|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Essay talk:How Atheism Becomes Religion
CIA and Islam, among other things[edit]
As someone who has studied the CIA coup in Iran, I'm curious. To what extent do you believe the actions of the CIA and other western actors such as oil justify any and all actions carried out by Wahhabi Islamic movements? Also, I think you're mischaracterizing the cult of Stalin and Hitler. Stalin's cult of personality was, in large part, one of fear and force rather than reverence. To say they merely made themselves Gods and no one said anything or spotted the difference is true in only perhaps the most fanatical of cases. Now MAO may have had such a cult, but if you look at accounts of the men who carried out the atrocities (such as Ordinary Men) you will see that many didn't quite buy into Hitler as a God. Captain Swing (bringer of nachos) 03:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hitler's ability to utilize Western religious norms (Germanic paganism, occultism, Christianity) was a bit more complex than Stalin's because Germanic religious norms were less homogeneous. The Germans were multi-religious while the Russians had been an Orthodox theocracy. The Germans were also industrially and economically light-years beyond Russia, so there were certain amounts of post-Enlightenment thought to integrate into the ideology. By contrast, Stalin only needed to say Trotsky was being a typical Jew, re-open the Orthodox Churches, and serialize WAR AND PEACE in Pravda to make everyone psychologically feel like it was tsarism back in power, which is how the USSR was run after Lenin died. I'm not going to engage in the BS politicking with you, though, you've been up my butt the last few days policing me over Trotskyism and all this nonsense and it's as productive as debating how many angels dance on the head of a pin. You seem to be obsessed with the sort of thinking Christopher Hitchens had, from mild observation, and let me just emphasize that no one takes him seriously because he was a shitty debater and a pretty rude person, the way he treated Edward Said's death was repugnant. Your own equating of Islam with Wahhabism, the ideological tract of the CIA-backed Saudi family, is particularly problematic. There are like 25 different trends in Islamism alone, some which are insanely authoritarian and others which have an economic theory for debt forgiveness that shames anything the World Bank has ever done in terms of aid.--Andrewstewart1 (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- I never equated Islam with Wahhabism, I merely asked if you thought some of the actions carried out by the wahhab movement were justified, two completely different things. You seem to be making assumptions, especially with regard to my "policing." You accused Hitchens of, among other things, yellow journalism and of never being a pacifist. He himself said that the classification of pacifism was problematic, but no one denies that was how he started out initially, as the page stated. As for your edit of the Trotsky page, wow, I didn't let a blanket opinion totally devoid of context or evidence stand, what a shocker. As for Hitler, the question was the extent which people bought into the anti-semitism/pan-Germanic movements, or if they saw some economic stability and growth and a chance for personal gain and bought into the philosophy/cult so long as it was convenient. Captain Swing (bringer of nachos) 04:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hitler's ability to utilize Western religious norms (Germanic paganism, occultism, Christianity) was a bit more complex than Stalin's because Germanic religious norms were less homogeneous. The Germans were multi-religious while the Russians had been an Orthodox theocracy. The Germans were also industrially and economically light-years beyond Russia, so there were certain amounts of post-Enlightenment thought to integrate into the ideology. By contrast, Stalin only needed to say Trotsky was being a typical Jew, re-open the Orthodox Churches, and serialize WAR AND PEACE in Pravda to make everyone psychologically feel like it was tsarism back in power, which is how the USSR was run after Lenin died. I'm not going to engage in the BS politicking with you, though, you've been up my butt the last few days policing me over Trotskyism and all this nonsense and it's as productive as debating how many angels dance on the head of a pin. You seem to be obsessed with the sort of thinking Christopher Hitchens had, from mild observation, and let me just emphasize that no one takes him seriously because he was a shitty debater and a pretty rude person, the way he treated Edward Said's death was repugnant. Your own equating of Islam with Wahhabism, the ideological tract of the CIA-backed Saudi family, is particularly problematic. There are like 25 different trends in Islamism alone, some which are insanely authoritarian and others which have an economic theory for debt forgiveness that shames anything the World Bank has ever done in terms of aid.--Andrewstewart1 (talk) 04:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
How about you quit the I AM SUCH A REVOLUTIONARY PROLE act and leave me alone, your demotion makes clear bias is your middle name. I have to be honest it is creepy you troll me this much.— Unsigned, by: Andrewstewart1 / talk / contribs
- If you want me to "leave you alone" and consider editing your edits "trolling," well, perhaps you should reconsider editing on a wiki. (P.S. The demotion thing was a tongue-in-cheek joke to the fact that sysops here are basically janitors) Captain Swing (bringer of nachos) 08:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)