Hi,
I have seen this image (linked below) pop up on a few occasions, at first I see a few 'atrocities' were not even atheistic at all and coincidentally some religious. What I would like maybe 1 or 2 sentences explain why they have nothing to do with atheism and more to do with politics or power or just some insane leader. But please if one of these have any atheistic motive behind it, I would like to know.. as I believe to stay truthful about things, you cannot go wrong. I have seen many essays refuting this stupid fallacy, name 'The Atheist Atrocity Fallacy', and you can use those has a basis for information or well any history book. I will give a few links sources at the end to go by Smile I mean I have looked everywhere for a picture of sorts on google images but nothing really to go against this picture, there are a few with but nothing of worth. A collaboration with you guys will be extremely appreciative.
Update: I don't mean these were done with people with no belief in a god (I could argue some of these leaders did and/or believed they were god and carried out and defended a religious worldview), rather were they done in the name of NO god. Was it there motive? Personally atheism is just a lack of believe of a deity and carry with it NO strong motive, i'e doctrine, worldview, book telling what to do, god telling them what to do.
This little write-up below accompanied the image:
Quote:
"Atheism and Mass Murder in 20th century:
Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,00 people murdered
Jozef Stalin (USSR 1932-39 only) 15,000,000 people murdered
Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000 people murdered
Kim II Sung (North Korea 1948-94) 1.6 million people murdered
Tito (Yugoslavia 1945-1987) 570,000 people murdered
Suharto (Communists 1967-66) 500,000 people murdered
Ante Pavelic (Croatia 1941-45) 359,000 people murdered
Ho Chi Min (Vietnam 1953-56) 200,000 people murdered
Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 people murdered
Adolf Hitler (Germany 1939-1945) 12,000,000 people murdered"
***********************************
For example the North Korea one, everyone worshiped Kim Jong-Il and he himself believed he was the son of god or rather a mini god himself and his father a god.. The whole servility and totalitarianism by the people of North Korea is a religious regime, and believed he was god, as the first known totalitarianism in the world was a religious one.
In a place (North Korea) with absolutely no private or personal life, with the incessant worship of a mediocre career-sadist as the only culture, where all citizens are the permanent property of the state, the highest form of pointlessness has been achieved.
The whole "GOD" thing is similar to the situation in North Korea. North Koreans have been taught since childhood that the "Dear Leader" is indeed a God, so they actually believe it because they know nothing else since childhood. As children, we were drilled and instructed NOT to challenge religion, but to accept 'on faith" or be damned to hellfire and damnation. I don't wish to live under a permanent unalterable dictatorship where one grovels and praises the divine leader and his divine father sounds almost like heaven, does it not. Totalitarianism defined.
Religious belief is a totalitarian belief. It is the wish to be a slave. It is the desire that there be an unalterable, unchallengeable, tyrannical authority who can convict you of thought crime while you are asleep, who can subject you - who must, indeed, subject you - to total surveillance around the clock every waking and sleeping minute of your life - I say, of your life - before you're born and, even worse and where the real fun begins, after you're dead. A celestial North Korea.
Who wants this to be true? Who but a slave desires such a ghastly fate? North Korea has a dead man as its president, Kim Jong-Il is only head of the party and head of the army. He's not head of the state. That office belongs to his deceased father, Kim Il-Sung.
It's a necrocracy, a thanatocracy. It's one short of a trinity I might add. The son is the reincarnation of the father. It is the most revolting and utter and absolute and heartless tyranny the human species has ever evolved. - Christopher Hitchens
*********************************
So taking whats above as a guide, the summary would be: I would say "North Korea was a religious state that had Kim Jong-Il as a god and he himself believed he was the son of god and his father Kim Il-Sung was a god.. The son is the reincarnation of the father."
*********************************
If/when I have enough information, I will and try to create a few opposing pictures
1) The rebuttal to this (i.e - Mark out with red pen saying "Incorrect" and give a brief explanation why.)
2) 20thC atrocities - and give the years, deaths and description of what type of regime (political, power, religious etc.) it is (preferably using the picture shown here as a direct guide).
3) Since they can do it, so can we. We will make a "Religious 20th Century Atrocities" statistical image.
What do you guys thing? If you guys think you know how to handle photoshop, please go ahead and create a master piece :)
I appreciate any co-operation and feedback.
- Cheers :)
https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com/2014/10/21/the-atheist-atroc...
http://academicatheism.tumblr.com/post/108462193395/here-we-go-again-wit...
Attachments
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Republican Spain? I almost sprayed coffee onto my monitor when I saw that on the list!
But look at that huge number for the Soviet Union! It isn't even in the right order of magnitude. Someone is playing very fast and loose.
As soon as someone claims that Hitler was an atheist I completely dismiss that person's facts or opinions. Hitler was a catholic pure and simple. Nowhere in history has anyone killed people simply because the killer was an atheist and the victim was not.
Stalin killed people that he felt threatened his authority. He didn't kill them because they were not atheist. Mao killed people for the same reason. People must understand that Stalin and Mao never went after people for their beliefs. The Chinese are at war with Buddhist, but because they want the territory that Buddhist control. Buddhism is allowed in China and has never been abolished. The USSR Russians allow churches to stay and people to attend them. Officially the government was atheist, but they didn't bulldoze down the Basil Cathedral, nor did they outlaw religious worship.
The counter is that religions have always committed genocide to exterminate people that don't BELIEVE what they believe.
To attribute murder to atheism is a fallacy.
"Religious belief is a totalitarian belief. It is the wish to be a slave. It is the desire that there be an unalterable, unchallengeable, tyrannical authority who can convict you of thought crime while you are asleep, who can subject you - who must, indeed, subject you - to total surveillance around the clock every waking and sleeping minute of your life - I say, of your life - before you're born and, even worse and where the real fun begins, after you're dead. A celestial North Korea."
I would disagree with all that. Not the least because you used such abstract terminology as to invalidate your sweeping generalizations.
If you want to know what a religion believes, wouldn't it be better to find someone who knows it then ask them, rather than put up such straw man arguments?
You also don't understand what the argument from effect is. One does things because they believe them to be the thing to do. One also does things because there is no reason not to. Take into account the latter, and not just the former, and you'll have a better understanding of your opponent's arguments.