Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-11-2010, 05:40 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Agree with gamutman. What about all those things and Jim Jones, the sarin gas attacks in Japan etc.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2010, 05:47 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
(21-11-2010 11:28 AM)Kikko Wrote:  Well, in the Soviet Union, priests and such were sent to Siberia and killed, because they were priests and believers. But they weren't killed directly because of atheism, but because of hating religion and hating believers. But of course they wouldn't have hated religion if they wouldn't have been atheists...
But so what? Dictators doing horrible things isn't new. No sane person would do that kinda stuff, no matter if the person is a theist or an atheist.

Is it the hate of religion or an attack on a conflicting power base? Stalin was in it for the power, he was at war with every idea that conflicted with his power base.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-11-2010, 11:41 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Hey, No. J.

Quote:Is it the hate of religion or an attack on a conflicting power base? Stalin was in it for the power, he was at war with every idea that conflicted with his power base.

Well said.

Pol Pot didn't just murder religious types, he murdered intellectuals and teachers. Like if you had glasses, chances were you'd be killed. He didn't want anyone left alive that might carry ideas that ran counter to the Khmer Rouge message. Easier to be a dictator that way.

Hey, BnW.

Quote:Finally, as we've discussed numerous times, no one has ever claimed that religion is the sole reason for wars and atrocities but that does not mean it has not been a sole reason for some wars and some atrocities.

Who said anything about this?

Quote:Who was proposing that the Nazi movement was religious?
Quote:My first retort, as is most atheist's, is that Hitler was in a fact a self-proclaimed Catholic. Anyone who has read Mein Kampf has seen Hitler describing the Aryan race as the divine race, created by God, and saw racially intermixing was a sin. He mentions the "creator of the universe" and worked towards eradicating the Jews, a group that atheists have no hostility towards since they are just another chapter in the big book of fairy tales.

The Nazi agenda, to a massive degree, was Hitler's agenda. It seemed reasonably implied in the above that Hitler's Christianity made its way into the Nazi party agenda at the very least via Mein Kampf. That, in part, was what I was reacting to.

Quote:I don't know where this myth on Hitler comes from. He absolutely was not an atheist.

---

And, on the subject of Hitler and the Nazi's, two things: first, while it was not a religious movement, Hitler absolutely used religion and claims of "divine providence" to justify what he was doing to the German populace. He absolutely played the "god card" in his actions.

Then there's you.

Quote:Second, to state that his "Final Solution" was the result of believing the Jews posed an economic threat is seriously understating the impact religion had in the Holocaust. Seriously, seriously understating it. You want to talk about revisionist history, that is revisionist history and it has been a position pushed by mostly Christian groups since the end of the war to absolve themselves of any culpability to the whole thing.

I'm not a Christian group.

So overstate it for us.

Revisionist eh? Like the part where I said, "So none of this is to say that religion didn't play any part in the Nazi movement..." Way to cherry pick.

Quote:I never understand the basis of these arguments. Especially the Hitler one. What, then, was the secularized explanation for his antisemitism? He didn't like the clothes?

Why would you ask for secular reasons for Hitler's antisemitism and then rail on someone who answered your question?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 08:25 AM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
The Nazi's were not a religious movement. However, religion and religious prejudices played a roll in some of their policies, and specifically in their policies on race.

The Ku Klux Klan is also not a religious movement but religion and religion based prejudices played a role in a lot of their views, and specifically their views on race.

It is not all that difficult a concept, so I fail to see why are you trying to make it one.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 09:57 AM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Hey, Bnw.

It's simple. The case is often made that religion is the cause of attrocity. If the Nazi party is viewed as a religious organisation, they can be used as evidence of this theory. If they are viewed as a party with which religion was involved on some level, but not in a primary role, they can be used as evidence against the theory.

Quote:The ideological roots of Nazism derive from Romanticism, nineteenth-century idealism, and a eugenic interpretation of Friedrich Nietzsche’s concepts of “breeding upwards” — towards the Übermensch (“Superman”). Such ideas, as espoused by the Ariosophical Germanenorden (German Order) and the Thule Society much influenced Adolf Hitler’s world-view...

The racist subject of Nazism is Das Volk, the German people living under continual cultural attack by Judeo-Bolshevism, who must unite under Nazi Party leadership, and, per the spartan nationalist tenets of Nazism: be stoic, self-disciplined and self-sacrificing until victory.[119] Adolf Hitler’s political biography, Mein Kampf (My Struggle) formulates the Weltanschauung of Nazism with the ideologic trinity of: history as a struggle for world supremacy among the human races, conquered only by a master race, the Herrenvolk; the decisive, autocratic Führerprinzip (leader principle); and anti-Semitism targeting the Jews as the universal source of socio-cultural and economic discord...

In establishing Nazi German racial superiority, Adolf Hitler defined “the Nation” as the highest creation of a race, and that that great nations were the creations of homogeneous populations of great races working together. These nations developed cultures that naturally grew from races with “natural good health, and aggressive, intelligent, courageous traits”. Whereas the weakest nations were those of “impure” or “mongrel races”, because they were disunited. Hitler claimed that lowest races were the parasitic Untermenschen (subhumans), principally the Jews, who were living lebensunwertes Leben (“life-unworthy life”) owing to racial inferiority, and their wandering, nationless invasions of greater nations, such as Germany — thus, either permitting or encouraging national plurality is an obvious mistake...

Although the “National Socialist leaders and dogmas were basically, uncompromisingly antireligious”, Nazi Germany usually did not directly attack the Churches, the exceptions being clerics who refused accommodation with the Nazi régime. Martin Bormann, a prominent Nazi official, said: "Priests will be paid by us and, as a result, they will preach what we want. If we find a priest acting otherwise, short work is to be made of him. The task of the priest consists in keeping the Poles quiet, stupid, and dull-witted."[132][133] To demoralize Poland, the Nazis killed almost 16 per cent of the Polish Catholic clergy; 13 of 38 Bishops were sent to concentration camps.[134][135] These actions, and the closing of churches, seminaries and other religious institutions, almost succeeded in exterminating the Polish clergy.[136]...

Regarding the persecution of Jews, the contemporary, historical perspective is that in the period between the Protestant Reformation and the Holocaust, Martin Luther's treatise On the Jews and their Lies (1543), exercised a major and persistent intellectual influence upon the German practice of anti-Semitism against Jewish citizens. The Nazis publicly displayed an original of On the Jews and their Lies during the annual Nuremberg rallies, and the city also presented a first edition of it to Julius Streicher, the editor of Der Stürmer, which described Luther’s treatise as the most radically anti-Semitic tract ever published.[148][149]
-From Wikipedia

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 11:21 AM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Quote:It's simple. The case is often made that religion is the cause of attrocity.

No, it is often cited as "a" cause, not "the" cause. Again, no one is claiming that religion is the sole and exclusive cause of wars, genocides, etc. However, religion makes it a lot easier for ordinary people to justify participate in these things.

Which takes me back to: what was the secular reason for the Holocaust? Forget that Hitler was a syphilis ridden sociopath. How did he get millions of Germans to go along with this? Antisemitism goes back to the forming of the Church and when they claimed that Jews were responsible for the death of Christ. The entire basis for what happened in Germany was religion and thousands of years of organized religious hatred.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 02:19 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Uh.

To say the Holocaust was driven by religion because one of the TARGETS of it were religious is kinda wonky. What about gays and the retarded? What was the religious reasoning behind putting them to death?


And of course anti-sematism was a huge part of the Holocaust. I just posted a section about how Martin Luther's writings were a huge part of that. But I also just posted a ton of information about other reasons. Secular reasons. And you just brushed it aside. If you really want to say it was all about religion, more power to you. You just won't be taken seriously.

Quote:No, it is often cited as "a" cause, not "the" cause.

Actually it's usually cited as the cause in my experience, but you're right, some people cite it as a cause.

But back to the point of this thread, Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin did NOT kill people in the name of Atheism. Unless you count the fact the PP and Stalin wanted to make people not-Theists. Pol Pot and Stalin were Atheists (as far as I know). Hitler was religious and religion was used as a part of the Nazi agenda and the relationship between the party and religious organisations was complex. But it wasn't the driving force. The Nazis, as quoted above, were largely anti-religious but not a religious force. I don't want to call them secular, but they were hardly a religious movement.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 02:36 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
The real cause of Hitler's, Stalin's and Pol Pot's power was BLIND OBEDIENCE. You remove that and you remove religion and you also remove people doing the bidding of sociopaths because they will be using their own moral code.

In a religion free world good people do good things and bad people do bad things. It takes religion (or at least blind obedience) to make good people do bad things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 03:15 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
Ghost

Quote:To say the Holocaust was driven by religion because one of the TARGETS of it were religious is kinda wonky. What about gays and the retarded? What was the religious reasoning behind putting them to death?

Gays was also about religion. Retarded people were an issue of impacting the master race. Not all their tyranny was based on religion and I was not claiming otherwise. You seem to want to make this an "all or nothing" thing.

Quote:And of course anti-sematism was a huge part of the Holocaust. I just posted a section about how Martin Luther's writings were a huge part of that. But I also just posted a ton of information about other reasons. Secular reasons. And you just brushed it aside. If you really want to say it was all about religion, more power to you. You just won't be taken seriously.

Yes, I did just gloss over that, but I didn't mean to. Basically, the secular reasons came after. The idea of the miserly Jew controlling money and making people's lives worse off is an old Antisemitic stereotype and it certainly predates Hitler. It comes up in the works of Shakespeare and other writers and is as common place in European tradition as some of the other Antisemitic lies and stereotypes. For example, the entire "vampire" myth is based on the blood libel from Eastern Europe. So, that the Nazi's perpetuated these stereotypes and blamed the Jews for the financial problems that Germany had should have been a surprise to no one.

Also, when you are playing the victim, which the Nazi's certainly tried to do both when they were vying for political power and after they seized control (with Germany being the victim after Hitler came to power), you need an oppressor. So, the Jews became part of that myth of oppression, and it was an easy target for Germans, already imbued with their own longstanding Antisemitic traditions, to embrace. This despite the fact that Germany had really embraced its Jewish community for a fairly long period of time prior to this, maybe a good 50 years or so. In fact, prior to the Nazis, Germany was one of the best places in Europe to be Jewish. I suppose that's why so few of them took the treats seriously.

But, the point is that without the underlying religious based Antisemitic traditions in play, the economic arguments would never have really taken off like it did and Hitler would have had to find another bogeyman to blame all of Germany's problems on (and I've little doubt he would have done just that).

Quote:But back to the point of this thread, Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin did NOT kill people in the name of Atheism. Unless you count the fact the PP and Stalin wanted to make people not-Theists. Pol Pot and Stalin were Atheists (as far as I know). Hitler was religious and religion was used as a part of the Nazi agenda and the relationship between the party and religious organisations was complex. But it wasn't the driving force. The Nazis, as quoted above, were largely anti-religious but not a religious force. I don't want to call them secular, but they were hardly a religious movement.

I basically agree with this. I was not claiming that the Nazi's were a religious force, but I am claiming that they used religion to their advantage and, whether they admitted or not, and their views on Jews, and gays and certain other groups, came from their religious traditions.

I don't know a whole bunch about Pol Pot except that he was anti-intellectual and religion is (ironically in my view) often associated with intellectualism. Probably because for a long time religious folks were the only people who could read and write. Stalin I know a lot more about and he was definitely anti-religious. I believe at one point in his youth he was studying to become a Russian Orthodox Priest. I know his parents were devout Russian Orthodox. Stalin's agenda was consolidating power, but I've no doubt he enjoyed tormenting religious folks. But, so what? Again, I don't think anyone is claiming that being an atheist gives you any kind of moral superiority or frees you from some of the murderous tendencies that sometimes plague mankind. Well, maybe some people are claiming that but I haven't seen anyone here claim it.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2010, 09:15 PM
RE: Ye Olde Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot spiel; evaluate my usual response
(22-11-2010 02:36 PM)No J. Wrote:  The real cause of Hitler's, Stalin's and Pol Pot's power was BLIND OBEDIENCE. You remove that and you remove religion and you also remove people doing the bidding of sociopaths because they will be using their own moral code.

In a religion free world good people do good things and bad people do bad things. It takes religion (or at least blind obedience) to make good people do bad things.

Exactly. A cult of personality is a dangerous idea. Period. Religions have this too (i.e. "Look how wonderful and all-knowing Jesus is! Let's all blindly follow this great and wise man!"), but religion is not necessary. The same effect can be achieved through a secular state modelled after religion.

My WWII prof put it in pretty much the same words; he called Nazism a "secular religion" because Hitler based his government on the structure of the Roman Catholic Church (i.e. with an ultimate, unquestionable authority on top, and a downward trickling of authority from there).

It is the tyrannical absolutism of both organised religion and these kinds of cult-of-personality states that is the reason for atrocity. Belief or non-belief in a deity has little to do with it. (Although a religious upbringing will probably be one of the factors in how easily persuaded a population is to follow one of these leaders.)

"Remember, my friend, that knowledge is stronger than memory, and we should not trust the weaker." - Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: