Atheists' view on Stalin

In a recent thread, biblical atrocities which supposedly originate from God were compared to atrocities committed by Stalin. As I understand it, both Christians and the non-religious reject Stalin, but there is a common argument saying that the non-religious, or atheists in particular, accept Stalin in the same way as Christians accept God (ultimate morality being what I see as the focus).

I think this sounds counter intuitive, so I thought I'd make a poll to see if that is true.

 

One need not be religious to recognize atrocity.

 

Please forgive my vote for "I am non-religious, I think Stalin was moral", I thought this thread was about Satan. I really need a higher prescription.

Satan wasn't into the whole voluntary interaction thing, but I wasn't given an option for middle ground, so I went with him being moral, because he has a more anarchist tinge to God's tedious moralism.

[hr][/hr]

As for Stalin (you know, the topic of this thread), I think he was one of the most horrible people who have ever lived. I despise communism. I'm a radical voluntaryist - Stalin was the opposite in every conceivable way. I have no doubt that my own morality is far, far further from Stalin's than most of the pro-state religious conservatives'.

 

Why are so many atheists afraid to embrace their roots......

 

Because those supposed roots are immoral? Why, would you embrace something you thought was immoral just because you thought they were your roots?

There is also, of course, the question of to what extent Stalin is in any way a root of atheism, but I leave that to others.

 

One of the agendas of communism is to attempt to vanquish religion from the state there for to get its citizenry to worship the state instead
For communism to work people have to have the outmost blind faith in the government they have to believe it is their provider and savior it is their existents just like you see in religions
so a communist atheists isn't a true atheist they just replaced the worship of a god with the worship of a government

 

It is good that some recognize this but many will deny atheism was Stalin's bag. The rejection of religion is a big part of these totalitarian governments that want to control everything and everyone. For them religion must go so everyone will worship the government. The same in North Korea.

 

Well, what do you mean by "bag"? I don't think there are many who think Stalin wasn't an atheist, but seeing his upbringing, life situation, medial situation, political situation, psychological situation and so on, I think it'd be a brave statement to pin his actions on any religious matter.

 

This makes even less sense than Idiots claiming that because Hitler was a Christian, the religion is inherently evil. As Atheism is a belief in nothing...how could it be the cause of anything?

Stalin was a very bad man....as was Hitler. Religion or a lack thereof had nothing to do with what they did.

 

As has been explained, atheism is a central part of the communist totalitarian regimes that were responsible for mass murders and true genocide in the 20th century. So since Stalin was a totalitarian communist he embraced all aspects of it. 2 + 2=4....etc......

 

Atheist apologists are hilarious! Hahaha!

 

Sure, just as Hitler enjoyed strudels. It seems you are including some extra judgement here and that you're trying to pull some kind of guilt by association. However, you have yet to construct an actual argument using that, so as far as I know, you could be deliberately using logical fallacies or just be misinformed.

But yes, atheism was a part of communism. People had been so mistreated by the "ruling classes" that they jumped at anything else, even communism.

 

And Morons are Morons, regardless of what they believe.....Hahaha!

What exactly do you imagine I might be apologizing for?

Am I apologizing for Stalin?....uh...No.

Am I apologizing for Atheism?....gain...NO.

Am I pointing out the ignorance and inherent bias your opinions contain?....absolutely.

Are you helping me by continuing to spew these opinions?....Ayup.

 

Stalin is not my roots, that's a moronic thing to say.

- - - Updated - - -

Trouble is you are saying 2+2=5. Stalin was atheist, he killed lots of religious people, you could jump to a conclusion with only that but it would not be justified. Just like you could see that shark attacks increase whenever ice cream sales improve, and wrongly conclude that the two are causally linked.

 

You need to learn the difference between cause and correlation.

 

With the level of collusion between church and king from Moscow to Portugal, wanting to overthrow the whole lot makes sense.

 

You just thanked a post right above this one here that explained how a communist isn't a true atheist. Even in your post here you show that these people need and want religious type faith and even to be worshipped like in North Korea, actual atheists not only don't want this they recognize it as simply a state religion. I'm truly starting to think you have jumped in before learning to swim.

 

Stalin was not motivated by atheism more than Henry VIII was motivated for his hate for catholics .

 

Men are prone to need a belief system a purpose and direction in life a moral compass. Its why religion was established probably from day one and has been around ever since. it is part of mankind. there had to be a need for it other wise it would have never have been as popular and lasted as long as it has

there for if man doesn't believe in a god he will replace it with what ever, the government a person money or anything else that floats their boat including themselves that gives them a purpose and direction in life a moral compass. they will still call themselves an atheist but they still are worshiping and following what ever they decided to just like as if it was a religion

An atheist in any kind of ultimate power like Stalin is very dangerous because who does he have to answer to if he isn't a believer in a higher being? If he is the creator of his own moral compass that compass can point to any direction he decides and not be concerned about any retribution from anyone above him

 

We can also note that many atrocities are rationalized based upon religion. Christians murdering abortion doctors, Zionist Jews that control Israel attacking refugee camps, and Islamic fundamentalists committing acts of terrorism are rationalized based upon religious beliefs.

Of course "political power" is the greatest motivation for most large scale atrocities and often "religion" is just the rationalization for it. When ancient Jews slaughtered the Canaanites it was exclusively about gaining political power over a territory. Religion was a rationalization for the political conquest of Canaan by the Jews over 2,000 years ago when they slaughtered the Canaanite men, women, and children in achieveing the political conquest of the region. The recent terrorist attacks in Iraq being committed by Sunni Muslims is about political power and religion is just a rationalization for the attacks. The civil war in Syria is about political power and religion is often the rationalization for attrocities being committed by both sides of the conflict. The "Crusades" were about political power where religion was used as a rationalization for the atrocities committed by both sides of the conflict.

 

Religion was created to achieve political power. That is something few seem to understand. It was the foundation for the belief in the "Divine Right of Kings" as the monarch was "God's Emissary on Earth" and therefore the "people" were compelled to support the monarch based upon their belief in God. To oppose the King was to oppose God. Religion has always been about achieving political power over the common person.

 

no people used religion to gain political power it wasn't the entail reason religion was created. it was created when man first looked up at the stars or the sun and asked where did that come from who made that, and or what is my purpose in life why am I here. And organized religion stemmed from when that same man had a conversation with his buddy over those very thoughts and they agreed on where the stars or sun came from and or what their purpose in life was. religion is much older then you think it is it started right when man was able to do what I described above

 

Seems "religion" is a bit too broad here. I'm of the opinion that religion originally stemmed from human curiosity, because there are questions people could not answer. "Where did we come from", for example. And there have always been a lot of ill-formed questions in that they are based on a priori assumptions not necessarily valid. Questions like "what is the purpose of life?" Given that it's unnatural to admit ignorance, people simply made up stuff they found satisfying. By and large, they find "goddidit" satisfactory because people have a purpose for all they do, they project a purpose onto everything, which implies a purpose-haver for everything, which must be something like a god. Explaining the unexplainable is easy if you can use gods as one-size-fits-all "explanations".

I think it's only after belief was socialized and widespread, that it became a politically useful tool.

 

A belief system, a purpose, a direction in life and a moral compass are not mutual exclusive. One can have a moral compass and not have a belief system, one can have a moral compass and not have a purpose or a direction. From what I can tell morality and ideology don't often mix especially if that ideology is dogmatic in nature. Just because you can force people to act or behave in a certain manner doesn't mean those actions are moral.

Religion was in a way originally a poor mans version of science as it attempted to answer questions mankind was ill-equipped to answer. We have long since shed our need for it and the only reason it has persisted is because of how the ruling class used it over last few thousand years to control the masses. There is ample evidence to support this position.

Please give an actual example of this that would make this statement true of all atheists. Because as it stands it’s quite absurd in that it’s a contradiction. Atheists don’t simply disbelieve in God they reject the notion that religious faith is a virtue and are ever wary of credulous claims or ideals. It is the act of worship and blindly following any authority (as in accepting authoritative declarations absent evidence and honestly even with evidence as that is not how science works) which are deal breakers for atheists.

An atheist who is not a mad man will answer to reason and logic and a more objective morality because he or she will not be bound by any mythological dogmatic beliefs that tend to favor one group over another. Science sees beyond the flesh and bone of humanity and makes a true connection not only between all of us but to the universe itself. Also when there is no afterlife waiting for us this life actually has meaning and regardless of purpose it matters a great deal how people live it and that we all have the best opportunity to do so. When you benefit I benefit, our social nature is a product of evolution, one we still need to evolve and in order to do that we first have to admit that it’s fricken happening not divert our attention from it with superstitious nonsense about our divine creation.

Not sure if you’ve noticed but not only have most of the religious leaders throughout history not really been concerned about any retribution they have used their Gods to grant themselves immunity and even rewards from and for being entirely immoral.

Men have to answer to men, Gods answer to no one.

 

then who establishes that moral compass if it doesn't come from a higher being? the person himself? then that moral compass can be what ever that person wants it to be at the time he wants it. in that case that is dangerous because then he can justify any and every action he decides

many questions man has cant be answered by science and never will be. yes science can explain where the heavens and earth came from but will never answer why are we here what is our purpose what is my direction in life

you confusing the act of worship and religion. when it is said man can worship money it doesn't mean he has a dollar bill on some alter that he says prayers to ever night it means money is what gives him his direction and purpose it is what he consciously or subconsciously bases his direction and decisions in life on. money becomes his religion Atheist will replace God with things like money or government or themselves so they have a direction and a purpose so they are not wandering aimlessly through life its not intentional that they do it but the are filling a subconscious need to do so

all men are inherently evil it is morals that keeps us from acting on that evil and when you are allowed to create your own morals as atheist do then that evil is more prevalent to happen

power corrupts. and it is why you never want to grant man to much power that is why big government will always be corrupt