Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-01-2017, 06:45 PM
Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
Were they the result of anti-religious sentiment ? I have heard this claim recently and I want to know what is your take on it.

What about the two world wars ? Wasn't the killer who "started" the first world war an atheist ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-01-2017, 06:58 PM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
Some historians call the Black Hand an anarchist organization. I identify as an anarchist and I'm definitely an atheist. From my experience anarchists are far more likely to be atheists than atheists are likely to be anarchists. I'm not sure if there are a higher percent of anarchists among atheists. I don't know any other anarchists in real life.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-01-2017, 07:21 PM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(21-01-2017 06:45 PM)momo666 Wrote:  Were they the result of anti-religious sentiment ? I have heard this claim recently and I want to know what is your take on it.

What about the two world wars ? Wasn't the killer who "started" the first world war an atheist ?

No and that is utter bullshit.

The Russian Orthodox majority population never left under Stalin. Stalin simply suckered them into his NATIONALISTIC populism, but it was ALL dissent not just religion. He ended up relaxing the Church's restrictions to gain support for his fight against Hitler. Hitler too sold a majority Christian population a hyper national message and also used populism to get his power.

Anarchists can be theists too, they are not strictly atheists. Anyone who is an atheist and an anarchist is not an atheist, being one myself, that I would support.

China also is NOT religion free, it is a mostly Buddhist Country with mixes of minority Asian religions as well as even Christians and Muslims.

Not even Cuba is religion free, it is a majority Catholic.

North Korea has it's own brand of religion too.

Now what all those states DO share in common with theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran, are worship of authority. In the case of a closed religious state the authority is religion, in a closed one state party, religion still exists, but the state is what is worshiped.

There is a bullshit false slur aimed at atheists and secularists that liberals in the west want to ban all religion. There are unfortunately very few, but some atheists who voted for Trump who would want to deport all illegals and ban all Muslims. I am not one of those.

There are also other atheists, Che worshipers, Che is the asshole who lead to Castro's Cuba. Also very few of the total atheists in America.

Closed states are not religion free, theocracies and one party states simply want the same blind worship of authority. If you support that majority rule they tolerate you. But if you open your mouth and the theocracy and or party worship doesn't like it, over any subject, not just religion, the religious state or state party, will arrest you, or murder you.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Brian37's post
22-01-2017, 02:09 AM (This post was last modified: 22-01-2017 02:26 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(21-01-2017 06:45 PM)momo666 Wrote:  Were they the result of anti-religious sentiment ? I have heard this claim recently and I want to know what is your take on it.

Anarchism I guess could be such result - if anarchism is about freedom then it is not hard to see why it would be against church and nearly everything that such institution represents.

Communism or more to the point marxism-leninism was just another religion - it has it chosen people (proletariat), prophet whose writings made core of the faith (Lenin), devil (capitalists) and paradise (communism). Also while it contained anti-religious sentiment m-l was more of a protest about tsarist Russia living conditions, weak economy, and it oppression of it's subjects even if bolshevik putsch heralded even greater oppression.

Nationalism I see as going hand to hand with religion - religion can reinforce the notion that nation x is the best, and nationalist can choose religion x as a part of their identity and in result favor one church. Nationalism sometimes used religious language (Hitler and his speeches) but that's all. I doubt that nationalism started as some kind of protest against religion.

Quote:What about the two world wars ?

What about them? SU was a marxist-leninist theocracy and III Reich was ordinary society of believers. Some SS mans calling themselves Gottgläubig means nothing as they still believed.

First war has nothing to do with atheism - it is religious countries which waged the war.

Quote:Wasn't the killer who "started" the first world war an atheist ?
[/quote]

I have no idea but he does not started it.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-01-2017, 09:28 AM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(21-01-2017 06:45 PM)momo666 Wrote:  Wasn't the killer who "started" the first world war an atheist ?


Nope. From Wikipedia-

... in 1920 Princip and the other "Heroes of Vidovdan" were disinterred and brought to Sarajevo, where they were buried together beneath a chapel "built to commemorate for eternity our Serb Heroes" at St. Mark's Cemetery.

Spreading horseshit about atheists is one of the theist's main hobbies. Drinking Beverage

And to repeat RS76's quote- "Lying for Jesus is still lying".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fireball's post
22-01-2017, 10:02 AM
Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
The Ole anarchist bomb throwing Slavic man was the turn of the century fear, the rise and blame of that was like the Muslim terrorist fear of these days.

Though the man that murdered us president McKinley was one it's so said.

I'm not sure you could call Franz Ferdinand and his comrades anarchists so much as they were seeking serbian nationalism for their nationhood and culture opposed to wanting some governmentless area.

Plenty religious sentiments and movements lead to ideas of anarchy or communism... they just get called cults because they aren't "mainstream" religious thoughts but they're religious in equal distinction.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-01-2017, 10:14 AM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
Communism and anarchism at their core are social revolutionnary ideology. You cannot make such a social revolution without breaking one of the biggest pillar of authority: the Church. Communism and anarchism are much less anti-religious than they are anti-clerical. As for nationalism, religion, and especialy sectarism, is fundamental to a national identity. Thus, nationalism and religion usualy go hand in hand. Right now the rejection of a religion, Islam, is used to fan the flames of nationalism in the Western world by populist political organisation. As for the origin of both communism and anarchism, yes, their core thinkers were all atheists or very mild deists. Almost all of them made lengthy critiques on the subject of religion and especially the corruption of the Church. Yet, in every social revolution their leaders never rejected outright religion and faith. It was substituted by blind faith and obediance in a new governance or simply stole matters and representation of faith out of the hands of the Church to place it in the those of the revolutionnaries to unite common people behind them. Most of the time, revolutions are much more bloody and dirty than most revolutionnary leaders imagine.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like epronovost's post
24-01-2017, 03:54 AM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(22-01-2017 10:14 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Most of the time, revolutions are much more bloody and dirty than most revolutionnary leaders imagine.

Because not all of the keys needed to get into power are the same ones you need to keep power.




[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2017, 09:07 PM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(21-01-2017 06:58 PM)ImFred Wrote:  Some historians call the Black Hand an anarchist organization. I identify as an anarchist and I'm definitely an atheist. From my experience anarchists are far more likely to be atheists than atheists are likely to be anarchists. I'm not sure if there are a higher percent of anarchists among atheists. I don't know any other anarchists in real life.

I also am an anarchist and an atheist. I was --or, I should say, I realized I was-- an atheist long before I became an anarchist. And I did become an anarchist; before I did I flirted with a number of political philosophies. However, I was born an atheist, although it took my many years to realize that fact.

That said, Anarchists have been the world's political scapegoats; both the right and the left will happily dump on them at the drop of a hat.

The whole purpose of any political system -- beyond the trivial purpose of self-preservation -- is to provide a means by which the few can have power over the many, and control them. In this respect I regard religion as the ur-politick -- the mother of all politics.

Religion is all about vesting power in the hands of a supposedly enlightened few, assumed to be possessed of mystical insights. The tribe defers to the shaman on all matters of importance: where an when to hunt and gather to avoid offending the gods and bringing down their wrath in the form of storms or animal attacks, etc. In return for this "service" the shaman gets special dispensation -- he doesn't have to hunt, gather, or work. He gets to live off donations, which he partly justifies as being necessary for him to carry on his tasks of propitiating the gods and divining their mysterious intentions for the tribe. Pretty cushy situation for the shaman, who is, for all intents an purposes a monarch.

If the tribe is well situated, or lucky, or both, it begins to increase its numbers, and things start to become burdensome for the shaman; he doesn't have enough time to go around for all the people who want to consult him about how to keep the gods happy. He has to devise increasingly elaborate stories and rituals to keep the populace blinkered to the fact that he really just sitting on his duff and living off the fruits of everyone else's labor. If he's smart, he learns to delegate. He takes on acolytes, who take over the menial task of dealing with the public. The birth of bureaucracy.

This goes on until there are enough humans where groups start bumping into each other with some regularity, and killing each other. With this and the birth of agriculture you start to get some groups banding together for mutual defense, either marching against attackers or gathering together in walled cities to ward them off. The beginning of civilization. Some of these groups are organized under the equivalent of the shaman and his acolytes; others by more secular-minded leaders who take their cue from existing religious hierarchies. Now you have government, per se, though in much of the world it is still intimately entwined with religion at least (in the West) until sometime after the Enlightenment .

Even today government has yet to throw off it's religious roots completely in many places. Witness the fact that no American president has ever openly admitted to being an atheist, and every presidential candidate has felt a need to appeal to God and the religious in order to get elected. A certain segment of the populace still wants their mystical shaman, and there is no lack of candidates willing to fulfill that role.

Meanwhile, the few continue to control the many, the government still tells us where to hunt and gather (both actually and metaphorically), and the core of government remains shrouded in mystery for most of it's constituent subjects.

To directly address the OP, Nationalism certainly isn't a result of anti-religious feeling -- it's a continuation of religion-by-proxy, in the form of government. Communism is an economic theory that's been adopted as a tool to advance other forms of political control.

Anarchy is the result of a desire to be free from the lot of it, and have real personal liberty, without monarchs, presidents, priests, or other shamen telling us what to do. Anarchy doesn't necessarily preclude having personal religious convictions, but it does reject religion and religious leaders as external governing forces. Yet, while anarchism is not specifically anti-religious, personally, I believe a close examination of anarchist principles ultimately leads to a rejection of any formal religion, because anarchy rejects external government, and formal religion is just government in priest's (or rabbi's, or mullah's) clothing.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dr H's post
22-02-2017, 09:11 PM
RE: Anarchy, Communism and Nationalism
(22-01-2017 10:14 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Communism and anarchism are much less anti-religious than they are anti-clerical.

Damn! I somehow skipped over your post before making mine.
You made in one concise sentence a point I blabbered on for about four paragraphs to get to.Blush

Ah well, live and learn . . .

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dr H's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: