Poland needs to get its head out of its ass

[metalman]

​

So, in response to the question, "which system?" we've now had: ​

a cryptic quote​

a video that doesn't work​

a pdf that doesn't work​

​

Can't you just answer the question?​

​

​

To be honest, I'm now more interested in the reasons *why* you won't answer the question than the answer to said question.​

Are you incapable of speaking for yourself?​

your doing nothing but being a troll


Video works for me, pdf opens for me

What the {bleep} is your problem?

 

[metalman]

there is NO such thing as a "devout atheist"

devout to non-belief??? wow, that's really funny

de·vout /diˈvout/

Adjective

1. Having or showing deep religious feeling or commitment.
2. Totally committed to a cause or belief.

definition use #2
e.g.
Totally committed to atheism

you're an evangelical atheist

see definition use #5

 

[Robert]

your doing nothing but being a troll


Video works for me, pdf opens for me

Well tell me which system they refer to, then!
How hard is that?

The video does not work for me, nor does the pdf.
I have no idea why neither open here.

What the {bleep} is your problem?

My 'problem' may simply be that I'm in a different country from you. Perhaps someone else can click your links and tell me which system they specify, since you seem completely incapable of doing so.

And you calling me a troll in the context of this conversation is deliciously funny.

 

[metalman]

My 'problem' may simply be that I'm in a different country from you. Perhaps someone else can click your links and tell me which system they specify, since you seem completely incapable of doing so.

http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web?fcoid=417&fcop=topnav&fpid=27&q=Hayek Road To Serfdom pdf&ql=
pdf = Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) you need adobe reader or equivalent plug in


http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web?fcoid=417&fcop=topnav&fpid=2&q=Hayek Road To Serfdom video&ql=
video youtube uses Adobe Flash Video you need a flash player plugin for your browser

How Browser Plugins work

click a link >> move your mouse cursor over the linked text, left click
pick one

pick 1 (p

k)
v. picked, pick·ing, picks
v.tr.
1.
a. To select from a group: The best swimmer was picked.
b. To select or cull.
2.
a. To gather in; harvest: They were picking cotton.
b. To gather the harvest from: picked the field in one day.
3.
a. To remove the outer covering of; pluck: pick a chicken clean of feathers.
b. To tear off bit by bit: pick meat from the bones.
4. To remove extraneous matter from (the teeth).
5. To poke and pull at (something) with the fingers.
6. To break up, separate, or detach by means of a sharp pointed instrument.
7. To pierce or make (a hole) with a sharp pointed instrument.
8. To take up (food) with the beak; peck: The parrot picked its seed.
9. To steal the contents of: My pocket was picked.
10. To open (a lock) without the use of a key.
11. To provoke: pick a fight.
12. Music
a. To pluck (an instrument's strings).
b. To play (an instrument) by plucking its strings.
c. To play (a tune) in this manner: picked a melody out on the guitar.
see definition #1 a & b

 

[Robert]

http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web?fcoid=417&fcop=topnav&fpid=27&q=Hayek Road To Serfdom pdf&ql=
pdf = Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) you need adobe reader or equivalent plug in


http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/search/web?fcoid=417&fcop=topnav&fpid=2&q=Hayek Road To Serfdom video&ql=

Pick one.

OK, the second link gave a list of video clips, the first of which is a youtube link which does work for me.

It's "The Road to Serfdom in Five Minutes," which depicts a sequence of events leading to what appears to be a totalitarian, fascist state.
It says nothing directly about atheism. For that matter, it doesn't even make any claim that such a sequence of events is part of a system.
Still all very cryptic and apparently tenuous.

Despite your obvious yet bizarre reluctance to do so, I'd probably have a better idea of what you're actually getting at if you tried to explain it in your own words.
-EDIT-
from your subsequent edit, you obviously think I'm rather stupid so please try to keep it in layman's terms if you can.

 

[Glaucus]

All I have to say is:

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

​

​

​

To be honest, I'm now more interested in the reasons *why* you won't answer the question than the answer to said question.​

Are you incapable of speaking for yourself?​

It's the old "If you can't guess what I'm thinking then I'm smarter than you (even if I don't know what I'm thinking)" gambit.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

de·vout /diˈvout/

Adjective

1. Having or showing deep religious feeling or commitment.
2. Totally committed to a cause or belief.

definition use #2
e.g.
Totally committed to atheism

Atheism is not a cause. Atheism is not a belief. Therefore #2 does not apply. Don't believe that Thor does not exist. I just don't believe that he does. I feel the same about your god. I just don't believe.

 

[cecilia]

Well tell me which system they refer to, then!
How hard is that?

The video does not work for me, nor does the pdf.
I have no idea why neither open here.

I downloaded the pdf for you



I'll see if I can do anything about the video

 

[Robert]

I'll see if I can do anything about the video

Thanks but no need. I got to see one from Metalman's second batch of links.

 

[cecilia]

you're an evangelical atheist

once again this is a RE-tarded notion.

I don't give a rat's ass who believes WHAT. As long as people keep their asshole religion out of my face. And - most importantly - away from MY civil rights.

It's called being an American.

I don't go around selling atheism. I don't collect money in it's name. Only religion does that.

Most of my life I didn't even THINK about religion. I spent way more time thinking about my career.

Only people so enslaved by religion think everyone lives like they do.

Most recently I have realized that unless atheists fight back the encroachment of the religious right lunatic fringe we WILL lose our civil rights.

What the Internet has done is allow atheists who all their lives thought they were The Only One to find each other and exchange experiences.

What Atheists don't do is walk up to strangers and try to convince them to reject religion.

The fact is that Religion itself creates atheists.
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov, Russian-American author (c. 1920 - 1992)

When you talk to other atheists like I have you find out people become fed up with being bullied by crazy frigid nuns. They are insulted by the Illogic of it all. They are emotionally harmed by the guilt. They come to atheism because they free their minds of the mental slavery.

you can't "buy" atheism like going to a store and picking up a grapefruit. They arrive at it because they realize that religion is damaging them.

 

[cecilia]

Thanks but no need. I got to see one from Metalman's second batch of links.

ok

 

[metalman]

Maoism and Stalinism were certainly brutal and claimed roots in Communism but weren't what Marx had in mind.
Atheism should not be lumped in with Communism as it wasn't the driving philosophy but rather power was.

"The Road to Serfdom in Five Minutes," which depicts a sequence of events leading to what appears to be a totalitarian, fascist state. It says nothing directly about atheism. For that matter, it doesn't even make any claim that such a sequence of events is part of a system.

All communist states that have followed a Marxist–Leninist variant are officially atheistic and antireligious

The Road to Serfdom applies to National Socialism, International Socialism, or Socialism in One Country
None of the utopia's work (exempli gratia: to function or operate in the desired or required way) without a totalitarian government

from your subsequent edit, you obviously think I'm rather stupid so please try to keep it in layman's terms if you can.

The edit was primarily to help a few of your fellow members follow along, who are short bus challenged, and complaining about a lack of hyper links and dictionary definitions in my posts. When playing Blue's Clues with my kids I get more clues than "which system?"

 

[metalman]

Atheism isn't a cult because it lacks leaders, followers and a creed.

There are many weird atheist cults. Cults that explicitly deny the existence of a Supreme Being, and deny the existence of multiple deities ( polytheism ) such as is found in Hinduism, or followed by the ancient Greeks and Romans. Cults like the Raelians or Scientology do not believe in any deity, therefore they are atheists. Buddhism offers no consistent teaching regarding the existence, or non-existence, of any deity. All these "New Age Spiritualist" who emphasize inner spiritual reflection and meditation. The Heavens Gate type Cults who seek an advanced race of extraterrestrials to help themselves transform to a "higher plane" of existence. Gaia Cults who worship the planet itself, Mother Earth, who spawned the evolution and diversity of living creatures, and believe the earth must be protected from all destructive human activity. Gaia Doomsday Cults who believe humans are destroying Mother Earth, by CFC’s/Global Warming/ industrialization/ GMO's, and need to return to a primitive way of life. Gaia Cults believe evolution eliminates the need for a belief in any divine creator.

If you believe there is no supreme diety, then it follow that there are only higher status humans. Every Marxist-Lennist country evolved a cult of personality around its Dear Leader. The regime is all: When there are no unalienable rights endowed upon us by “nature’s God” our “Creator” ( per the Declaration of Independence ) then all you have left, is a group of powerful, high status, humans, a cult of personality.

 

[faethor]

It will always result in a psychopath in charge, its an unintended feature of the system

There's a school of thought developing that Leaders themselves tend to have more psychological issues than the general public. I don't think there's sufficient quantity of evidence to say this is a for sure. It appears certain psychological conditions may have advantages during certain times. For Example: There's some that believe Winston Churchhill had depression. This trait may have contributed to him being a good leader in WWII. But, the same trait may have made his leadership more difficult during times of peace.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=wisdom-from-psychopaths is a recent interesting read.

 

[faethor]

once again this is a RE-tarded notion.

Being an atheist myself I do consider 'evangelical atheism' a useful term. One of note would be Richard Dawkins. His approach is someone I see as a highly zealous. Thus, he makes good "news". Whereas most atheists are quiet about the issue. They don't care to make waves as along as religion isn't over burdening their life. In any system of understanding/belief all types of approaches have value. If they have value to me or to you that's our personal approach to life. But, you are right it's basically unheard of that 'Atheists' hand out the tray and collect money weekly to sustain their belief system.

The fact is that Religion itself creates atheists.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived." - Isaac Asimov, Russian-American author (c. 1920 - 1992)

That definitely helped my journey out of the cave of belief.

All communist states that have followed a Marxist–Leninist variant are officially atheistic and antireligious

I think this statement makes your error fairly clear. You've twisted this relationship the wrong way. Lenin, indeed, didn't see a diety nor associate one with his system. But not having a diety doesn't demand one be a Leninist. Your writings here read that you argue Atheism will always lead to Leninism. That's clearly not the case. Additionally, Leninism is but one type of communist - there are Christian Communists and Christian Societies that have operate or do operate as communistic.

There are many weird atheist cults.

Raelians are polytheists, not atheists. Scientologists do conceive of god the creator and let each individual divine god(s) in their own way. So again, not atheistic. I wouldn't characterize Gaia Cults as atheistic either. They conceive that god is in all things, including the universe itself. Some of these might compare the bacteria in our stomach to be similar to people on earth, we're all part of the god. That's certainly different from saying there is no gods, which is what atheists conceive.

If you believe there is no supreme diety, then it follow that there are only higher status humans.

There is nothing about atheism that demands higher status humans. Atheism says there are no Gods. That's all it is. It does not rank humans or any other animal/vegetable/mineral in any sort of better/worse hierarchy. I go back to stamp collecting - denying the fun in collecting stamps doesn't contribute to anything else. Likewise denying a deity doesn't contribute to anything else.

When there are no unalienable rights endowed upon us by “nature’s God” our “Creator” ( per the Declaration of Independence ) then all you have left, is a group of powerful, high status, humans, a cult of personality.

The reason for these wordings is opposite of what you contend. Europe had defined it's countries to derive it's rules from the Godhead. With the use of these phrases the Founding Fathers only 'god driven' right was the self determination of our nation from the rules we judge as humans are the most fair. We don't have a deity that interacts to build anything for us. This concept is Deist in origins, closer to today's atheism, than it is to any religious notion of a deity.

 

[metalman]

You've twisted this relationship the wrong way. Lenin, indeed, didn't see a diety nor associate one with his system. But not having a diety doesn't demand one be a Leninist.

Reread the statement, Communists >> Atheists >> official religion = atheism

Raelians are polytheists, not atheists. Scientologists do conceive of god the creator and let each individual divine god(s) in their own way. So again, not atheistic. I wouldn't characterize Gaia Cults as atheistic either. They conceive that god is in all things, including the universe itself. Some of these might compare the bacteria in our stomach to be similar to people on earth, we're all part of the god. That's certainly different from saying there is no gods, which is what atheists conceive.

Raelians and Scientologists theology is basically space opera science fiction, they believe in advanced races of extraterrestrials beings who evolved, they don't believe in any deity, therefore atheist

Gaia Cults believe evolution eliminates the need for a belief in any divine creator, they do not worship Gaia as a deity, but as a mystical "biota", the Mother Earth as a evolving, self regulating living system that maintains the conditions that are suitable for organic life to exist. They don't believe in any deity, therefore atheist

There is nothing about atheism that demands higher status humans. Atheism says there are no Gods.

Nothing demands it
however once you have decided there is no higher deity, humans have a psychological need to fill the void
higher status humans? (personality cults)
more advanced extraterrestrial races? ($cientology, Raelians, Heavens Gate, ....)
Evolution? (Gaia worship)

With the use of these phrases the Founding Fathers only 'god driven' right was the self determination of our nation from the rules we judge as humans are the most fair. We don't have a deity that interacts to build anything for us.

psychologically there is a very big difference

 

[faethor]

Reread the statement, Communists >> Atheists >> official religion = atheism

Exactly what I was saying! Communism doesn't necessarily lead to Atheists. Christian Communists are the easy example. They exist Philosophically and existed as societies. For example: Ceclia cited Monks.

Raelians and Scientologists theology is basically space opera science fiction, they believe in advanced races of extraterrestrials beings who evolved, they don't believe in any deity, therefore atheist.

Again Scientology believes a god is by a personal examination and definition so there is a god in there. How one defines a deity or necessitates a God might give Raelians an atheist stance. So let's split it!

Gaia Cults believe evolution eliminates the need for a belief in any divine creator, they do not worship Gaia as a deity, but as a mystical "biota", the Mother Earth as a evolving, self regulating living system that maintains the conditions that are suitable for organic life to exist. They don't believe in any deity, therefore atheist

Again we'd have to talk about which Gaia Cultists. Many conceive we are part of the god. They're often closer to Pantheism than Atheism. More easily we might consider those two the opposite. God is everywhere and all existence VS God is nowhere in no existence.

Nothing demands it
however once you have decided there is no higher deity, humans have a psychological need to fill the void
higher status humans? (personality cults)

Last point first - personality cults are not unique to atheism. Christianity is a personality cult around Ja supposed man who was a supposed God Jesus. First point last - some humans, but not all, may have a psychological need to fill the void with a higher status humans. Many atheists I know do nothing of the sort. What I see here is you're taking a subset of types of actions of people who are atheists and assume all are the same. Not true.

Again atheism is the notion there is no god. There's nothing that demands a personality cult or a communist society is the result. I assume you're an anti-leprechaunist right? I assume you don't really think Leprechaun have pots of gold at the end of rainbows or make your breakfast cereal. (Let me know if I'm wrong there.) There's no demand there you promote anything - likewise with atheism.

psychologically there is a very big difference

Psychologically Christians and other faithful wrongly assume the documents talk about their God. When in fact it does not. The important difference is that it enabled us to not follow the dictates of a presupposed religion. Whereas most of Europeans of that time derived their national right from an ordination of a type of Godhead.

 

[cecilia]

faethor, I basically agree with everything you have said but I'd like to clarify this:

Being an atheist myself I do consider 'evangelical atheism' a useful term. One of note would be Richard Dawkins.

When asked Dawkins will say he has no proof of the existence or non-existence of any god. Being a scientist he will not make a statement that absolutely there is no god.

However, he says, the likelihood of a god is quite slim. There are atheists who really are bugged by this view because they would like him to be more definite about there being "no god(s)", but I find their attitude , well, silly.

The fact is that no one has proven the existence of any god. Ever. And that's all we "know". What this means for me is that I am not obligated to believe in any god. I can happily go on with my life and ignore all that religion bullshit because it's based on nothing concrete.

What Dawkins is 'evangelical' about is pointing out that organized religion can be dangerous to individuals and society because in some cases it's actually anti-science and anti-logic. And, boy , do I agree 1000% with THAT.

This insistence that being educated about reality is certainly NOT pushing atheism. This morning my (very Catholic) mother was waxing poetically about a TV show she saw last night where the discussion was about how Neanderthals were quite clever in their weapon making talents and that their DNA is still within us to this day.

Clearly, my mother is capable of being religious AND educated - and is more than happy to continue her education even into her 'old age'. I'm sure if Dawkins met my mother they would be perfectly cordial with each other - even when they disagreed on a few (in my view) minor points.

 

[metalman]

[quote="faethor, post: 60107, member: 32"] Communism doesn't necessarily lead to Atheists. Christian Communists are the easy example. They exist Philosophically and existed as societies. For example: Ceclia cited Monks. [/quote]
"Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes" -Karl Marx translated as: "religion is the opiate of the masses"

Communists are atheists, there is no such thing as a "Christian Communist" the correct description is "Christian Socialist"

You keep bringing up Christian Utopian societies, the Pilgrims tried one, there were numerous societies tried in the 19th century, they all failed, the Shakers did make some nice furniture and invented the modern broom, but they have all long ago disbanded.

There are a few cases (e.g. Monks) were socialist societies work, but the members all take a vow of poverty

Again Scientology believes a god is by a personal examination

They use an e-meter to "scientifically" improve themselves (dianetic$), there is no belief in any deity

Again we'd have to talk about which Gaia Cultists. Many conceive we are part of the god. They're often closer to Pantheism than Atheism. More easily we might consider those two the opposite. God is everywhere and all existence VS God is nowhere in no existence.

"No True Atheist"

Last point first - personality cults are not unique to atheism. Christianity is a personality cult around Ja supposed man who was a supposed God Jesus.

Personality cults are not unique to atheism, its a basic human nature
It makes a difference who is the object of the cult though. most are harmless, and the Jesus cult involves a strict moral code, but every Communist nation has used this basic human nature to maintain power

Psychologically Christians and other faithful wrongly assume the documents talk about their God. When in fact it does not.

Its the Judeo-Christrian God