Ibn Warraq gets this point dead wrong as we have witnessed the Carnage and bloodlust of Communists who were atheists but proclaimed themselves God. The cult of reason in the French revolution also has to be reconciled with the Great Terror and the Colonial wars of Napoleon . Napoleon does not belong in a conversation with Communism or Nazism. Nazism was the cult of man deciding what life is worthy and has far more in common with Communism . The idea of sending humans to concentration camps or anyone else for that matter is man elevating himself to God.
The view that polytheists or Pagans were more humane then the monotheists is baloney.
The Mongols were certainly not peaceful animists. Ancient Greece was colonial and often imposed its culture on others. African and American Indian tribes were a mixed bag of peaceful and warlike tribes. This blanket statement is way too broad and the historical record is mixed at best.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I also think that Ibn Warraq has this particular point wrong. Warraq is at his best when he is specific about Islam and doesn't try to analyze other ideologies; these particular analyses of his are indeed too broad.
I will say that any centralized religion as the form of centralized government is dangerous. That's one reason for having separation of church and state.
Polytheists or pagans were definitely not more humane than monotheists. In fact, monotheists led the way in the founding of this nation.
As Jason has pointed out many times, from its inception Islam has been political in nature--not just a religion of personal faith.
Islam isn't monotheistic, it's pseudotheistic.
what government created the first concentration camps?
Oooh! Oooh! Pick me! I know the answer!
You said "government" so this would exclude the semi-private enterprise of slave marketeering in the early Roman Empire.
I'm gonna have to go with the Caliphate of Abu Bakr in the late 7th Century.
I agree with AOW, Warraq’s book doesn’t hinge on his view of religion in general since he builds his case on the specifics of Islam. You can take or leave what you want of the other points. I usually recommend it to people who are secular since some people wonder if Spencer, Trifkovic and others are coming from their religious perspective (they are not but I like having several sources.)
He argues more emphatically than I that Islam is a state religion created specifically for that purpose. I argue that it is a political ideology with religious trimming. Perhaps these two views are the same. In the 7th century, if you wanted to rule you needed the sanction of a religion. Presto: Islam.
Over on another website they are debating if I'm a racist bigot or not. This gets tiring. Some people just want to distort what you say. Fortunately, good people who still aren't convinced that I'm right (one Dr. Steele) respect where I'm comming from and know it is not from hostility towards any demographic group (never mind that Islam is not a race.)
People are going to do what people do no mater what they believe. Always have. Always will.
Post a Comment