Refuting the myth that Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists.

[cleanhippie]

http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-birmingham/refuting-the-myth-that-hitler-stalin-and-pol-pot-were-atheists

It is a common talking point amongst Christians to attribute the horrors committed by infamous world leaders to atheism, and many times we are ill-equipped to refute those erroneous claims. In fact, last year, an Anglican Archbishop named Peter Jensen told his Australian congregation that atheism is not the rational philosophy that it claims to be. He stated, "Last century we tried godlessness on a grand scale and the effects were devastating: Nazism, Stalinism, Pol Pot-ery, mass murder, abortion and broken relationships - all promoted by state-imposed atheism…the illusion that we can build a better life without God." He further stated, "It's about our determination as human beings to have our own way, to make our own rules, to live our own lives, unfettered by the rule of God and the right of God to rule over us…What we're really seeing, once more an example of the contest between human beings and God over who rules the world."

Atheist Foundation president David Nicholls says the comments are an act of desperation by the church. Personally, I think "desperation" is an understatement of epic proportions. There are so many things wrong with Jensen's statements that I had to sit here and stare at my screen for quite a while before I even found a starting point. I gave considerable thought to expounding on the sheer arrogance that a god rules the world regardless of whether or not anyone actually believes in one, the utterly ridiculous notion of a struggle between god and man, or their dogma about not being able to achieve peace, happiness and harmony in our society without their god. However, time being at a premium today, I decided to a different route.

Continue reading on Examiner.com: Refuting the myth that Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists - Birmingham atheism | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-birmingham/refuting-the-myth-that-hitler-stalin-and-pol-pot-were-atheists#ixzz1DrF3o2Rp

http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-birmingham/refuting-the-myth-that-hitler-stalin-and-pol-pot-were-atheists

[BanzaiBonnie]

1. I hope more people will read this article

[darkstar3]

2. The myths have been refuted here time and time again.

Haters gonna hate.

[Igel]

3. The same argument holds for Richard Dawkins.

He's a believer. His statements in support of religion are obligatorily there not to admit that it exists while he encourages atheism, but to convert atheists to religion.

Why is he assumed to be a believer? Because he was raised Anglican and was a Xian. And once you're a believer--at age 9, 15, or 20, you must *always* remain a believer. You can convert to religion, but you must be 100% in your atheism, always an atheist from day one, to be a True Atheist.

Hitler may have been as "Teutonic" in his religion as Xian, condemned nuns as race-traitors for not breeding, and even hung swastikas on his "Xmas" tree, but he was as he always had been. Stalin may have only embraced Orthodox churches when he needed the support (being a good Catholic and all that--the extreme love that Catholics and Orthodox had for each other is infamous); all his personally written diatribes against religion were merely Catholicism in disguise.

And Pol Pot was a good Buddhist. Why, just compare what he said and did with what most Buddhists believe. Richard Gere, eat your heart out.

Of course, the writer of this piece, Al Stefanelli, was a Southern Baptist preacher. By his own standard of logic, he must still be a Southern Baptist, failing his own "True Atheist" test. This would make him a hypocrite, but such obviously shoddy reasoning just serves to smear the real true atheists with the label of "hypocrite" and "shoddy thinker" This can only help keep his sheep on the true path to enlightenment--obviously his true purpose, being a Baptist pastor and all that.

Must it be added that any True Atheist would immediately see through his flimsy logic and condemn him as an infiltrator and saboteur?

[Goblinmonger]

4. Fail.

First of all the argument is that Hitler was not an atheist.

Dawkins had denounced his religion. Hitler did not. Sure, Hitler had a pretty skewed version of Christianity, but said on several occasions that what he was doing was for his religion. Even if you don't agree with Hitler's Christianity, he did do what he did for his atheism, which he didn't have.

Apply to other examples, this was just to show the flaw in your analogy.

[darkstar3]

5. Might wanna proof that second paragraph.

You have a positive where you're looking for a negative.

[darkstar3]

6. The article isn't exactly well-written, but it does prove a specific point I've made before.

Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot were power-mad dictators whose sole motivation was the acquisition of more power in the hopes of total domination. The article claims that none of them were atheists for good case-making measure, but I feel that such a claim is beside the point. Whatever faith or lack thereof was followed by each of these monsters is irrelevant in the face of their motivation. There is simply no historically accurate claim that can be made to lay the blame for their regimes at the feet of atheism.

[LeftishBrit]

8. Agree - and in any case, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot did all promote a religion

An ancient religion at that: Emperor Worship. The ancient Romans worshipped some of their Emperors as gods. These tyrants essentially demanded that *they* be worshipped. It was perhaps at its most obvious with Mao, whose 'Thoughts' for a while essentially played the role of a religious text.

This is just as much a religious mindset as any other. I call such regimes 'quasi-theocratic'; they don't promote atheism as usually understood, but demand worship of a dictator, his ideology, and the state apparatus around him.

[darkstar3]

11. That is a good point, too, but one that is often ignored by the people backing the meme. n/t

[cleanhippie]

9. Did you simply fabricate this or what?

And once you're a believer--at age 9, 15, or 20, you must *always* remain a believer. You can convert to religion, but you must be 100% in your atheism, always an atheist from day one, to be a True Atheist.

:wtf?

[humblebum]

7. Oh, this is gonna be precious! nt

[darkstar3]

10. Yes, just as soon as you go find your 3 friends who agree with you

and start trotting out the same old crap we hear from you time and again. Tell me, did you even read the article?

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. Hitler on religious schools

"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith."
speech made during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordant of 1933, 26 April 1933

Only church schools can provide a moral framework that is compatible with Nazism. Can't say that I disagree.

[humblebum]

13. I have never felt that Hitler could be considered an atheist.

But it is impossible to consider him a devout Christian either or for that matter a devout anything except devout Nazi. Hitler was well aware of the 1st Reich's control over the Roman Catholic Church and the Emperor's role as defender and co-leader of it. He also had a deep knowledge and admiration for the ancient pre-christian Germanic past. And he was a devout student of Nietzsche. In other words, he was an amalgam of many ideas and creeds and his views changed drastically over time.

"In 1941, Martin Bormann, a close associate of Hitler said publicly "National Socialism and Christianity are irreconcilable".<51> In 1942 he also declared in a confidential memo to Gauleiters that the Christian Churches 'must absolutely and finally be broken.' Thus it is evident that he believed Nazism, based as it was on a 'scientific' world-view, to be completely incompatible with Christianity.<52>

When we speak of belief in God, we do not mean, like the naive Christians and their spiritual exploiters, a man-like being sitting around somewhere in the universe. The force governed by natural law by which all these countless planets move in the universe, we call omnipotence or God. The assertion that this universal force can trouble itself about the destiny of each individual being, every smallest earthly bacillus, can be influenced by so-called prayers or other surprising things, depends upon a requisite dose of naivety or else upon shameless professional self-interest.<53>

Other members of the Hitler government, including Rosenberg, during the war formulated a thirty-point program for the "National Reich Church" which included:

The National Reich Church claims exclusive right and control over all Churches.
The National Church is determined to exterminate foreign Christian faiths imported into Germany in the ill-omened year 800.
The National Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible.
The National Church will clear away from its altars all Crucifixes, Bibles and pictures of Saints.
On the altars there must be nothing but Mein Kampf and to the left of the altar a sword.<54>
Some Nazi party leaders viewed Christianity and National Socialism as competing world views (even though some Christians did not see a conflict) and Hitler planned to eliminate the Christian churches after securing control of his European empire. The churches were permitted some self governing and allowed to remain because Hitler did not want to risk strong opposition until other more pressing issues were dealt with.<55>

From the mid 1930s, anti-Christian elements within the Nazi party became more prominent - they were restrained by Hitler, who thought religion would die by itself as science advanced.<11> Nevertheless the Party began to suppress religious teaching, closed religious youth movements and excluded religious instruction from the Hitler Youth.

As for any card-carrying Marxist-Leninist ie. Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, Kruschev, Hoxha, Ceausescu, etc. - they were all required to declare themselves atheists, regardless of any past religious affiliations.

[humblebum]

14. Nope, no atheism for Stalin or Pol Pot even if they were marxist-leninists.

The League of Militant Atheists comprised workers, peasants, students, and members of the intelligentsia. Organizations were founded at plants, factories, kolkhozes, and educational institutions. By early 1941, the league consisted of approximately 3.5 million working people of 100 nationalities. The number of groups reached 96,000. Guided by Leninist principles of antireligious propaganda and by the party’s decisions on these principles, the league dedicated itself to ideological struggle against all forms of religion and the development of a scientific world view among working people. It disseminated propaganda on the natural sciences and atheism, offered believers individual counseling, and trained propagandists and atheist agitators. It also published scientific and popular scientific works and a number of periodicals, founded museums and organized exhibitions, and conducted scientific research in the field of atheism and criticism of religion. Working under the motto “The struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism,” the league coordinated atheist propaganda with economic, political, and cultural tasks. The league maintained extensive international ties; it belonged to the International of Proletarian Freethinkers, and then to the World Union of Freethinkers. In 1947 the league turned over its tasks of disseminating scientific-atheist propaganda to Znanie (Knowledge), a newly created all-Union society.
REFERENCES
Konovalov, B. N. “Soiuz voinstvuiushchikh bezbozhnikov.” In the collection Voprosy nauchnogo ateizma, no. 4. Moscow, 1967.
Konovalov, B. N. K massovomu ateizmu. Moscow, 1974.

And of course no atheist outside of a communist country would consider themselves allied with those people.

Joseph McCabe- Is the Position of Atheism Growing Stronger? By Joseph McCabe (1936)
“No wonder they hated and libeled Russia! For the news is spreading, and is triumphing even over reactionary opposition that Russia is doing the finest and soundest reconstructive work of our time, and it is doing this, not only without God, but on a basis of militant Atheism.”

[dimbear]

15. As long as the Christians bravely accept Hitler as one of their own,

atheists should be willing to accept Stalin. He was what he was, a person who was raised Christian but who rejected his faith.

It's no accident the linked article only spills a few words over Uncle Joe.

[laconicsax]

16. LOL! Some Christian sects aren't even willing to accept other sects as "one of their own."

Illustrated in the http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2005/sep/29/comedy.religion?cat=stage&type=article">best God joke of all time

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.

:rofl:

[montanto]

20. lol omfg that is too funny. nm

[darkstar3]

17. Let us know when that happens.

And BTW, read #6. I have no problem with the idea of Stalin as an atheist. It doesn't change the fact that what he did doesn't reflect on atheism or other atheists, due to his motivations.

[originalpckelly]

18. And if they were?

It's not like history isn't replete with individuals who were Christians and did horrible things.

Being an atheist has nothing to do with one's morality or lack thereof.

If anything, not needing a fictitious god is a healthier form of morality. I do the right thing because I care about other people, not because of some skydaddy.

[trotsky]

19. Yup, that's a great point.

I mean, consider another current active thread in this forum asking where all the beautiful things are that atheism inspired. Seems to me some believers want it both ways: atheism is directly responsible for and inspired the Soviet gulags, but has nothing at all to do with amazing secular accomplishments because it is an empty philosophy that says nothing. Meanwhile, I haven't yet met a non-believer who says that religion hasn't inspired people to do beautiful things. It's just that the same factors that have inspired beauty and creativity have also inspired some of the worst cruelty humanity has ever seen.

But apart from that, the whole point is that the behavior or relative creativity of theists or atheists has absolutely nothing to do with the truth of the claims being made. (Unless, of course, someone wants to make the claim that religion makes one a more moral person, which is laughable to say the least.)

[AlecBGreen]

21. Religion doesnt HAVE to make you more moral, though it can.

I think its far more likely to make more things seem wrong and make you feel guilty for doing them when you cant/wont stop. That has been my experience.

[trotsky]

22. That's basically another way of saying the non-religious don't have as much of a conscience.

That is an extremely unfair thing to say.

[AlecBGreen]

23. actually I meant it the other way.

I dont think the non-religious lack a conscience, I think the religious can develop hypersensitive consciences (aka not in a good way).

[darkstar3]

24. Then you miscommunicated when using the phrase "more moral."

[AlecBGreen]

25. I dont understand

could you explain how you think I misused the word?

[darkstar3]

28. Well, read #23.

It sounds to me like you are contradicting yourself. You first said that religious people can be "more moral", and when it caused offense with trotsky you backtracked in #23 and said that some religious people can have "hypersensitive consciences (aka not in a good way)."

A conscience is what makes you moral. If you didn't misuse the words "more moral" when you started on this train of thought, then you clearly believe that non-religious people have defective or non-existence consciences, which contradicts #23.

[kwassa]

26. This refutation of the "myth" is crap

This article is simply someone's political agenda, not an argument of any depth at all. It is poorly written and completely unsupported.

Atheism is part of Communism. It is simple as that. I've seen some atheists come up with all kinds of logical back-flips trying to explain away how it wasn't really atheism that caused problems, because they didn't things "in the name of atheism". I hope that keeps them warm at night, because no one else will buy that line of bullshit.

Stalin is their big problem, mass murderer that he was. Some atheists try to finesse this uncomfortable piece of history by claiming that communism was a state religion, Stalin a pseudo-god, which lets "real" atheists off the hook. The bottom line is that communist atheism under Stalin did oppress religion and believers. Admit it, live it, and move on.

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

The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion<1> and its replacement with atheism.<2><3> Toward that end, the communist regime confiscated church property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in the schools.<4>

State atheism in the Soviet Union was known as "gosateizm,<5> and was based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. As the founder of the Soviet state V. I. Lenin put it:

Religion is the opium of the people: this saying of Marx is the cornerstone of the entire ideology of Marxism about religion. All modern religions and churches, all and of every kind of religious organizations are always considered by Marxism as the organs of bourgeois reaction, used for the protection of the exploitation and the stupefaction of the working class.<6>

Marxism-Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression,and, ultimately, the elimination of religious beliefs. Within about a year of the revolution the state expropriated all church property, including the churches themselves, and in the period from 1922 to 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were killed (a much greater number was subjected to persecution).<7>

but wait, there is more!

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

Stalin followed the position adopted by Lenin that religion was an opiate that needed to be removed in order to construct the ideal communist society. To this end, his government promoted atheism through special atheistic education in schools, massive amounts of anti-religious propaganda, the antireligious work of public institutions (especially the Society of the Godless), discriminatory laws, and also a terror campaign against religious believers. By the late 1930s it had become dangerous to be publicly associated with religion.<86>

Stalin's role in the fortunes of the Russian Orthodox Church is complex. Continuous persecution in the 1930s resulted in its near-extinction as a public institution: by 1939, active parishes numbered in the low hundreds (down from 54,000 in 1917), many churches had been leveled, and tens of thousands of priests, monks and nuns were persecuted and killed. Over 100,000 were shot during the purges of 1937–1938.<87> During World War II, the Church was allowed a revival as a patriotic organization, and thousands of parishes were reactivated until a further round of suppression in Khrushchev's time. The Russian Orthodox Church Synod's recognition of the Soviet government and of Stalin personally led to a schism with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia.

Just days before Stalin's death, certain religious sects were outlawed and persecuted. Many religions popular in the ethnic regions of the Soviet Union including the Roman Catholic Church, Uniats, Baptists, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, etc. underwent ordeals similar to the Orthodox churches in other parts: thousands of monks were persecuted, and hundreds of churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, sacred monuments, monasteries and other religious buildings were razed.

edit to add:

Here is a film clip of the destruction of Christ the Savior cathedral in Moscow, the biggest in the city, by Stalin's government in 1931. The Soviets decided to build a palace to the people on the site, but gave up that plan when the foundation started to slide into the Moscow river. They then turned it into the biggest outdoor swimming pool in the country. The cathedral was rebuilt in 1995; I visited in in 2002.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRpVyqWFGh0&NR=1

[darkstar3]

27. Why look, it's the same exact argument from another uninformed source.

The fact remains simple, as it always has: Communism =/= atheism. Lemme see if I can provide an analogy...

If you take egg, milk, vanilla, flour, baking powder, and salt, and combine them together in the appropriate amounts, you can make pancakes. The pancakes will be a tasty treat, and adding butter and syrup to them will make them even tastier. But the pancakes ARE not and DO not reflect any of their individual ingredients. You couldn't eat baking powder as a tasty treat, and adding butter and syrup to it will do nothing for the taste.

To spell it out for you, since I know you need it: Atheism is an ingredient, Communism is the finished product. You cannot take an aspect of the finished product and claim that it is reflective of a single ingredient. The whole is more than the sum of its parts.

If you want to say that atheism is responsible for millions of deaths, you need to prove (if you care at all about legitimacy) that atheism outside of Communism would lead to the same mass murders. Not only have you and your choir never done that, there is no history you can use to do so.

But feel free to prove me wrong. Please use examples and links in the process since you require them of everyone else.

[darkstar3]

37. Kwassa, humblebum, I don't see any answers to this post.

I see humblebum arguing about whether he has conflated Communism and atheism in the past, badly, but I don't see either of you bothering to answer this simple point. As I see it, you have 3 choices:

1. Provide a reasonable answer to post #27 that logically supports your (plural) case about Communism and atheism.
2. Stop pushing the meme that atheism is somehow responsible for the crimes of Communists.
3. Continue down your chosen path using logically deficient argumentation, not to mention hateful rhetoric.

It's your choice.

[humblebum]

39. You are making a vacuous argument here darkstar and

dare I say a strawman. Actually you have become the one who is conflating the two. And history stands on its own merits.

[darkstar3]

40. I think you have a problem with projection.

Did you have an answer to #27 that wasn't an inaccurate accusation of "strawman" or a desperate attempt at dismissal?

[trotsky]

71. The silence in response to your challenge is deafening.

And not surprising at all.

[humblebum]

29. kwassa, not all communists are atheists, BUT ALL Marxist-Leninist

Communists are required to be atheists if they are actual card-carrying members of the party. And of course that included Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Kruschev, Mao, Pol Pol, Ceaucescu, Hoxha, etc. Also, not all atheists are communists and that was the case in the USSR where there were many more atheists than Communists. There was a sizable atheist population and movement in Russia before the Bolsheviks took power and still so today.

There are also other types of Communists, such as the Christian Communists.

[darkstar3]

30. And now you show your complete intellectual dishonesty.

How many times in this forum have people asked you to separate Communism and atheism? How many times have you purposely conflated the two in order to make a rhetorical point? And now you show that you understand that the two are mutually exclusive.

You just showed that every debate you've had on this board has been a farce, with you hammering on a point that even you don't really believe. And the sick thing is, even though I used the word "every", it's not fuckin' hyperbole.

[humblebum]

31. No darkstar, I have never conflated the two. It was always you

saying that I confused communists with atheists. Just got tired of correcting you and got to the point where I just shook my head in amazement of your blather. If I ever once said that all atheists were communists or vice versa, show it or shove it. You have a habit of denying the obvious when the proof is right before your eyes.

[cleanhippie]

Sorry, man, DS is 100% correct.

[humblebum]

33. The proof please.

Never have I stated that communism and atheism go hand in hand. I have been accused of that many times, but claiming something many times doesn't make it so. However, I have stated many times things that were done by atheists or in the name of atheism, and the reply was that it was communists, not atheists who were responsible. That is hardly conflating the two. As a matter of fact I have stated many times the same response I gave to kwassa. The Communists in the USSR and China were Marxist-Leninists and therefore atheists, and they did many, many things in the name of atheism. But that does not mean that all of the atheists in Russia at that time were communists. Many atheists were not. Joseph McCabe who in 1936 wrote,“No wonder they hated and libeled Russia! For the news is spreading, and is triumphing even over reactionary opposition that Russia is doing the finest and soundest reconstructive work of our time, and it is doing this, not only without God, but on a basis of militant Atheism” was not a Communist, and in fact leaned toward anti-communism, but he was definitely a British atheist who agreed with the actions of militant atheists in the USSR.

[darkstar3]

34. You provided it in your own post.

"The Communists in the USSR and China were Marxist-Leninists and therefore atheists, and they did many, many things in the name of atheism."

Did they? Did you happen to miss the important point I made about ingredients and finished products?

Every debate you have gotten into that started with your idiotic phrase "the history of organized atheism" has been about the horrors of Communist regimes. Communism =/= atheism, organized or otherwise, but that doesn't stop you from claiming that "organized atheism is responsible for the largest number of deaths in" blah blah blah.

The fact stands: Your post here shows that even you don't really believe that Communism is "organized atheism", which shows every debate you've had on the topic to be farcical, and will be used against you in the future every time you trot out that same old phrase.

[humblebum]

35. Sorry buddy, but nowhere did I in there claim that communism

and atheism are the same thing or that they are equal. You are clearly interpreting, calculatingly and purposely so, my statement that says nothing of the sort. If I say that all card-carry communists in the USSR in the 20th century were atheists, I am correct simply because the communists in the Soviet Union were Marxist-Leninists and as such are required to declare themselves to be atheists. But, I have also said before that there were atheists there who were not communists, which is true.

Organized atheism in the USSR existed in Russia before the Revolution, but Communism (Marxist Leninist)ensured that it had little official competition. As far as Communism being organized atheism - I never said that. You only claim that I said so. Atheists in the Soviet Union were organized into many different groups and not all those in the groups were communists. I have intimated that more than once. I even mentioned McCabe, who was an ardent supporter of militant atheism (his words), but he was definitely not a Marxist-Leninist Communist.

Organized atheism is organized atheism, whether they be communists or not. Republicans can be atheists, Democrats can be atheists. No I never said that communism was organized atheism, nor that all colors of communists were atheists. you are purposely trying to distort my words and intentions. However, "the history of organized atheism" does include Marxist-Leninist communists, who are and were required to officially declare themselves to be atheists and to renounce any religious affiliation.

So from now on when you accuse me of conflating communism and atheism, remember that I know the difference and I also know how you operate. No, they are not the same thing, and not all involved in organized atheism are communists. And if you continue down the same road, you are brazenly putting out false information.

[darkstar3]

36. Nothing like the status quo.

First you make claims you can't back, then you get called on it, then you tell us all you never made the claims.

Now, you say you never said that Communism was/is "organized atheism", yet here you blame every death in Communist regimes on atheists. In fact, that whole thread is replete with examples of you laying the crimes of Communists at the feet of atheists, ignoring completely the idea of ingredient vs. finished product that you have been repeatedly presented with. This exemplar thread is only one instance in a long history of you attacking atheism and current atheists by blaming them for crimes committed by Communists, conflating the two ideas repeatedly and purposely.

Your rhetoric sickens me beyond the capacity for expression. And since you have been continuing down this same road for a long time, you have been brazenly putting out false information.

[humblebum]

38. It just so happens that statement is true. They were atheistic

dictators. They were not religious. Your ingredient versus finished product analogy is nothing but a diversion. As far as "attacking atheism and current atheists by blaming them for crimes committed by Communists" - YOU are conflating the two. When crimes are committed under the banner of League of Militant Atheists, the Godless, the Society of the Godless, etc., etc., and advertised as such in countless posters, newspapers, and broadcasts - it can definitely be said that atheism was the motivation. The establishment and supremacy of state atheism was a stated goal. And yes, the dictators were all atheists. And a goal was to wipe out religion. You also said that I blame "current atheists" and I made no such statement. Again you are making false accusations.

[darkstar3]

41. Again you ignore the genesis of those groups and actions,

focusing entirely on the ingredient and caring nothing about the fact that the finished product is to blame. Go back and research the origination of these societies of which you speak, and you will find that they were sanctioned, guided, and supported by the Communists and their regimes. Your agenda shows clearly when you ignore such things. It also shows clearly when you accuse me of diversion simply because you can't answer my point.

As for current atheists, check that thread again and read about how you compared Communist murderers and current prominent atheists. Go back and read some of the things you've written about Dawkins and Hitchens.

Your arguments on Communism have been agenda-driven and intellectually dishonest, and you have shown yourself to be contradictory in this thread even though you are desperate not to admit it. You have hoisted yourself with your own petard.

[humblebum]

42. I have been researching this topic for the better part of 40+ years.

Atheism is atheism and Communism is Communism. I'll stand by my words.

[darkstar3]

43. More claims you can't verify,

not to mention a stubborn refusal to accept anything from someone who disagrees with you. :boring:

[humblebum]

44. If you discount the enormous amount of material that I have

presented in the past, then you can say there has been mo verification. It is you that are in denial in the face of overwhelming evidence. You know it , I know it. Goodbye.

[darkstar3]

45. Oh yes, you've referenced a handful of books, we can't forget that.

Of course some of the books you've referenced have been so badly written, so clearly agenda-driven, and so incredibly lacking in scholarly research that they refute themselves. And then there's your interpretation and skewing of simple historical facts, such as your insistence on calling it the "League of Militant Atheists" (instead of Militant Godless as was its actual name), and your insistence that it was an independent organization with no ties to or support from the Communist Party.

Your "overwhelming evidence" is about as evidentiary as the "overwhelming evidence" for alien abductions with anal probes. You have an uncanny ability to latch on to the few writers who agree with you and prop them up as sources of authority while at the same time ignoring the vast amount of information and simple logic that contradicts your agenda.

Now, feel free to use another logical fallacy in your attempt to take the last word. You have the predictability of Old Faithful.

[humblebum]

50. If you can't debunk the facts, then you try to debunk the sources of the facts.

You are criticizing not just one or two books that were written by noted scholars, including Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, but many publications and sources, both primary and secondary. And the Russian term "bezboznik" is translated as both "atheist" and "godless" - same word. But of course you knew. And then there is this bit of false blather:"your insistence that it was an independent organization with no ties to or support from the Communist Party." I have always maintained that the Marxist Communists were a vehicle for the spreading of militant atheism, which they were. It was not the League of Militant "Communists", nor Society of the "Communists". Their newspaper was not "the Communist", but "the Atheist" - "Bezboznik". The examples go on and on.

[darkstar3]

52. What facts?

There are no facts to support your case. You are using Communist groups, Communist actions, and Communist motives to claim that "the history of organized atheism" is bloody and filled with oppression and mass-murder, just like kwassa was above. That is the conflation of Communism and atheism that you have been accused of, and of which you have again provided proof.

And again you accuse me of falsifying your position. You state that you have never insisted that the "League of Militant Atheists" was separate from the Communist Party, yet the sentences that you end your post with are exactly what you have used before in order to claim that the League was not related to the Communist Party, but rather a standalone example of "organized atheism". You're just full of contradictions this weekend.

Now, if you really had been studying this topic for 40+ years, and you had an ounce of intellectual honesty, you wouldn't write such sentences as this one: "I have always maintained that the Marxist Communists were a vehicle for the spreading of militant atheism, which they were." Why do I say that? Because Communism had little to do with "militant atheism" and everything to do with crushing the influence of non-Party leaders.

History shows us clearly that a bunch of so-called "militant atheists" did NOT organize in the hopes of oppressing religious people and call themselves Communists, even if that is what your statement implies. Rather, several men from varied backgrounds and religious educations tried to form a new kind of government together, and in the process decided to enforce societal godlessness in order to prevent the highly respected church from undermining their rule. If you want to know WHY the church had such power over the people and the ability to undermine the rule of the Communist Party, you might read up on the relationship that Russia's prior rulers, the Tsars, had with the church.

(Of course, I'm really just writing this for the benefit of other readers, since I know that trying to get YOU to admit to these facts, even though I know you are aware of them, is pissing in the wind.)

[humblebum]

53. Hopefully, your distortion of history will spur others to read and

research for themselves. I'm done with ya.

[darkstar3]

55. Oh, are you done again?

Just like you were done before when you said "goodbye"?

I hope other readers will indeed do their own homework into how the Tsars and the Russian Orthodox Church were intertwined, how the Tsars lost power, and how the new regime was desperate to ensure that no other source of power or authority could be found within the boundaries of Russia. Once they do so they will be sure to laugh at your twisted interpretations.

But what of your defensive accusations of falsehood? Have you no smoke left to try and screen your conflation of Communism and atheism? Have you finally realized that you have been caught in a massive contradiction of your own farcical views and so wish to ignore it until you can restart the old meme in a new thread?

You're not done here. Not by a long shot. Because I'm not letting you off the hook that easily and you always have to have the last word.

[humblebum]

57. Give it your best shot. The demonstrable truth remains that atheistic dictators

did indeed murder more people in the 20th century alone, than all religious wars in history. You can throw up all of your strawmen about Tsars and the Russian Church. Very violent and abusive, but nothing compared to what followed. And guess what? You are conflating Communism and atheism.

[cleanhippie]

59. Wow, dude, just wow!

There seems to be a break from reality happening in your posts....

[humblebum]

60. I guess when one side leaves reality the other must follow, otherwise

you wind up talking to yourself.

[cleanhippie]

64. Thats who you are talking to...yourself.

Cause no one else is listening to your nonsense any more.

[darkstar3]

62. The demonstrable truth is that Communists murdered people.

For you to claim "atheistic" dictators were responsible proves that you conflate the two, and have no answer to the point made in #27 about ingredients vs. finished product. You conflate atheism and Communism in every attack you post, and then accuse others of doing it when they point out your error because you have deliberately blinded yourself. You are so blind that you cannot even recognize that what I wrote about the Tsars had nothing whatsoever to do with their violence or abuse. You are so ill-informed that you cannot even apply the simple logical concept of a straw man appropriately. Your argument is so intellectually bankrupt that you have to resort to mass repetition and shouting down your opponents. The problem with that type of argumentation is that it is logically and factually inferior, and when the playing field is equal and there is no clock for you to run out, all you can do is talk yourself in circles.

[humblebum]

65. The "religion" of the Marxist-Leninist Communists was defined

as "Scientific Atheism" by them. That is an established fact. Countless numbers of people were imprisoned, tortured, or died in opposition to its forced acceptance. All of this other stuff you are trying throw out such as your ingredients vs. finished products argument is nothing more than one huge red herring. You can slice dice and analyse the situation any way you see fit, but that does not obscure the facts. You are trying everything you can - your ad hominems, your strawmen, your vacuous and ad hoc arguments - to obscure the facts.

[darkstar3]

66. So you try inaccurate fallacy spotting and dismissal.

I'm not throwing out anything other than the fact that you are continuously and purposely conflating atheism and Communism. You can slice, dice, and interpret the facts any way you like to fit your agenda, but it won't change the fact that you are using Communist groups and Communist actions to paint atheism with murder, oppression, and hate. Your conflation is nothing more than ill-informed, poorly crafted rhetoric.

[onager]

46. Sorry, wrong again...

If I say that all card-carry communists in the USSR in the 20th century were atheists, I am correct simply because the communists in the Soviet Union were Marxist-Leninists and as such are required to declare themselves to be atheists.

:rofl:

So after 1917, all Russians suddenly and magically became Official Atheists? Strange, since clashes between Russian religious believers and Communists persisted (and were documented) for many years after the Revolution.

Here's an example from 1935, nearly two decades after the USSR officially, suddenly and magically became atheist:

Even members of the Young Pioneers, the Komsomol's junior branch for ten to fourteen-year-olds, might be targeted for attack. In the Rossosh district of central Russia, a stronghold of religious sectarianism and monarchism, Pioneers were subjected to regular harassment by religious believers who "call the Pioneer tie 'the devil's noose' and consider that it is a sin to wear it.'

In 1935, a group of adult believers ambushed some Young Pioneers as they were coming back from the Pioneer club...

'...Arepev (the sectarians' leader) seized Pioneer K.I. Loboda and tore off his clothes and threw stones at the others and broke the head of one of them. As they threw stones the sectarians shouted: "Little idolatrous devils, I'll show you how to wear a tie."

From Everyday Stalinism by Sheila Fitzpatrick...who really is an expert on Stalinist Russia.

[humblebum]

51. Now this just wreaks of ignorance:

"So after 1917, all Russians suddenly and magically became Official Atheists?" Not all Russians were Communists, nor Marxist-Leninist Communists. No, they didn't officially become atheists. However, card-carrying members were required to renounce any religious adherence and declare themselves atheists and to officially harrass, persecute, and ridicule any religious persons encountered. And there was also a Revolution and a Civil War, if you are not aware of the fact and that would explain the fighting.

[onager]

92. Uh... that should be "reeks" of ignorance, Professor.

Some homophonic help for ya. That's OK, don't thank me:

No, (wreak and reek) haven't become interchangable; people have become lazier in their thinking and confuse the two.

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/marketing-sales/writing-editing/MAR_WED/550850-10256550?browseCategory=


Urban Dictionary:

term used to make an internet poster seem more intelligent than they are when talking about possible sarcasm or other hidden meaning behind another post.

is used to replace the word "reeks" as that seems like a less cool word.

Hmm, that post wreaks of sarcasm.

You wreak of ignorance.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wreaks


And thanks for the concern, but I do know "there was a Revolution and a Civil War." I even know there was another war you rarely mention, probably because the Godless Commies were on our side, after Russia was invaded by a bunch of Xians from Germany:

[skepticscott]

47. Did you really expect it

to display even a modicum of intellectual honesty? It has never been capable of that.

[darkstar3]

48. It's good to demonstrate that from time to time, though.

[skepticscott]

49. True, there may be some

that don't realize the depths of its dishonesty and bullshittery.

[cleanhippie]

54. "Never have I stated that communism and atheism go hand in hand." Are you F-ing kidding me?

Come on, man, you are either lying or delusional about this. WTF?

[humblebum]

56. Not all communists are atheists and not all atheists are communists.

It's just that simple.

[cleanhippie]

58. Uh, okay, but that pretty much destroys every argument you have ever made regarding communists and

atheists.

Whatever, man, its been bizarro world around here lately, nothing surprises me anymore.

[humblebum]

61. Not in my book it doesn't. The marxist-leninist Communists do not

comprise the entirety of Communism. Marxist-Leninist Communists were officially all atheists in the USSR, China, and the satellite countries. Other communist communities exist that are not atheistic. Also, not all those in the Soviet Union belonged to the Communist party and many of those were not atheists. And there were many atheists who did not (officially) belong to the Communist party, but many of them did join groups such as League of Militant Atheists, Society of the Godless, etc.

[cleanhippie]

63. Yeah, uh, ok, whatever you say man.

Its pointless to continue with you on this any longer.

[humblebum]

67. I agree with you that it's pointless. I'm sure we both have better things to do. nt

[cleanhippie]

68. Hopefully you will not change your mind that this is pointless and conradict yourself.

again.

[humblebum]

69. I told you to provide proof and guess what? Nothing.

I have never changed my story.

[cleanhippie]

70. You already provided the proof with your posts, no need to be redundant.

They are there for all to see. I really am not concerned about convincing you, I just want you to know that the next time the subject comes up, you have no credibility anymore, and you understand why you will be ignored.

You can have the last word, you seem to always need it (or you can prove me wrong by not responding, but I won't hold my breath for that), by my point has been made.

Have a nice day.

:hi:

[humblebum]

72. Just as I thought, nothing. But you have a nice day too. NT

[cleanhippie]

73. You just couldn't do it, could you? You had the opportunity to prove me wrong and you failed.

Here is one more opportunity to prove that you do not need the last word. Don't reply and prove me wrong. Can you do it? Come on, you know you can. Be strong, resist the urge to reply.








No, don't do it!

[humblebum]

74. "and you understand why you will be ignored" Um?

Strangest case of being ignored I've ever seen.

[cleanhippie]

85. Just can't do it, huh? Always have to have the last word, no matter what.

:rofl:

[humblebum]

91. You are really bad at ignoring people. nt

[cleanhippie]

93. You are killing me, Smalls.

:rofl:


gotta have that last word, huh?

And did you even notice that in my post where I said you would be ignored, it was "when this subject comes up again." FFS, man, you really cannot comprehend what you read, can you?

[humblebum]

97. But this subject has come up again. nt

[cleanhippie]

101. The only subject now is your insistance that you have the last word.

:rofl:

[humblebum]

102. Excuse me, but the subject of this thread is

"Refuting the myth that Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists"

[cleanhippie]

105. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:






Fail

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our first quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

[CJvR]

75. Stubborn myth.

I suppose it is convenient to have those names as a sledgehammer when other arguments implode.
While Stalin and Lenin might have been atheists it wasn't their atheism that caused their persecution of the church but rather their totalitarian communist ideology that couldn't tolerate any competing power in the Sovietunion. Once the church fangs had been pulled Stalin didn't mind restoring it once it could be useful.

[humblebum]

76. Um? Then how come...?

The ATHEIST’S HANDBOOK was published in Moscow in 1959 in conjunction with Khrushchev’s campaign to eliminate the remaining traces of religion in the U.S.S.R. This text attacks the Bible, the Qur’an, Christianity, and Islam. “Science,” says the Handbook, “has long since established that Jesus Christ never existed, that the figure of the alleged founder of Christianity is purely mythical.” And according to the Handbook, the Apostle Paul, too, turns out to be “a mythical figure.” "We are doing everything we can to eliminate the bewitching power of the opium of religion.”

[darkstar3]

77. "in conjunction with" gives you the answer in your own post.

Khrushchev, the Communist.

[humblebum]

78. you keep conflating the two. Communism is an economic system.

Atheism is not.

[darkstar3]

79. Wrong on two counts.

Firstly, every time you blame a Communist dictator or a Communist action while trying to lay the blame for those actions at the feet of atheism, you conflate the two. Blaming others for pointing that out to you is pointless.

Secondly, Communism is a system of government, which is far more involved and complex than an economic system. It includes concepts regarding the acquisition, usage, and retention of power, and those concepts include the crushing of rival centers of authority.

[humblebum]

80. Um? The book is entitled "The Atheist's Handbook", not

The Communist's Handbook. And...
Communism:
•A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

[darkstar3]

81. For someone who claims to have researched this topic for 40+ years,

your knowledge has the depth of a Frisbee. The handbook you reference was published by Communists, at the behest of a Communist dictator, to further the ends of the Communist Party.

As for your pasted definition, I can do that too, and mine comes from a respectable source:
"Communism, which is also described as "Revolutionary Proletarian Socialism" or "Marxism," is both a political and economic philosophy."
http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/communism.htm

So, what we have here is you taking Communist actions and blaming them on atheism, thereby conflating the two, and when confronted with that fact you show your ignorance of Communism by posting a ridiculously simplistic summation of the governmental system.

[humblebum]

83. Um? At least I realize that atheism is not an economic system.

Communism: A theory that is based on a collective society in which all land and capital are socially owned and political power is exercised by the masses. 1) A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. 2) Communism: a) A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people. b) The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

You are seriously confusing the two. Atheism was becoming quite established in tsarist Russia long before the Revolution. Not all atheists were communists.

If God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish him.
-- Mikhail Bakunin, God and the State (1882)

[darkstar3]

86. Ah, the tried and true path of repetition.

Allow me to reiterate, since you didn't seem to read it before:
"Every time you blame a Communist dictator or a Communist action while trying to lay the blame for those actions at the feet of atheism, you conflate the two. Blaming others for pointing that out to you is pointless."

I'm not confused at all. You're the one blathering about how Communist actions are really the fault of atheists, even in the face of your complete lack of answer to #27.

[CJvR]

82. Well...

...it was still a fairly useless thing to drag along into the socialist utopia. Also if they did "everything" then why not shoot the priests and level the churches?

As for science proving JC never existed, I wouldn't go that far. There simply isn't enough evidence to prove anything either way. I tend to agree with Hitchens that the fabrication itself indicates something was going on.

[humblebum]

84. Well?

"Also if they did "everything" then why not shoot the priests and level the churches?" They did.

[CJvR]

87. Not...

...in the era you refer to.

[humblebum]

88. Um?

"But in 1959 Nikita Khrushchev initiated his own campaign against the Russian Orthodox Church and forced the closure of about 12,000 churches. By 1985 fewer than 7,000 churches remained active. It is estimated that 50,000 clergy were executed by the end of the Kruschev era.<16> Members of the church hierarchy were jailed or forced out, their places taken by docile clergy, many of whom had ties with the KGB."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russian_Orthodox_Church#Postwar_era

[CJvR]

89. So?

That figure is for the entire reign of terror from the start of the revolution according to the source referenced in wiki...

"In the Bolsheviks' first five years in power, 28 bishops and 1,200 priests were cut down by the red sickle. Stalin greatly accelerated the terror, and by the end of Khrushchev's rule, liquidations of clergy reached an estimated 50,000. After World War II, fierce but generally less bloody persecution spread into the Ukraine and the new Soviet bloc, affecting millions of Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as Orthodox."

And the question remains. If one of the worst totalitarian terror regimes in human history did "everything" to wipe out the church in the Soviet union why did it use silly handbooks rather than firing squads? If atheism was such a central and vital part of the Soviet totalitarian system then why was the church not completely exterminated? Are we to belive the KGB couldn't find the last 7000 churches? The Soviet atheism have far more to do with typical power politics than with a crusade against God.

[humblebum]

90. Answer: Kruschev was gone before he could finish the job.

State Atheism still existed up until 1989. 7000 churches spread out over 11 time zones is pretty sparse.

"In the USSR, Nobel Prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn estimated that state repression and terrorism took over 66 million lives from 1917 to 1959 under Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev."

[laconicsax]

94. So is Khrushchev your new boogey-man?

It'd be a refreshing change of scenery to see you screaming "KHRUSHCHEV! KHRUSHCHEV! KHRUSHCHEV!" in place of the usual "STALIN! STALIN! STALIN!" to try to prove whatever nonsense you're on about.

[humblebum]

98. Actually, I have always emphasized that it was not just Stalin, but

Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hoxha, Ceaucescu, Kruschev (or Khrushchev-whichever makes you happy), etc., etc. Never just STALIN!

[laconicsax]

109. Your method of emphasis could use some work.

BTW: Khrushchev is a far more accurate than Kruschev (Хрущёв almost literally converts to "Khrushchov.") If you're going to be intellectually lazy and blame someone's totalitarianism on atheism, you might as well take the effort to spell their name correctly.

[humblebum]

110. "Khrushchov" - And it even more literally converts to "Khrushshyov"

if you are going to legalistic about it and account for dialect.

[CJvR]

95. No...

...correct answer is that once religion was de-fanged it wasn't particulary important anymore.

[humblebum]

96. Then it must've grown new fangs, because it's back. nt

[CJvR]

100. Yep.

It is hard to kill it entirely, particulary without replacing it with something simillar.

IIRC the revived church have recived a monopoly on Russian souls in exchange for blessing the current regime.

[humblebum]

104. The Russian Orthodox Church is the traditional Russian Church but

is by no means the only Christian denomination, nor the only religion.

[Deep13]

99. Sure, but it doesn't really matter.

Stalin: probably an atheist to the degree that he did not believe in god, which is the accepted definition. He did believe in the irrational ideology of what has become know as Stalinism of which nonbelief in god was usually (though not always) part. At least he claimed to believe it. More likely he used Marxism to sell his own absolute dictatorship. In any event, Stalin's mandatory state-imposed atheism is not what prominent skeptics are talking about when they criticize religion or advocate discarding it. They are talking about skepticism which demands evidence and rationality to support belief (and public policy.) I can't speak for everyone, of course, but for the most part N. American and European atheists tend to support religious freedom even if they don't agree with the opinions being expressed. Likewise, we generally do not want to see a dictatorship where atheism or anything else is imposed on the public through force. Anyway, the submissiveness of the Soviet people after centuries of church-supported imperial autocracy made a fertile field for the seeds of dictatorship to be sown.

Pol Pot: I don't know enough about his personal views to comment much, except I understand that like Stalin, he espoused a kind of state-imposed accept-atheism-on-faith, which is antithetical to skepticism. I seriously doubt that any Western atheists think we should kill off the best educated third of our population in order to impose an agrarian utopia. If it turns out that Pol was executed by his captures, then no one at Nuremberg deserved it more.

Hitler: Hitler was a Roman Catholic, albeit a heretical one. He believed in is own divine destiny and often spoke of it. More importantly, his supporters believed it too. Hitler had a friendly working relationship with the Vatican and with at least the major Protestant churches of Germany. His racist campaign against all things Jewish is based on Christian theology which blames Jews for betraying Jesus and made Jews the scapegoats for everything bad that happened from the Romans to the surrender at the end of WWI. Again, as far as I know, present day atheists are not Nazis.

[humblebum]

103. Organized Atheism in the USSR had the same philosophic roots

and orientation as organized Atheism today. And many of the same stated goals ie. NO religion in schools, characterization of religious instruction at home as child abuse, absolute separation of C&S, and the purposeful use of ridicule as a deterrent to religious expression, to name a few. For instance, C. Hitchens has called for "ridicule, hatred, and contempt to be shown for religion. And coincidentally, the man was a Trotskyite, and is an admirer of Lenin and Marx.

The atheism of Marx, Bukunin, and later Lenin had its origins in the Paris Commune and the Vienna Circle, which also influenced atheists such as Russell and Joseph McCabe, as well as many other notable 19th and 20th century atheists.

[darkstar3]

106. More conflation, and a logical fallacy, and that in only your first sentence.

Your topic sentence refers to the Communist Party and Communist actions as an example of "organized atheism", once again conflating the two even as you deny doing so in several places in this thread. Also, your topic sentence engages in a fallacy known as "guilt by association".

You wish desperately to compare Christopher Hitchens and any who might agree with him to the Communists. In your mind, any atheist who speaks against religion today is obviously headed down the same path as Stalin. You have a one-dimensional view of atheists as monsters, and an agenda to ensure that you spread that view to as many people as possible.

[Deep13]

107. That borders on a staw-man argument.

First, I doubt that scientific skepticism which traces its roots to classical Ionia has anything to do with totalitarianism, either fascism or its left-wing cousin, communism.

Anyway, whatever the "roots" of the atheistic point of view, no reasonable comparison can be made between present day well-known atheists and Stalin. The Hitchens example really is a straw-man argument. He has never advocated force or state-sponsored oppression against religion. All of the weapons he advocates are rhetorical. The connection between Hitchens and Marxism is entirely misleading as he disavowed that point of view during the Thatcher administration and has since embraced the political right. In his autobiography he said that he was a Marxist and a revolutionary, but to the best of my recollection never described himself as a "communist" or an admirer of Lenin except perhaps the admiration of his political savy.

While I am unaware of him specifically advocating ridicule, hatred or contempt (although that does sound like him), I suspect he had the worst religious examples in mind if he said it (the Fred Phelpses of the world). I also suspect that this was when he was a Marxist. In his book God Is Not Great, he said he is respectful at least outwardly of religious traditions (takes off his shoes in a Mosque, covers his head in a Synagogue etc.) simply because making some sort of protest by not doing so has negative practical effects.

I say all this primarily in defense of a writer who I think you are defaming. Of course the whole point of refuting a straw man argument is that even if Hitchens really did think like Stalin, all that would do is discredit Hitchens. There is still no reason to think god is real or to think that skepticism will lead to another Stalinist empire.

[humblebum]

108. Well, he recently expressed his admiration for Marx and Lenin, and

he admits that he was a trotskyite, and many former trotskyites did reject the tenets of the Fourth International and moved farther to the right and actually describe themselves now as neo-conservatives, but still atheist.And I didn't mention Stalin. In any case, I will stand by everything I said. And I certainly mentioned nothing about classical Ionia, but Logical Positivism and the modern scientific method both came out of the Vienna Circle or to be more precise were defined and quantified there, and Logical Positivism and its applications are especially attributed to A.J. Ayer, another atheist. And if you want to drag Stalin into the mix, his policy of "Scientific Atheism" was fashioned directly from the Logical Positivistic model that came out of the Vienna Circle, e.g.'The Origin of Life' by Alexander Oparin. Last I knew most atheists base their beliefs or lack of them on objective , empirical scientific "proof" and Logical Positivism aka logical empiricism is exactly that, and by definition it considers anything that cannot be sensed or experienced such as metaphysics, intuition, or a priori knowledge to be "non-sensical." Pure materialism.

BTW, Hitchens' "ridicule, hatred, and contempt" exhortation is at about the 4:15 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2-CPsFwJwU