Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Tell me , how many countless hours did you spend ignoring the hundred other sources before you found one You liked? I should send you 25 Stalin/Communist propaganda books that were written slowly after the war.
I couldn't care less about the propaganda. Every ideology has its propaganda and dogma. We had to study the Militant Godless propaganda papers. My professors lectured extensively on the destruction of churches and persecution of priests (along with Stalin's hilarious backpedal during WW II.)
None of that matters, but this isn't about secularism or religion. This is about a type of mindset that exists whether one is religious or not. It is the dogmatic mindset. It just happens to occur more often in religion, because religion is a dogmatic enterprise.
Soviet Communism was a totalitarian ideology that was dogmatically pitched as the final truth of civilization. It has nothing to do with atheism, but the mindset that it existed in.
That you cannot see that, only highlights your own dogmatic mindset.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Yes because I choose to follow hundreds of other sources, my parents, grandparents, I'm somehow dogmatic. That's the beauty of philosophy majors. They find a few sources and suddenly the majority are false. By your logic I can attribute the Crusades to dogmatism as well.
Ah yes the hundreds of other sources that apparently claim that Soviet Communism wasn't a dogmatic secular replacement for religion that didn't function like a religion? I'm betting they don't exist and you are talking out of you ass, as usual. Either that or my professors and the Russian guest speakers we had were lying.
And I would attribute the Crusades to dogmatism. No liberal religious faith would bring about something like the Crusades.
Why I am even doing this? You are dumb**** ignorant tard and are never going to change your mind.
Have a can of ad hominem.
Originally posted by AutokratI rest my case. Another incompetent philosophy major without any ability to ne objective or even attempt to gather many sources, not ones he agrees with. Keep thinking you're going to educate me on he concepts and ideals of communism and Marxism. You are one stupid human being.
Ah yes the hundreds of other sources that apparently claim that Soviet Communism wasn't a dogmatic secular replacement for religion that didn't function like a religion? I'm betting they don't exist and you are talking out of you ass, as usual. Either that or my professors and the Russian guest speakers we had were lying.And I would attribute the Crusades to dogmatism. No liberal religious faith would bring about something like the Crusades.
Why I am even doing this? You are dumb**** ignorant tard and are never going to change your mind.
Have a can of ad hominem.
The theory as it was proposed was noble, all people working together for a common amount of money so that everyone was equally blessed by the fruit of their labor, despite social status. Marxist: "Pure Communism," if you will.
The theory as it was implemented was a brutal tool for the government to hold total power and resources. Soviet Communism was a dogmatic secular replacement for religion that didn't function. It had to be a replacement for religion, considering the fact that most communist countries have tried to remove religion from the equation.
Also, the crusades were originally a war against terror, in a sense. You know that thing about history repeating itself?
The Crusades originally had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched in response to a call from the Christian Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia.
Edit: also, autokrat, please respond to me in the EU forum, you bastard. pissed.
DS, I'm curious as to what exactly you're trying to achieve. What, just becuase one system under a crazy **** ******* was bad it suddenly elevates secularism up to the billions of people that religious dogmatism has killed? The ****? You don't see Athiest's bombing shit becuase they're pissy twits, killing people becuase tehy made fun of Dawkins or crusading to bring the light of god through their swords to those poor ignorant masses.
I've heard that argument only once DE and it has as much validity as lance bass being straight. Look up estimated human population from beginning of time up until the Middle Ages. Even if Stalin WAS all I had, it still wouldn't be close, not with all the rationalizations in the world. If one is going to attributed secularist events to dogmatism, I guess we can do the same with religious events too. We've just eliminated the concepts of extremism, whether its religious or secular.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/128810?cookieSet=1
I'll post the full article shortly.
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/anti.html
Also, have you read "Religious Policy in the Soviet Union"? I ask, not because it's listed in wikipedia, but because it's a book in my collection and one that I thought would be quite valuable to your "project".
Of course, all I have to do before looking into my parents' books is just post you the wikipedia article. I'm sure you're familiar with all of this, right?
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
http://www.jstor.org/pss/128810?cookieSet=1I'll post the full article shortly.
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/anti.html
Also, have you read "Religious Policy in the Soviet Union"? I ask, not because it's listed in wikipedia, but because it's a book in my collection and one that I thought would be quite valuable to your "project".
Of course, all I have to do before looking into my parents' books is just post you the wikipedia article. I'm sure you're familiar with all of this, right?
And you completely miss my point, not that this surprising.
I am not arguing that the Soviet Union wasn't atheistic. I am arguing that atheism was not the source of its ills. Atheism has no coherent belief system. Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in the supernatural. Atheism presupposes no more than what the individual decides to add.
The Secular Nationalism of Soviet Communism (along with Maoist China while we are at it) on the other hand, was a coherent belief system that went far beyond atheism. It had its basis in Marxist philosophy and was so fanatically devoted to the idea that the Party was History realized, that it was just as dogmatic as fundamentalist religion (I am not including liberal or moderate religion in this.) Both systems believed (fundamentalists still believe they know the truth) they knew the final truth. Both systems have coherent and paradoxically often contradictory belief systems. Both systems abuse logic and twist it to their own ends and finally, both systems have a strong organizational structure based on a dogmatic ideology.
Atheism presupposes none of the above paragraph and to attribute such horrors to it, is nothing more than desperate attempt to make your beliefs look better.
The true irony of this, is that it doesn't actually matter what the true ideological “source” of Soviet Communism was. Even if it was atheism that brought about such horrors, it would not make religion any more true. Things are not true because they are useful to us, unless of course, you want to submit to the Pragmatic Theory of Truth, DS, which I doubt you do. To do so, would be to admit that your beliefs are based on nothing than their utility to you.
Originally posted by Autokrat
And you completely miss my point, not that this surprising.
I am not arguing that the Soviet Union wasn't atheistic. I am arguing that atheism was not the source of its ills. Atheism has no coherent belief system. Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in the supernatural. Atheism presupposes no more than what the individual decides to add.
The Secular Nationalism of Soviet Communism (along with Maoist China while we are at it) on the other hand, was a coherent belief system that went far beyond atheism. It had its basis in Marxist philosophy and was so fanatically devoted to the idea that the Party was History realized, that it was just as dogmatic as fundamentalist religion (I am not including liberal or moderate religion in this.) Both systems believed (fundamentalists still believe they know the truth) they knew the final truth. Both systems have coherent and paradoxically often contradictory belief systems. Both systems abuse logic and twist it to their own ends and finally, both systems have a strong organizational structure based on a dogmatic ideology.
Atheism presupposes none of the above paragraph and to attribute such horrors to it, is nothing more than desperate attempt to make your beliefs look better.
The true irony of this, is that it doesn't actually matter what the true ideological “source” of Soviet Communism was. Even if it was atheism that brought about such horrors, it would not make religion any more true. Things are not true because they are useful to us, unless of course, you want to submit to the Pragmatic Theory of Truth, DS, which I doubt you do. To do so, would be to admit that your beliefs are based on nothing than their utility to you. [/B]
The truth or validity of religion was never in question so I'm not sure why you're bringing this up, other than a subjective defense mechanism. So what you did with the project, in essence, is prove there are worst things out there than religion, such as what Stalin's regime showed us in the absence of religion.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
I think you missed the entire Stalin era then, or rather you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm telling you that religious persecution was rampant because the "State" believed in class struggle and the individual, and a belief in the "supernatural" was bad for the State, so they sought to eradicate it.
Where did I deny this? One ideology was forcibly disposing of another. Christianity did it to Roman Paganism, Islam did it to Sassanid Zorostraism and Russian Marxism to Orthodox Christianity.
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
The truth or validity of religion was never in question so I'm not sure why you're bringing this up, other than a subjective defense mechanism. So what you did with the project, in essence, is prove there are worst things out there than religion, such as what Stalin's regime showed us in the absence of religion.
I brought it up, because its one of your favorite default arguments whenever you argue about the superiority/validity of your belief system. I am pointing out that if you have belief in religion over secularism because you find it to be more useful a system (along with your cultural background,) then you are adopting a pragmatic theory of truth.
You attack secularism and cite Hitler (even though Hitler wasn't secular) and Stalin (surprisingly you never mention Mao) as the results of the secularism. However, you lump the ahistorical Marxist interpretation of secularism in with the rest of secular concepts. No secular humanist today would condone the dogmatic Marxist ideology flaunted in the Soviet Union. They would condemn is as the antithesis of everything they believe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aipy5kWARi4&feature=related
This guy's the worst reviewer I've ever seen. I can understand that he didn't like the Matrix sequels but slating masterpieces like the Incredibles, Back to the future 2 and The freakin Lion King is just stupid. So heres a review for you guys if you want to yell at your screen for a while.
Originally posted by Autokrat
Where did I deny this? One ideology was forcibly disposing of another. Christianity did it to Roman Paganism, Islam did it to Sassanid Zorostraism and Russian Marxism to Orthodox Christianity.
I brought it up, because its one of your favorite default arguments whenever you argue about the superiority/validity of your belief system. I am pointing out that if you have belief in religion over secularism because you find it to be more useful a system (along with your cultural background,) then you are adopting a pragmatic theory of truth.
You attack secularism and cite Hitler (even though Hitler wasn't secular) and Stalin (surprisingly you never mention Mao) as the results of the secularism. However, you lump the ahistorical Marxist interpretation of secularism in with the rest of secular concepts. No secular humanist today would condone the dogmatic Marxist ideology flaunted in the Soviet Union. They would condemn is as the antithesis of everything they believe. [/B]
Hitler wasn't religious either. Go ahead, post those sources I know you're going to post. You would have a much better argument had Hitler believed that the Nazi VALUES were superior to the Jews and everybody else. The fact that he believed blood was superior, makes it a not very Christian or religious belief, at ALL.
Also, show me where I'm lumping those things together? Where are you getting all of this information? Your initial assertion is that religion is bad....And that it's been responsible for more deaths than anything else. At least I think that was your assertion. If it wasn't, then we aren't really arguing about anything.