Quote:
Originally Posted by William_the_Bloody
I never directly labeled Richard Dawkins as a militant atheist, though I believe he is, as he burns with the same religious fervor that a Baptist fundamentalists like Pat Robertson does. (Thankfully he's just far more rational)
|
i know you didn't. i mentioned him because years ago he led the charge, calling for a new militant atheism. but by 'militant' he basically means relentlessly opinionated and argumentative.
yet, when we refer to say 'militant islam,' we're not just referring to hard headed muslims. we refer to actual militants, willing to take up arms for their religion. the same goes for militant christians, buddhists, or any other religion or ideology for that matter. anyone who's most extreme tactics in their arsenal of weapons that they will use in pursuit of their ideological goal still falls short of actual coercion is to me, not really a militant. but that's just my opinion.
Quote:
Dawkins to me is a militant because he is a complete materialist who is out not to just discredit religion, but the belief in anything supernatural in general, ghosts, NDE, ect.
He is completely close minded on the issue and his little kabob of scientists have been known to mock and bully other well established scientists in the community for their beliefs in the probability of an afterlife. So militant yes.
|
that just makes him opinionated, to me... and perhaps impolite. not militant.
Quote:
|
As for "militant atheists" in regards to China, you bring up a good point in regards to atheism being an essential component to Communism. The fact that Christianity was brutally suppressed in the Soviet Union is proof of this, but today it is thriving under Putin's autocratic regime that is pretty much controlled by the ex KGB. Largely because it coincides with his ideological principles of European Conservative Nationalism.
|
putin's russia is not communist. it's closer to fascist. so that is easily explained.
actually, at this point, it's fair to say that china is hardly even really communist anymore. they honestly seem to be veering more towards a fascist state than anything else, from what i understand.
Quote:
|
Totalitarianism doesn't equate to atheism though, National Socialism was based on paganism and nature worship despite it's pseudo scientific Darwinian component.
|
and communism need not technically be totalitarian. but historically... that has been the case.
but even if it weren't totalitarian... marx himself wrote about religion in negative terms, as something that had the potential to prevent the workers from recognizing their dilemma and free themselves from wage slavery, being instead placated and distracted by supernatural promises