country. :thumbup1:

[The Vegan Marxist]

Militant Atheism is a great idea for all atheists to take part in. It's not a call to gun down christians or any other religious believers, but to dismantle the illogicality of religious dogma from any & all spectrum of society. Sort of like Guerrilla Atheism!

[Comrade_Stalin]

Indeed, how could I forget. Thanks for reminding me :)
I actually know some people who lived in Albania during that time. Some say it was horrible, while others will admit it was pretty good :)

As for militant atheism today. Is it always related to leftist ideology or could be set apart from political views?
Again Richard Dawkins comes to mind (great archive channel btw: http://www.youtube.com/user/dawkinschannel) - he is very "aggressive" towards dismantling religion on basis of scientific facts but he's also very reluctant to declare himself on either part of the political spectrum.


Militant atheism, just like normal atheism, has mostly been on the left. There are some atheists on the right, but they are few in numbers, and mostly follow objectivism.

[RadioRaheem84]

I am not opposed to the militant atheism of Dawkins and some other folk, but I don't like the condescending nature of people like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens is well liked because of his wit and ability to lambaste the obviously ludicrous elements of organized religion, but his philosophical outlook is a bit sophmoric. I don't know why Hitchens and Harris are always put in th same league as Dawkins or Daniel Dennett*.


*Except I wasn't too keen on Dennett's whole "Brights" idea. :rolleyes:

[Kléber]

There was a League of the Militant Godless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_the_Godless) in the USSR until 1947.

Stalin was soft on religion if anything, since he suppressed the Militant Godless and had some of them shot.

[black magick hustla]

militant atheism is for emotionally stunted people and college libertarian nerds

[CELMX]

Militant Atheism is a great idea for all atheists to take part in. It's not a call to gun down christians or any other religious believers, but to dismantle the illogicality of religious dogma from any & all spectrum of society. Sort of like Guerrilla Atheism!

yes, i agree with you, but then it wouldn't be called militant, would it? militant inplies force, but what you are saging just sounds like propaganda, or sharing ur own perspective, but not necessarily forcing it upon others. i would say that's anti-theism. if u speak of militant atheiam in a forceful sense, i am adamently against it. tolerarion of others perspective should be a main element in a post-revolutionary society. if u start being militant against religion, that would start a new class of ppls-the religious.

[Invincible Summer]

militant atheism is for emotionally stunted people and college libertarian nerds

Or people who don't want to see others wasting their lives following some asinine belief system

[black magick hustla]

"religion is the heart of a heartless world." ideology is the mirror of the world and you cannot change it until the world is changed. politics based on opposition to religions are silly and i hate more the dawkins and hitchens asskissers than most average conservative blokes

[Rjevan]

"religion is the heart of a heartless world." ideology is the mirror of the world and you cannot change it until the world is changed. politics based on opposition to religions are silly and i hate more the dawkins and hitchens asskissers than most average conservative blokes
But you can help people to use their brains. Everybody who doesn't waste his time to worship some phantasm and doesn't bow before non-existing entities who propose at best irrelevant nonsense and at worst sexism, hate, ignorance and intolerance which is used by people to fool, control and exploit the dumb masses, has won a bit of life and freedom. And of course economic conditions have to change to make religion disappear but till then it's always great fun to expose the hypocrites and liars and as soon as socialism is built it is vital to fight religion along with the other remaining reactionary ideologies and influences.

[black magick hustla]

Or people who don't want to see others wasting their lives following some asinine belief system

And you think you can use "reason" to convince them? Insult them by telling them their beliefs are asinine?


But you can help people to use their brains. Everybody who doesn't waste his time to worship some phantasm and doesn't bow before non-existing entities who propose at best irrelevant nonsense and at worst sexism, hate, ignorance and intolerance which is used by people to fool, control and exploit the dumb masses, has won a bit of life and freedom. And of course economic conditions have to change to make religion disappear but till then it's always great fun to expose the hypocrites and liars and as soon as socialism is built it is vital to fight religion along with the other remaining reactionary ideologies and influences. Again, how are you going to convince them to "use their brains" when bombs are murdering their children?

[Rjevan]

And you think you can use "reason" to convince them? Insult them by telling them their beliefs are asinine?
Yes, you can. It's actually not very hard if the people you talk to are not elderly people, fundamentalists or hardcore fanatics. Once you managed to make them doubt some aspects of their faith (=make them use their brains) the most difficult part is done and the rest almost happens without any further convincing.


Again, how are you going to convince them to "use their brains" when bombs are murdering their children?
What could be more convincing than this very example? Where is their god, where is their protection, where is the answer to their hundreds of prayers, to their tears and pain? Is it because god doesn't care at all what happens to humans or because he/she wants to punish his/her followers or test their faith? Then god is evil and malevolent, innocent childern are sacrificed for god's glory, why do you need such a god who only bring harm upon you and your beloved ones but fails to help you? Or is it because he/she can't help? Then he/she is not almighty and thus not god... or he/she simply doesn't exist.

[Invincible Summer]

And you think you can use "reason" to convince them? Insult them by telling them their beliefs are asinine?

Reason works, but it has to be applied consistently and constantly. And although I'm calling spiritual belief asinine here, I won't necessarily be doing that to their face.




And I think this belongs in the "Religion" forum

[mikelepore]

Hoxha believed that religion was inherently reactionary and harmful to the proletariat so that "the struggle for socialism cannot be separated from the struggle against religion", a statement which I fully subscribe to.

I would beware of the vagueness of "struggle against." Certainly, promote scientific education and logical thinking. Even ridicule superstitious ideas, if you choose to. However, religious people are entitled to join the workers' revolutionary organizations, and to participate in the new society's democratic councils, without being relegated to the status of second-class citizens. You can lecture people, and even yell at them. You cannot limit their rights.

[RadioRaheem84]

Reason works. The Hitchens, Sam Harris, Bill Maher approach doesn't.

[bcbm]

entities who propose at best irrelevant nonsense and at worst sexism, hate, ignorance and intolerance which is used by people to fool, control and exploit the dumb masses

actually, at its best religion has proposed the destruction of the rich and powerful, the removal of all hierarchies between men and women and, indeed, between all people and the holding of all goods and lands in common. in the past it has not only proposed what amounts to communism, but fought for it. religion has often been an integral part of the struggles of the poor and exploited and inspired the "dumb masses" (what an enlightened attitude) to resist the lot that has been given to them.

[black magick hustla]

actually, at its best religion has proposed the destruction of the rich and powerful, the removal of all hierarchies between men and women and, indeed, between all people and the holding of all goods and lands in common. in the past it has not only proposed what amounts to communism, but fought for it. religion has often been an integral part of the struggles of the poor and exploited and inspired the "dumb masses" (what an enlightened attitude) to resist the lot that has been given to them.
i think there was a time where communsim was expressed in religion (13th century peasants only had the theological language to express it). i think "religious communism" today is an impossibility though, and it seems to me it is associated more with intellectuals, like things like "muslim feminism", than in the world.

[bcbm]

i think there was a time where communsim was expressed in religion (13th century peasants only had the theological language to express it). i think "religious communism" today is an impossibility though, and it seems to me it is associated more with intellectuals, like things like "muslim feminism", than in the world.

it may be an impossibility in the first world, though i'm not entirely sure, but in many parts of the third world where conditions very similar to those under which previous religious communist movements existed still prevail (primitive accumulation) such movements have risen, either from traditional religious practices, appropriation of "colonial" religion or some combination of the two. in any case, my point was that religion isn't always simply negative, or a tool of coercion used by the ruling class.

[black magick hustla]

it may be an impossibility in the first world, though i'm not entirely sure, but in many parts of the third world where conditions very similar to those under which previous religious communist movements existed still prevail (primitive accumulation) such movements have risen, either from traditional religious practices, appropriation of "colonial" religion or some combination of the two. in any case, my point was that religion isn't always simply negative, or a tool of coercion used by the ruling class.

:shrugs: i think religion might give rise to "communal" feelings but not necessarily communism. i think it is necessary to distinguish communalism and communism - the former is more of a way of living. of course, religious people can participate in class war but i am really doubtful that they can engender a clear position of the world.

[bcbm]

:shrugs: i think religion might give rise to "communal" feelings but not necessarily communism. i think it is necessary to distinguish communalism and communism - the former is more of a way of living. of course, religious people can participate in class war but i am really doubtful that they can engender a clear position of the world.

i think communalism and communism are closely related, and i don't think a move towards communalism from a religious view is a bad thing in any case. i think your earlier point about ideology being the mirror of the world was very apt, and following from this i think there is certainly the possibility of religious people being part of the class war or even of religion adopting communist expression in times of intensified struggle. modern millenarians coming from a communist perspective would make for way more interesting episodes of the 700 club, at the least. ;)

[black magick hustla]

i think communalism and communism are closely related, and i don't think a move towards communalism from a religious view is a bad thing in any case. i think your earlier point about ideology being the mirror of the world was very apt, and following from this i think there is certainly the possibility of religious people being part of the class war or even of religion adopting communist expression in times of intensified struggle. modern millenarians coming from a communist perspective would make for way more interesting episodes of the 700 club, at the least. ;)
we communists are the modern millenarians! atleast that is what our critics say and what mr. guy deboring said

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I've actually found belittling and basically demeaning people for their religious beliefs is more effective than reasoning with them. That's sad, but it's what I've found to be the case in my limited experiences. Psychologically speaking, people do change their views if you make them associate the view in the right context. You can convince people to change their viewpoints without reason. If the belief is unreasonable in the first place, they will naturally adjust their reasoning properly as they switch their viewpoints.

However, I do support education based policies for discouraging religion rather than militant approaches (with exceptions). It's an area that "data" is not available for. It's hard to say whether active state coercion (via bans, rewards, restrictions, etc) would be beneficial at dealing with religious issues.

I think Scientology should be banned, and I think children under sixteen should be prevented from attending religious services. Parents who refuse blood transfusions for kids should have the transfusions given to the children AND the children taken by the state. Children should be taught men, blacks, homosexuals, and other minorities are equal. This should occur in school. If the child objects, they should be told they are "factually" wrong. It should be no different than if the child's parents thought the capital of Canada is Montreal. It's not. Therefore, the child should be corrected. If the parent gets offended because of their own stupidity, that's too bad.

Churches should also be taxed. Churches preaching against minorities should be shut down for hate speech. Polygamists sects should be abolished even if it inconveniences a current generation in order to spare future generations the same fate. Churches should be required to list there members so the data can be analyzed to check for correlations of voting, racism, etc, within specific churches.

I think a lot of things should be done. Most of them would outrage most religious people, but I'd still let them have a Church. At the same time, I'd have the state consistently affirming the position that matters of God are not matters of opinion and he, in fact, does not exist.

I don't know if you can really describe people like Dawkins, Hitchens, etc, as militant. They're just in your face, disrespectful, rude, etc. I could be wrong, but I haven't heard of them advocating anything unreasonable. And frankly, I think there attitude is quite understandable. Religious people say it turns them off. Otherwise they might listen. That's just an excuse. If you talk politely, they talk back. Religious people want you to engage them as if they have something worth saying. They attitude society needs to take towards religious attitudes is really the same attitude one should take towards a misbehaving child, in many respects.

[ArrowLance]

Militant atheism is misguided and liberal. The destruction of religion is not our aim, and its a very narrow and unimportant field for the time being. Any efforts that are spent in this movement are efforts spent against revolution. They confuse matters and should be instead spent on the greater revolutionary movement.

[Tablo]

I don't see religion as the primary problem we should focus on, but it is fun convincing people their god is a lie.

[Kuppo Shakur]

I think it really depends on the religion.
Religions like christianity are definitely harmful to humanity and freedom in general, but if someone wants to be some kind of neopagan or similar, i'd say that's perfectly fine.

[punisa]

Yes, you can. It's actually not very hard if the people you talk to are not elderly people, fundamentalists or hardcore fanatics. Once you managed to make them doubt some aspects of their faith (=make them use their brains) the most difficult part is done and the rest almost happens without any further convincing.

I would just like to back up this claim as being true by some real examples.
By using common sense, argumentative debating and some scientific facts - it can be done if you really care about people you talk to.

Rjevan you are correct about the "most difficult part" and how things flow naturally from that point on.
I have "successfully" converted several religious people into either atheists or agnostics. Them previously being Catholic and Muslim, aging from 25 to 65

Someone used harsh words regarding Richard Dwakins here, but let me just add that its exactly some of his quotes and ideas that "did the trick" in my case :thumbup1:

[punisa]

I think it really depends on the religion.
Religions like christianity are definitely harmful to humanity and freedom in general, but if someone wants to be some kind of neopagan or similar, i'd say that's perfectly fine.

I like your avatar, Cthulhu should be the only god we worship :lol:

[Rjevan]

actually, at its best religion has proposed the destruction of the rich and powerful, the removal of all hierarchies between men and women and, indeed, between all people and the holding of all goods and lands in common. in the past it has not only proposed what amounts to communism, but fought for it. religion has often been an integral part of the struggles of the poor and exploited and inspired the "dumb masses" (what an enlightened attitude) to resist the lot that has been given to them.
Maybe I expressed myself unclear, the "dumb masses" refered to the cleric's view of the people who follow them, not to my opinion of them. I'd say "blinded masses", the "dumb" is reserved for fundamentalists and maybe better replaced by "ignorant" in their case. Indeed, what an enlightened attitude, exactly what I wanted to express.

While we could argue about "deconstruction of the rich and powerful" (I'd rather say "deconstruction and replacement by new elites", also note: "And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him."), what religion ever proposed "the removal of all hierarchies between men and women"? Did the dozens of sexist and misogynist passages in the Tanakh, Bible and Qur'an (I'm sure there can be found equal stuff in Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.) suddenly disappear? Sure, there are also (rare) examples for your argument, but the opposite is the overwhelming majority and so we have at least contradictions. Do I really need a contradicting text (I guess god was a bit confused when he made his angels or whatever dictate this to the prophets/Evangelists/Muhammad) which quite clearly tends to sexism? No.

Same goes for equality between all people, sure, you can find examples where it is stressed that god's love is for all people but you can also find the exact opposite, namely "chosen people" and hate towards foreigners, the most popular is maybe this gem:

A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession." Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us." He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said. He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

To be fair, in the end he heals her daughter because she kneels, cries and begs on but seriously, refusing to help her and her daughter and comparing them to dogs just because they are Canaanites? How very anti-racist!

Common goods and property? Oh, you mean e.g. those passages in the Bible which state that slaves are your property or do you think about the 10 Commandments: "Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor." Praise the Lord!

And fought for "what amounts to communism"? You mean the Holy Crusades? Or the even holier Inquisition? Muhammad's holy wars in Arabia? The conquest of America, the Caribbean, Asia and the African colonies and the following evangelising by the church? Praising Mussolini and Hitler for samshing communism in Italy and Germany, allying with General Franco? The Taleban? All I can think of is the German Peasants' War which followed Luther's reformation and was - surprise, surprise - condemned by the latter who supported the nobility.

Yes, religion has often been an integral part of the struggle of the poor, etc. to resist the rulers, as long as it was in the interests of those who manipulated the poor and as soon as their goals were achieved they crushed the very same people who fought for them if they could not simply fool them by telling them that they too have reached their aims.

As I said, irrelevant and contadicting nonsense at best which solves and improves nothing and helps nobody besides the people who exploit it for their own aims.

[The Feral Underclass]

militant atheism is for emotionally stunted people and college libertarian nerds

I'm neither of those things, so how do you explain my anti-theism?

What kind of haemorrhage propelled you to post such unmitigated nonsense? Is this an argument? No. Is it a reasonable assertion? No. Is it founded in any kind of fact whatsoever? No. So why on earth did you post it?

[The Feral Underclass]

But "militant atheism"? Would they then have all theists against them as enemies?

Militant atheism is a bit of a bizarre term that seems to me, pretty redundant. Atheists are people who don't believe in god, but accept that the belief in god is acceptable. An anti-theist is a person who disbelieves in the existence of god, but also opposes the belief in god, which is obviously distinct from an atheist.

What a "militant" atheist is, is beyond me really, unless they use it as a way to refer to Anti-theists.


How about a more "hard-line atheism", any examples?There was an organisation in Soviet Russia called Society of the Godless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_the_Godless), which existed between 1927 and 1947. Also, a modern, more humble example would be the small Anti-Theist Action groups that exist.

[The Feral Underclass]

"religion is the heart of a heartless world." ideology is the mirror of the world and you cannot change it until the world is changed

Who has made that claim in this thread? From what basis are you even making this statement? It seems that you have your own warped interpretation of what anti-theism is and are criticising it from that perspective, despite it bearing no relevance to the actual analysis of anti-theism.


politics based on opposition to religions are silly and i hate more the dawkins and hitchens asskissers than most average conservative blokes

Name one set of political beliefs that is based on opposition to religion...

[bcbm]

Sure, there are also (rare) examples for your argument, but the opposite is the overwhelming majority and so we have at least contradictions.the middle ages were rife with social conflict, probably at a much higher level than today, and much of that was expressed through religious discontent. history is littered with examples of vagabond preachers inspiring peasant revolts against the rich, not to mention mass movements like the cathars, bogomils, brethren of the free spirit and anabaptists. similar movements have risen in the modern age in the struggles against colonialism and imperialism.

i think religion is comparable to politics in that it has manifested itself in a variety of forms and while the dominant forms have supported the ruling class, there have always been counter forms expressing the human need for communism.

[bricolage]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_God_Go