| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2009 06:45:07 PM · #351 |
Shannon, searching the histories of Lenin and Marx I don't think you can find lots of quotes about heliocentrism that sound like this:
"Communism begins where atheism begins, but atheism is at the outset still far from being communism; indeed it is still for the most part an abstraction." (Marx)
âThe first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religionâ (Marx)
âAtheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism.â (Lenin)
'âThe Soviet school, as an instrument for the Communist education of the rising generation, can, as a matter of principle, take up no other attitude towards religion than one of irreconcilable opposition; for Communist education has as its philosophical basis Marxism, and Marxism is irreconcilably hostile to religion." - The official journal of the Soviet Academy of Pedagogical Sciences
Let's hear your heliocentrism quotes. I bet they are AWESOME! |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 06:48:23 PM · #352 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities... It is best to win without fighting. |
But in the meantime, let's talk about how to wage a good war...
If you take actual words committed to a topic, acquiring victory without fighting is far from "the main emphasis". |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:00:19 PM · #353 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Shannon, searching the histories of Lenin and Marx I don't think you can find lots of quotes about heliocentrism that sound like this:
"Communism begins where atheism begins, but atheism is at the outset still far from being communism; indeed it is still for the most part an abstraction." (Marx)
âThe first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religionâ (Marx)
âAtheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism.â (Lenin)
'âThe Soviet school, as an instrument for the Communist education of the rising generation, can, as a matter of principle, take up no other attitude towards religion than one of irreconcilable opposition; for Communist education has as its philosophical basis Marxism, and Marxism is irreconcilably hostile to religion." - The official journal of the Soviet Academy of Pedagogical Sciences
Let's hear your heliocentrism quotes. I bet they are AWESOME! |
You're kind of taking Marx out of context though. It was the suppressive nature of the religions in power that Marx derided. Religion, in its accumulation of wealth at the expense of the people was what he fought against. The power it held over people was much like the power held by monarchies. Religion worked to maintain the status quo which, for the poor, was not good. He believed religion blinded people to the living conditions they had by promising more that it couldn't prove to deliver. Read a little more about the history of the time. you will find it is rather similar to the conditions under which Jesus preached. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:03:48 PM · #354 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But in the meantime, let's talk about how to wage a good war...
If you take actual words committed to a topic, acquiring victory without fighting is far from "the main emphasis". |
Okay. Let's just say you are absolutely correct. Its easier. Now answer the question. Besides one book that some guy wrote on a Taoist way to defeat enemies, how was the practice of Taoism associated with violence such as christianity and islam are? |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:07:40 PM · #355 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But in the meantime, let's talk about how to wage a good war...
If you take actual words committed to a topic, acquiring victory without fighting is far from "the main emphasis". |
Okay. Let's just say you are absolutely correct. Its easier. Now answer the question. Besides one book that some guy wrote on a Taoist way to defeat enemies, how was the practice of Taoism associated with violence such as christianity and islam are? |
Ya, hence "that's not a bad example" way above... ;) |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:11:21 PM · #356 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Shannon, searching the histories of Lenin and Marx I don't think you can find lots of quotes about heliocentrism that sound like this:
"Communism begins where atheism begins, but atheism is at the outset still far from being communism; indeed it is still for the most part an abstraction." (Marx)
âThe first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religionâ (Marx)
âAtheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism.â (Lenin)
'âThe Soviet school, as an instrument for the Communist education of the rising generation, can, as a matter of principle, take up no other attitude towards religion than one of irreconcilable opposition; for Communist education has as its philosophical basis Marxism, and Marxism is irreconcilably hostile to religion." - The official journal of the Soviet Academy of Pedagogical Sciences
Let's hear your heliocentrism quotes. I bet they are AWESOME! |
You're kind of taking Marx out of context though. It was the suppressive nature of the religions in power that Marx derided. Religion, in its accumulation of wealth at the expense of the people was what he fought against. The power it held over people was much like the power held by monarchies. Religion worked to maintain the status quo which, for the poor, was not good. He believed religion blinded people to the living conditions they had by promising more that it couldn't prove to deliver. Read a little more about the history of the time. you will find it is rather similar to the conditions under which Jesus preached. |
So assuming this is all true, does it mean that evils were not carried out in the name of atheism? That was the whole origin of this line of discussion. I don't care what Marx's baseline beef was with religion, I do care that:
A) Atheism and Communism were intertwined in the 20th century
B) Atheists/Communists such as Lenin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong targeted, persecuted, and killed people because they were religious.
That's all I need to make my argument. The quotes were provided to show Shannon was trying to introduce a Red Herring. Sure Lenin believed the earth revolved around the sun, but you can't find any discussion that it made any difference in what he did. You can, however, find lots and lots and lots of passages talking about atheism being important to communism. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:14:26 PM · #357 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities... It is best to win without fighting. |
But in the meantime, let's talk about how to wage a good war...
If you take actual words committed to a topic, acquiring victory without fighting is far from "the main emphasis". |
It's a what to do if you cannot avoid a fight.
Just like a book on wilderness survival is what to do if you get lost in the wild. While more words may be devoted to what to do in that scenario, the main point is to not get lost in the first place. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:18:28 PM · #358 |
| Having been on the other side of the argument, I have to point out I find it comical that whenever someone tries to defend or explain away things like the Crusades as being motivated by anything other than religous zeal it is met with a fervor of disgust. The very same people who respond that way are now defending Lenin and Marx and the Cultural Revolution as being more about power grabbing than about spreading any idea. You cannot have it both ways. Either both can be explained away by bad people doing bad things for bad reasons or neither can. To pick and choose is hypocritical, two-faced, and intellectually dishonest. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:22:45 PM · #359 |
What makes a person bad?
Almost no one does things motivated solely by malice. There's usually some kind of positive outcome, some reason for people to act the way they do. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:28:28 PM · #360 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
What makes a person bad?
Almost no one does things motivated solely by malice. There's usually some kind of positive outcome, some reason for people to act the way they do. |
Is this a new discussion or are you continuing the last one and I'm not getting the link? |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:32:47 PM · #361 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Having been on the other side of the argument, I have to point out I find it comical that whenever someone tries to defend or explain away things like the Crusades as being motivated by anything other than religous zeal it is met with a fervor of disgust. The very same people who respond that way are now defending Lenin and Marx and the Cultural Revolution as being more about power grabbing than about spreading any idea. You cannot have it both ways. Either both can be explained away by bad people doing bad things for bad reasons or neither can. To pick and choose is hypocritical, two-faced, and intellectually dishonest. |
Perhaps it has to do with the flags both carried. One had crosses and the other a hammer and a sickle. Would you say the latter are symbols for atheism?
|
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:34:15 PM · #362 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Perhaps it has to do with the flags both carried. One had crosses and the other a hammer and a sickle. Would you say the latter are symbols for atheism? |
C'mon Richard, are you serious? Out of curiosity, if you had to pick a symbol to put on a flag to represent atheism, what would you choose?
EDIT: Did you read your own link? :) "Some anthropologists have argued that the symbol, like others used in the Soviet Union, was actually a Russian Orthodox symbol that was used by the Communist Party to fill the religious needs that Communism was replacing as a new state "religion." The symbol can be seen as a permutation of the Russian Orthodox two-barred cross."
Message edited by author 2009-01-23 19:38:17. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:35:31 PM · #363 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
So assuming this is all true, does it mean that evils were not carried out in the name of atheism? That was the whole origin of this line of discussion. I don't care what Marx's baseline beef was with religion, I do care that:
A) Atheism and Communism were intertwined in the 20th century
B) Atheists/Communists such as Lenin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong targeted, persecuted, and killed people because they were religious.
That's all I need to make my argument. The quotes were provided to show Shannon was trying to introduce a Red Herring. Sure Lenin believed the earth revolved around the sun, but you can't find any discussion that it made any difference in what he did. You can, however, find lots and lots and lots of passages talking about atheism being important to communism. |
My only problem is using Marx's quotes as if he advocated systematic murder of any religious people. Marx was dead before any of his work was used as justification for slaughter. Its just like blaming Jesus for the actions of the Catholic Church during any of their cleansings. People can read anything any way they want to to justify their actions. It does not make it true nor does it make it accurate to the ideals being expressed by the author. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:39:52 PM · #364 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
So assuming this is all true, does it mean that evils were not carried out in the name of atheism? That was the whole origin of this line of discussion. I don't care what Marx's baseline beef was with religion, I do care that:
A) Atheism and Communism were intertwined in the 20th century
B) Atheists/Communists such as Lenin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong targeted, persecuted, and killed people because they were religious.
That's all I need to make my argument. The quotes were provided to show Shannon was trying to introduce a Red Herring. Sure Lenin believed the earth revolved around the sun, but you can't find any discussion that it made any difference in what he did. You can, however, find lots and lots and lots of passages talking about atheism being important to communism. |
My only problem is using Marx's quotes as if he advocated systematic murder of any religious people. Marx was dead before any of his work was used as justification for slaughter. Its just like blaming Jesus for the actions of the Catholic Church during any of their cleansings. People can read anything any way they want to to justify their actions. It does not make it true nor does it make it accurate to the ideals being expressed by the author. |
The Marx quotes were to link atheism with communism and to point out there is an obviously correlary as opposed to heliocentrism as Shannon was trying to say. If Marx is to communism what Jesus was to Christianity, then Lenin and Mao Zedong are the Crusaders and the Inquisition (or whatever. you get my point).
Message edited by author 2009-01-23 19:40:37. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:40:33 PM · #365 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Having been on the other side of the argument, I have to point out I find it comical that whenever someone tries to defend or explain away things like the Crusades as being motivated by anything other than religous zeal it is met with a fervor of disgust. The very same people who respond that way are now defending Lenin and Marx and the Cultural Revolution as being more about power grabbing than about spreading any idea. You cannot have it both ways. Either both can be explained away by bad people doing bad things for bad reasons or neither can. To pick and choose is hypocritical, two-faced, and intellectually dishonest. |
And just so you know, I think there is a vast difference between the teachings of Jesus and the actions of the catholic church. I think the same way about Marx. I think the actions of the leaders at the time of both (Church leaders and Lenin, Mao, etc) are the same. Kind of like hate the message but not the messenger, so to speak. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:41:31 PM · #366 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
And just so you know, I think there is a vast difference between the teachings of Jesus and the actions of the catholic church. I think the same way about Marx. I think the actions of the leaders at the time of both (Church leaders and Lenin, Mao, etc) are the same. Kind of like hate the message but not the messenger, so to speak. |
I can buy that. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:41:43 PM · #367 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The Marx quotes were to link atheism with communism and to point out there is an obviously correlary as opposed to heliocentrism as Shannon was trying to say. If Marx is to communism what Jesus was to Christianity, then Lenin and Mao Zedong are the Crusaders and the Inquisition (or whatever. you get my point). |
Hey, I think we actually agree on something! |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:43:40 PM · #368 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The Marx quotes were to link atheism with communism and to point out there is an obviously correlary as opposed to heliocentrism as Shannon was trying to say. If Marx is to communism what Jesus was to Christianity, then Lenin and Mao Zedong are the Crusaders and the Inquisition (or whatever. you get my point). |
Hey, I think we actually agree on something! |
Gimme five! |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:48:52 PM · #369 |
| So just to put flesh on those bones, what I am saying is that it's hard to hold creeds guilty when individuals carry them out to evil ends. But, at the very least, if you are going to hold Christianity accountable for the behavior of its adherents, then you have to do the same for atheism. It's fair treatment. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:49:14 PM · #370 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Perhaps it has to do with the flags both carried. One had crosses and the other a hammer and a sickle. Would you say the latter are symbols for atheism? |
C'mon Richard, are you serious? Out of curiosity, if you had to pick a symbol to put on a flag to represent atheism, what would you choose?
|
Yes I'm serious. Perhaps the reason there's no symbol is because there hasn't been a need for one, no flag needed, no army.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
EDIT: Did you read your own link? :) "Some anthropologists have argued that the symbol, like others used in the Soviet Union, was actually a Russian Orthodox symbol that was used by the Communist Party to fill the religious needs that Communism was replacing as a new state "religion." The symbol can be seen as a permutation of the Russian Orthodox two-barred cross." |
So what should I get out of this? Where's the tie to atheism?
|
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:50:42 PM · #371 |
Here is the Wiki definition of Communism:
Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general.[1][2][3] Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, following a socialist stage, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution. "Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life.
Nowhere is it stated that the main purpose, or even an important pillar of the belief of communism, is a world with no religion, or more importantly, a world with no belief in a higher being. Marx's view was merely that religion is used by those in a higher socioeconomic position to keep those in a lower socioeconomic position in a check, the promise of better things to come if you ride out the tough times in this life. He wasn't pushing atheism, he was pushing equality among the people and he saw that religion was used as an ether to anesthetize the people. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:52:02 PM · #372 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
What makes a person bad?
Almost no one does things motivated solely by malice. There's usually some kind of positive outcome, some reason for people to act the way they do. |
Is this a new discussion or are you continuing the last one and I'm not getting the link? |
I'd say it's more of a tangent.
You mentioned bad people doing bad things for bad reasons and the question came to me.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:55:57 PM · #373 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
What makes a person bad?
Almost no one does things motivated solely by malice. There's usually some kind of positive outcome, some reason for people to act the way they do. |
Is this a new discussion or are you continuing the last one and I'm not getting the link? |
I'd say it's more of a tangent.
You mentioned bad people doing bad things for bad reasons and the question came to me. |
Ah, well, the very short answer is self-interest. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 07:57:09 PM · #374 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Here is the Wiki definition of Communism:
Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general.[1][2][3] Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, following a socialist stage, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution. "Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life.
Nowhere is it stated that the main purpose, or even an important pillar of the belief of communism, is a world with no religion, or more importantly, a world with no belief in a higher being. Marx's view was merely that religion is used by those in a higher socioeconomic position to keep those in a lower socioeconomic position in a check, the promise of better things to come if you ride out the tough times in this life. He wasn't pushing atheism, he was pushing equality among the people and he saw that religion was used as an ether to anesthetize the people. |
I'm gonna go with Marx over wiki on that one. If Marx felt that the abolition of religion was important to the foundation of communism, what are we left with by default? Atheism.
Message edited by author 2009-01-23 19:58:10. |
|
|
|
01/23/2009 08:00:21 PM · #375 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Communism begins where atheism begins, but atheism is at the outset still far from being communism; indeed it is still for the most part an abstraction." (Marx)
âThe first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religionâ (Marx)
âAtheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism.â (Lenin)
'âThe Soviet school, as an instrument for the Communist education of the rising generation, can, as a matter of principle, take up no other attitude towards religion than one of irreconcilable opposition; for Communist education has as its philosophical basis Marxism, and Marxism is irreconcilably hostile to religion." - The official journal of the Soviet Academy of Pedagogical Sciences |
You're kind of taking Marx out of context though. It was the suppressive nature of the religions in power that Marx derided. Religion, in its accumulation of wealth at the expense of the people was what he fought against. The power it held over people was much like the power held by monarchies. Religion worked to maintain the status quo which, for the poor, was not good. He believed religion blinded people to the living conditions they had by promising more that it couldn't prove to deliver. Read a little more about the history of the time. you will find it is rather similar to the conditions under which Jesus preached. |
So assuming this is all true, does it mean that evils were not carried out in the name of atheism? |
Yes it does. The evils were carried out in the name of communism (not necessarily a bad thing in an of itself, but twisted under egomaniacal dictators), and eliminating religious leadership was considered part of returning wealth and power from the Church to the people (the whole point of Communism). Consider the meaning of your quotes in context:
[Empowering the people] begins where [disbelief in the power of gods] begins, but [disbelief in the power of gods] is at the outset still far from [empowering the people]; indeed it is still for the most part an abstraction." (Marx)
âThe first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of [the belief that gods hold power over people]â (Marx)
â[Disbelief in the power of gods] is the natural and inseparable part of [empowering the people].â (Lenin)
'âThe Soviet school, as an instrument for the Communist education of the rising generation, can, as a matter of principle, take up no other attitude towards [the belief that gods hold power over people] than one of irreconcilable opposition; for Communist education has as its philosophical basis Marxism, and Marxism is irreconcilably hostile to [the belief that gods hold power over people]." - The official journal of the Soviet Academy of Pedagogical Sciences
Your request for a quote on heliocentricity misses the point entirely ("stick it where the Helios don't shine" springs to mind). The rationale for the actions of these regimes was NOT, "We're doing this because we don't believe gods exist." It was the Communist ideology, "We're doing this because we believe the people should collectively control their own destiny" (an appealing notion in theory if you're one of those people and living under an oppressive government). Anything that takes power from the people (religion, monarchies, private business, etc.) is anathema to that principle. Although the greed and egos of those running the show quickly corrupted ideals of empowerment into evil acts, it was not disbelief of gods itself that provided the overarching motivation. In contrast to countless wars and atrocities committed "in the name of God/Allah/Zeus, none of these people ever committed an act "in the name of atheism." |
|
