Atheism's Twentieth Century Death Toll

[McCulloch]

You really want to play that numbers game, with atheism's 100,000,000 death toll last century?

Are there 100,000,000 deaths in the twentieth century attributable to atheism? Please list.

[Cephus]

Actually you're wrong, and so is dianaiad, and everybody else choosing to spout off about this topic. I doubt you or anybody participating in this thread knows anything about Communism. I doubt you or anybody else for that matter has read the Communist Manefisto, or any of the 3 volumes of Capital, or Marx's theory of Historical Materialism. All economic and political systems treat religion in a specific way. Under Capitalism, people are allowed to practice religion freely. Under Communism, people are not. Under Communism, religion is marginalized and outwlaed and persecuted, because atheism is a necessary component of Communism. This is a fact that is taught in University courses about Political Economy and Marxism. Marx clearly expressed hostility towards religion in his writings, and Stalin followed in his steps by targeting religion. With religion, you have killings and massacres and wars and strife. Without religion, you have killing and massacres and wars and strife, however they are on a much larger scale.

Atheism is a necessary component of communism in the same way it's a necessary component of rocks. Communism demands absolute adherence to the state and denies loyalty to any other belief or philosophy. Religion, like it or not, is one such philosophy that splits a believer's loyalty. Ending religion is a function of communism, not a function of atheism. No one has yet been able to demonstrate that, in Stalin's case, his demand that religion be ended was a function of his atheism and not a function of his communism.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't tell the difference between the two.

[dianaiad]

dianaiad wrote:

I do not understand the problem here. I really don't.

If you have a selection of shirts and you pick the blue one because you like the blue one, then you are picking the blue one because it is blue.

I remember some time ago when I tried to explain the logical contradiction between Human Free Will and an Omniscient God to you. I was frustrated for weeks!!!

Your analogy with the shirts would apply ONLY if from among numerous anti-communist groups in Russia, Stalin had selectively targeted ONLY theists from among them, but that is not the case. Stalin killed theists, among others, BECAUSE theists were known to be anti-Communist, not BECAUSE they were theists. Theism may have been a convenient identifying marker, but it was not the REASON.

Crows are black.
Farmers kill crows, but NOT because they are black.
Farmers kill crows because crows are known to raid crops.
If a farmer sees a black bird in his field, he may kill it without inquiring into its individual taste in food.
Therefore, you would say that farmers kill crows because crows are black?

I think you are confusing an identifying marker with the underlying reason for killing theists (or crows).

That is a bad example.

A leader looks at the people he governs.

He sees that he wants only certain types and beliefs in his system.
those who don't fit into those certain types get targeted.
They get targeted because of the beliefs and opinions they hold which do NOT fit.

If a leader decides that theists don't fit, he targets them because they are THEISTS...because THEISTS don't fit.
He might also target college graduates, because they are college graduates and college graduates don't fit.
He might also target people who can read, because people who can read don't fit.

He looks at the groups that have characteristics he doesn't like, and then goes after those groups because they have THOSE characteristics; the ones he does not like.

He targets eyeglass wearers because they are eyeglass wearers.
He targets college graduates because they are college graduates.
He targets readers because they are readers.

He does not target eyeglass wearers because they are college graduates.
He only targets eyeglass wearers because they wear eyeglasses.

He does not target college graduates because they wear eyeglasses/
He targets college graduates because they are college graduates.

He does not target theists because they are college graduates or wear glasses or read.
He targets them because they are theists.

OF COURSE there is a reason he doesn't like theists. They don't fit in his system. They have characteristics that he does not like. As murderous and incomprehensible as we might find these men, they don't target theists because they don't like the WORD. They target theists because they think theists worship God, and that is a bad thing in their world view.

The word 'theist' comes with baggage, and yes, it is the baggage it comes with that these guys didn't like, but that baggage is part of what being a theist is all about; without it, theism is just three nonsense syllables.

What you and the others here keep wanting to do is to dodge the issue here by claiming that because (and back to the farm analogy) the farmer ALSO kills coyotes for raiding the hen house, then he didn't kill the crow because it's a crow...even though the reason he killed the crow is because he thinks CROWS raid crops.

Trust me, no farmer is going to just shoot any damned black bird in the field. He's going to go after crows. Not blackbirds. Not finches. Not robins. Not hawks. He's going to shoot the crows.

Because they are crows, and he thinks 'crow' equals 'raid the crops."

[100%atheist]

People can kill people out of pure belief in, let's say, the Bible. But they can't kill other people out of pure disbelief in God. The direction is kind of missing, you know. For Christians, for instance, the Bible is full of directions to kill.

Fallacy of composition.

Christianity isn't 'Theism' any more than Marxist totalitarian Communism is 'atheism.'

The cold fact is that you have a nonsensical understanding of theism, Christianity, communism, atheism, and their relationships. Christianity is a theistic system. Communism is not an atheistic system (there are no atheistic systems at all). Therefore, your comparison is plain wrong, and the rest of your post is then meaningless. Sorry...

Actually you're wrong, and so is dianaiad, and everybody else choosing to spout off about this topic. I doubt you or anybody participating in this thread knows anything about Communism. I doubt you or anybody else for that matter has read the Communist Manefisto, or any of the 3 volumes of Capital, or Marx's theory of Historical Materialism. All economic and political systems treat religion in a specific way. Under Capitalism, people are allowed to practice religion freely. Under Communism, people are not. Under Communism, religion is marginalized and outwlaed and persecuted, because atheism is a necessary component of Communism. This is a fact that is taught in University courses about Political Economy and Marxism. Marx clearly expressed hostility towards religion in his writings, and Stalin followed in his steps by targeting religion. With religion, you have killings and massacres and wars and strife. Without religion, you have killing and massacres and wars and strife, however they are on a much larger scale.

This is interesting. Perhaps, you reffer to a capitalist university. I was educated in a soviet university and we were thought quite different things. And I did read the Manifesto, and we studies some parts of the Capital. I don't remember anything that would define Marx' philosophy as totalitarian Communism, so I agree with you that Diana is completely irrelevant here. I can't recall, however, specific moments when Marx expressed hostility to theism in general, and when he required atheism to be a necessary part of communism. Can you point me to specific parts of his texts?

[WinePusher]

Actually you're wrong, and so is dianaiad, and everybody else choosing to spout off about this topic. I doubt you or anybody participating in this thread knows anything about Communism. I doubt you or anybody else for that matter has read the Communist Manefisto, or any of the 3 volumes of Capital, or Marx's theory of Historical Materialism. All economic and political systems treat religion in a specific way. Under Capitalism, people are allowed to practice religion freely. Under Communism, people are not. Under Communism, religion is marginalized and outwlaed and persecuted, because atheism is a necessary component of Communism. This is a fact that is taught in University courses about Political Economy and Marxism. Marx clearly expressed hostility towards religion in his writings, and Stalin followed in his steps by targeting religion. With religion, you have killings and massacres and wars and strife. Without religion, you have killing and massacres and wars and strife, however they are on a much larger scale.

Atheism is a necessary component of communism in the same way it's a necessary component of rocks. Communism demands absolute adherence to the state and denies loyalty to any other belief or philosophy. Religion, like it or not, is one such philosophy that splits a believer's loyalty. Ending religion is a function of communism, not a function of atheism. No one has yet been able to demonstrate that, in Stalin's case, his demand that religion be ended was a function of his atheism and not a function of his communism.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't tell the difference between the two.

I don't disagree with any of this. But, I think you are missing the larger point, which is that ending religious belief does not end human warfare and massacres, etc. The Soviet Union was a secular society where religion was outlawed. What was the outcome? Misery and suffering for the entire population. So would the world be better of without religious belief, the answer is clear No.

This is interesting. Perhaps, you reffer to a capitalist university. I was educated in a soviet university and we were thought quite different things. And I did read the Manifesto, and we studies some parts of the Capital. I don't remember anything that would define Marx' philosophy as totalitarian Communism, so I agree with you that Diana is completely irrelevant here.

You're right to say that Marxism was not consistent with Stalinism. But, the common element found both in Marx and Stalin was the antipathy towards religion. That is my point. Marxism and Stalinism are merely different strands of Communism, and at the heart of any form of Communism is the opposition to religious belief. Religious belief cannot exist in a Communist society.

I can't recall, however, specific moments when Marx expressed hostility to theism in general, and when he required atheism to be a necessary part of communism. Can you point me to specific parts of his texts?

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions. http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/08/01/w ... ligion.htm

That is a great article summarizing my argument.

[JohnPaul]

WinePusher wrote:

You're right to say that Marxism was not consistent with Stalinism. But, the common element found both in Marx and Stalin was the antipathy towards religion. That is my point. Marxism and Stalinism are merely different strands of Communism, and at the heart of any form of Communism is the opposition to religious belief. Religious belief cannot exist in a Communist society.

I read the Communist Manifesto and a bit of Marx in school, but I confess I remember almost nothing of it. Communism never interested me because its ideology seemed to remove all individual incentive to achieve, and to glorify and turn control over to the ignorant masses. That seems to almost guarantee a totalitarian regime as the worst, perhaps criminal, elements rise out of the masses to seize control. Also, a collective economy without personal incentive is bound to fail.

I don't recall that Marx advocated totalitarism or the killing of theists. His opposition to religion seemed to be against the use that rulers made of it to pacify, control and oppress the masses with the promise of "Pie in the sky, bye and bye" as long as you behave yourself here and now.

[100%atheist]

WinePusher wrote:

You're right to say that Marxism was not consistent with Stalinism. But, the common element found both in Marx and Stalin was the antipathy towards religion. That is my point. Marxism and Stalinism are merely different strands of Communism, and at the heart of any form of Communism is the opposition to religious belief. Religious belief cannot exist in a Communist society.

I read the Communist Manifesto and a bit of Marx in school, but I confess I remember almost nothing of it. Communism never interested me because its ideology seemed to remove all individual incentive to achieve, and to glorify and turn control over to the ignorant masses. That seems to almost guarantee a totalitarian regime as the worst, perhaps criminal, elements rise out of the masses to seize control.

I think this perfectly characterizes a state that is based on a mix of capitalism and religion.

Also, a collective economy without personal incentive is bound to fail.

Probably, this is true and this is why until now most socialistic states failed.

[100%atheist]

This is interesting. Perhaps, you reffer to a capitalist university. I was educated in a soviet university and we were thought quite different things. And I did read the Manifesto, and we studies some parts of the Capital. I don't remember anything that would define Marx' philosophy as totalitarian Communism, so I agree with you that Diana is completely irrelevant here.

You're right to say that Marxism was not consistent with Stalinism. But, the common element found both in Marx and Stalin was the antipathy towards religion. That is my point. Marxism and Stalinism are merely different strands of Communism, and at the heart of any form of Communism is the opposition to religious belief. Religious belief cannot exist in a Communist society.

Actually, there is Religious Communism, so you are not quite correct on this.

I can't recall, however, specific moments when Marx expressed hostility to theism in general, and when he required atheism to be a necessary part of communism. Can you point me to specific parts of his texts?

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions. http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/08/01/w ... ligion.htm

That is a great article summarizing my argument.

Umm.... yes, I agree with the article. And it basically states that Marx in particular and Communism in general are not after religion at all. So, are you in a disagreement with your previous statements?

[Cephus]

I don't disagree with any of this. But, I think you are missing the larger point, which is that ending religious belief does not end human warfare and massacres, etc. The Soviet Union was a secular society where religion was outlawed. What was the outcome? Misery and suffering for the entire population. So would the world be better of without religious belief, the answer is clear No.

But who has even suggested that it does? You're making claims that simply do not bear out in reality. Doing away with religion will not do away with human violence, it's foolish to claim that it will and, so far as I can tell, nobody has ever said that. However, doing away with fantasy thinking, with irrational beliefs, with wholly emotional dreaming and replacing it with rational, intellectual, critically-evaluated methods is certainly going to improve how we handle human violence. Today, a religious person can declare that an imaginary man in the sky told them to go kill a bunch of heretics, there's not only no way to challenge those beliefs but half the planet shares them! You can't debate whether these beliefs are worthwhile, whether they are true and therefore, whether the actions taken because of them are justifiable because the beliefs themselves are wholly irrational.

You bring up the Soviet Union, but it was a place where religion was officially illegal, but unofficially widely practiced. I'm not talking about driving religion underground, I'm talking about eliminating religion and religious and superstitious beliefs from the human consciousness altogether. It will be a long process, to be sure, but I think it's clear that humanity will be far superior without religion than it ever has been with it.

[Bust Nak]

What you and the others here keep wanting to do is to dodge the issue here by claiming that because (and back to the farm analogy) the farmer ALSO kills coyotes for raiding the hen house, then he didn't kill the crow because it's a crow...even though the reason he killed the crow is because he thinks CROWS raid crops.

Trust me, no farmer is going to just shoot any damned black bird in the field. He's going to go after crows. Not blackbirds. Not finches. Not robins. Not hawks. He's going to shoot the crows.

Because they are crows, and he thinks 'crow' equals 'raid the crops."

Surely you are damaging your own case here: the conclusion to draw from your post is that the farmer is killing crows because they raid the crops, not because they are crows.

In other words, Stalin does not target theists because they are theists. He targets them because they don't fit in his system.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

Marxism and Stalinism are merely different strands of Communism, and at the heart of any form of Communism is the opposition to religious belief. Religious belief cannot exist in a Communist society.

What makes you think that? Counterexamples abound:

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