>> ^coolhund:

>> ^crotchflame:
>> ^coolhund:
What I learned from all these questions and discussion (not only this one) after 20 years is that atheists tend to be far more fanatic and totalitarian about their view than agnostics.

What about the agnostic atheists?
I've heard so many people say this and I still have no idea what a fanatic atheist would look like.

There are many different forms of agnosticism and atheism. But as long as someone calls himself atheist, its far more drastic than someone who calls himself an agnostic.
Also agnostics tend to be far more tolerable of religion, because they acknowledge that religion is a part of the human race and you simply cant imagine what would happen (or would have happened) if people wouldnt believe in anything bigger.
But a lot of atheists are pretty totalitarian. Religion is bad, needs to be exterminated, caused billions of deaths, you name it.


Agnosticism is a statement on the nature of knowledge while atheism is a statement of belief (or non-belief); the two don't seem like different points on some scale of religiosity to me. You can be an agnostic Christian as well as an agnostic atheist. Saying you're not sure doesn't say anything about what you believe since any sensible person would say that they're not sure.

I simply object to labelling a non-believer as a fanatic because it implies that they're holding to some belief without critical analysis and no such prescription can be attributed to atheism. An atheist that is completely intolerant of other people's beliefs isn't a fanatic he's an asshole. Anyone who claims that the pope is infallible on the other hand is a fanatic. I've never personally met an atheist that fits your description, though.

Atheism doesn't reject a belief in 'something higher.' It's a non-belief in Jehovah, Zeus, Thor, etc. I can experience the numinous while still insisting that the theistic description of a personal God is incorrect.

>> ^crotchflame:

>> ^coolhund:
What I learned from all these questions and discussion (not only this one) after 20 years is that atheists tend to be far more fanatic and totalitarian about their view than agnostics.

What about the agnostic atheists?
I've heard so many people say this and I still have no idea what a fanatic atheist would look like.


There are many different forms of agnosticism and atheism. But as long as someone calls himself atheist, its far more drastic than someone who calls himself an agnostic.
Also agnostics tend to be far more tolerable of religion, because they acknowledge that religion is a part of the human race and you simply cant imagine what would happen (or would have happened) if people wouldnt believe in anything bigger.
But a lot of atheists are pretty totalitarian. Religion is bad, needs to be exterminated, caused billions of deaths, you name it.

Upvote for the ironic ant extermination advert Google displayed at the bottom of the video a few seconds in. Now I'll go back and continue watching

Wish the robots would hurry up and start exterminating us... I can't stand the news anymore.

Dali was fascist scum.

http://www.counterpunch.org/navarro12062003.html

The Jackboot of Dada

Salvador Dali, Fascist

By VICENTE NAVARRO

The year 2004, the centenary of Dali's birth, has been proclaimed "the year of Dali" in many countries. Led by the Spanish establishment, with the King at the helm, there has been an international mobilization in the artistic community to pay homage to Dali. But this movement has been silent on a rather crucial item of Dali's biography: his active and belligerent support for Spain's fascist regime, one of the most repressive dictatorial regimes in Europe during the twentieth century.

For every political assassination carried out by Mussolini's fascist regime, there were 10,000 such assassinations by the Franco regime. More than 200,000 people were killed or died in concentration camps between 1939 (when Franco defeated the Spanish Republic, with the military assistance of Hitler and Mussolini) and 1945 (the end of World War II, an anti-fascist war, in Europe). And 30,000 people remain desaparecidos in Spain; no one knows where their bodies are. The Aznar government (Bush's strongest ally in continental Europe) has ignored the instructions of the U.N. Human Rights Agency to help families find the bodies of their loved ones. And the Spanish Supreme Court, appointed by the Aznar government, has even refused to change the legal status of those who, assassinated by the Franco regime because of their struggle for liberty and freedom, remain "criminals."

Now the Spanish establishment, with the assistance of the Catalan establishment, wants to mobilize international support for their painter, Dali, portraying him as a "rebel," an "anti-establishment figure" who stood up to the dominant forces of art. They compare Dali with Picasso. A minor literary figure in Catalonia, Baltasar Porcel (chairman of the Dali year commission), has even said that if Picasso, "who was a Stalinist" (Porcel's term), can receive international acclaim, then Dali, who admittedly supported fascism in Spain, should receive his own homage." Drawing this equivalency between Dali and Picasso is profoundly offensive to all those who remember Picasso's active support for the democratic forces of Spain and who regard his "Guernica" (painted at the request of the Spanish republican government) as an international symbol of the fight against fascism and the Franco regime.

Dali supported the fascist coup by Franco; he applauded the brutal repression by that regime, to the point of congratulating the dictator for his actions aimed "at clearing Spain of destructive forces" (Dali's words). He sent telegrams to Franco, praising him for signing death warrants for political prisoners. The brutality of Franco's regime lasted to his last day. The year he died, 1975, he signed the death sentences of four political prisoners. Dali sent Franco a telegram congratulating him. He had to leave his refuge in Port Lligat because the local people wanted to lynch him. He declared himself an admirer of the founder of the fascist party, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. He used fascist terminology and discourse, presenting himself as a devout servant of the Spanish Church and its teaching--which at that time was celebrating Queen Isabella for having the foresight to expel the Jews from Spain and which had explicitly referred to Hitler's program to exterminate the Jews as the best solution to the Jewish question. Fully aware of the fate of those who were persecuted by Franco's Gestapo, Dali denounced Bunuel and many others, causing them enormous pain and suffering.

None of these events are recorded in the official Dali biography and few people outside Spain know of them. It is difficult to find a more despicable person than Dali. He never changed his opinions. Only when the dictatorship was ending, collapsing under the weight of its enormous corruption, did he become an ardent defender of the monarchy. And when things did not come out in this way, he died.

Dali also visited the U.S. frequently. He referred to Cardinal Spellman as one of the greatest Americans. And while in the U.S., he named names to the FBI of all the friends he had betrayed. In 1942, he used all his influence to have Buñuel fired from the Museum of Modern Art in New York, where Buñuel worked after having to leave Spain following Franco's victory. Dali denounced Buñuel as a communist and an atheist, and it seems that under pressure from the Archbishop of New York, Buñuel had to leave for Mexico, where he remained for most of his life. In his frequent visits to New York, Dali made a point of praying in St. Patrick's Cathedral for the health of Franco, announcing at many press conferences his unconditional loyalty to Franco's regime.

Quite a record, yet mostly unknown or ignored by his many fans in the art world.

Vicente Navarro is the author of The Political Economy of Social Inequalities: Consequences for Health and Quality of Life and Dangerous to Your Health. He teaches at Johns Hopkins University. He can be reached at navarro@counterpunch.org.

Dali was fascist scum. http://www.counterpunch.org/navarro12062003.html

The Jackboot of Dada

Salvador Dali, Fascist

By VICENTE NAVARRO

The year 2004, the centenary of Dali's birth, has been proclaimed "the year of Dali" in many countries. Led by the Spanish establishment, with the King at the helm, there has been an international mobilization in the artistic community to pay homage to Dali. But this movement has been silent on a rather crucial item of Dali's biography: his active and belligerent support for Spain's fascist regime, one of the most repressive dictatorial regimes in Europe during the twentieth century.

For every political assassination carried out by Mussolini's fascist regime, there were 10,000 such assassinations by the Franco regime. More than 200,000 people were killed or died in concentration camps between 1939 (when Franco defeated the Spanish Republic, with the military assistance of Hitler and Mussolini) and 1945 (the end of World War II, an anti-fascist war, in Europe). And 30,000 people remain desaparecidos in Spain; no one knows where their bodies are. The Aznar government (Bush's strongest ally in continental Europe) has ignored the instructions of the U.N. Human Rights Agency to help families find the bodies of their loved ones. And the Spanish Supreme Court, appointed by the Aznar government, has even refused to change the legal status of those who, assassinated by the Franco regime because of their struggle for liberty and freedom, remain "criminals."

Now the Spanish establishment, with the assistance of the Catalan establishment, wants to mobilize international support for their painter, Dali, portraying him as a "rebel," an "anti-establishment figure" who stood up to the dominant forces of art. They compare Dali with Picasso. A minor literary figure in Catalonia, Baltasar Porcel (chairman of the Dali year commission), has even said that if Picasso, "who was a Stalinist" (Porcel's term), can receive international acclaim, then Dali, who admittedly supported fascism in Spain, should receive his own homage." Drawing this equivalency between Dali and Picasso is profoundly offensive to all those who remember Picasso's active support for the democratic forces of Spain and who regard his "Guernica" (painted at the request of the Spanish republican government) as an international symbol of the fight against fascism and the Franco regime.

Dali supported the fascist coup by Franco; he applauded the brutal repression by that regime, to the point of congratulating the dictator for his actions aimed "at clearing Spain of destructive forces" (Dali's words). He sent telegrams to Franco, praising him for signing death warrants for political prisoners. The brutality of Franco's regime lasted to his last day. The year he died, 1975, he signed the death sentences of four political prisoners. Dali sent Franco a telegram congratulating him. He had to leave his refuge in Port Lligat because the local people wanted to lynch him. He declared himself an admirer of the founder of the fascist party, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. He used fascist terminology and discourse, presenting himself as a devout servant of the Spanish Church and its teaching--which at that time was celebrating Queen Isabella for having the foresight to expel the Jews from Spain and which had explicitly referred to Hitler's program to exterminate the Jews as the best solution to the Jewish question. Fully aware of the fate of those who were persecuted by Franco's Gestapo, Dali denounced Bunuel and many others, causing them enormous pain and suffering.

None of these events are recorded in the official Dali biography and few people outside Spain know of them. It is difficult to find a more despicable person than Dali. He never changed his opinions. Only when the dictatorship was ending, collapsing under the weight of its enormous corruption, did he become an ardent defender of the monarchy. And when things did not come out in this way, he died.

Dali also visited the U.S. frequently. He referred to Cardinal Spellman as one of the greatest Americans. And while in the U.S., he named names to the FBI of all the friends he had betrayed. In 1942, he used all his influence to have Buñuel fired from the Museum of Modern Art in New York, where Buñuel worked after having to leave Spain following Franco's victory. Dali denounced Buñuel as a communist and an atheist, and it seems that under pressure from the Archbishop of New York, Buñuel had to leave for Mexico, where he remained for most of his life. In his frequent visits to New York, Dali made a point of praying in St. Patrick's Cathedral for the health of Franco, announcing at many press conferences his unconditional loyalty to Franco's regime.

Quite a record, yet mostly unknown or ignored by his many fans in the art world.

Vicente Navarro is the author of The Political Economy of Social Inequalities: Consequences for Health and Quality of Life and Dangerous to Your Health. He teaches at Johns Hopkins University. He can be reached at navarro@counterpunch.org.

>> ^gwiz665:

>> ^gorillaman:
>> ^xxovercastxx:
There really aren't any good guys in WH40K, though I'd say the Eldar are the most innocent.
>> ^gorillaman:
Also, the Imperium are not the good guys.


Exactly, though the Eldar are as xenophobic and ruthless as anyone else. The Tau are the obvious candidates as heroes - they're young, innovative, and they've got that underdog thing going, almost an idealised, progressive human race; but look closer and they're an ultra-communist slave society, aggressive and coercive in getting other races to join their Empire. If any race can claim innocence it can only be the Orks. They just dig fighting, and don't understand that other people don't like having their limbs hacked off.

Necrons are the only good guys.
"You can die, or you can run then die."


Aw, all Necrons want is to regain their galaxy of simple purity. Or rather I should say, all the C'Tan want. At least they want to exterminate Chaos.

EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!

^I mentioned the Palestinians because it's the same set of ridiculous dogmatic religious beliefs that lead some people to treat them as second-class citizens. Not Godwinization, not even anti-Semitism. Never said that not cooking on Saturdays = extermination of Palestinians. Please reread what I wrote.

Wow, this went on for quite a while before I noticed
Yes, Jews are fucked up. We are. There's no denying that. But to me it's on par with Muslims not drinking alcohol or eating pork, Christians giving up stuff for 40 days (Lent, it's called?), Hindus not touching cows and so on.

Yeah, religious Jews don't drive on Saturdays. They don't turn on lights, don't use computers and so on. The thing that's forbidden here is lighting a fire, and using electronics is close enough for them to include it.

So, my grandmother uses a hot-plate that she sets up on Friday, making Hamin which takes a day or so to cook. And my neighbors at my old apartment don't drive on Saturdays and give me funny looks when I do. And my grandfather's street is closed off on Saturdays, because there's a Synagogue there.

So fucking what? Are these customs really that bad that you need to start comparing them to Scientology or bring up the Palestinians (because of course, Jews are not cooking on Saturdays because we're secretly planning to exterminate them?). I guess if this goes on long enough, someone will say something about Nazis, right?

-----------------------

There are plenty of things wrong with religion in general and Judaism in particular. Observing Saturdays isn't one of them. So please, think a little more about the silly comments here, and grow the fuck up.

That seems like the most reasonable response to this video on the page.>> ^tsquire1:

I can't tell how much of her responses are sarcasm, and that is the determiner for judging her responses. However, this Horowitz fella seems to be a pretty hardlined zionist. He places her in a situation where she can't state a middleground and sets up a false dichotomy. Hezbollah is responsible for some mean shit, but look at what their actions are against. Folks say that Israel doesn't want to exterminate anybody. Thats bullshit and shows a lack of study or critical analysis of the situation. Israel's entire existence is contingent on Imperialism. They are a modern example of "Manifest Destiny v. Native Americans". Fuck Israel, and fuck Horowitz for defending a racist, apartheid system. As far as the woman is concerned, her sarcasm was the incorrect approach to the situation, and she shouldn't have responded to the false dichotomy. Easy to say these things in my shoes though, not her's, at that moment n all that.

TLDR.

PS: Both sides are crazy pants. A little bit like this thread.

>> ^bcglorf:

He merely said that people will not tolerate this woman espousing her hateful and ill conceived views, but we extend that courtesy to the Jews/Israelies who want to wipe out the Palestinians, likewise hateful and ill conceived.
He went a touch further initially and characterized all opposition to this girl as hypocrites that extend the courtesy to Israeli and Jewish acts of terrorism and excess. That by extension paints all Israelis as wanting to wipe out the Palestinians, and I do consider that a hateful view and will oppose it as long as it remains untrue. He did later clarify that as too broad though, and my last response had been to Drachen_Jager.
You've done the instinctive jump (I'm surprised you didn't start waving the holocaust flag sooner tbh) to go on the offensive as if Longde was some jew hating white supremicist when you have nothing, from what he has said, to base that on.
And yet you both failed the litmus test. When Drachen_Jager stated his willingness to extend leniency to oppressed peoples, like Hamas and Hezbollah, I pointed back to 1940's Israel and asked if the same standards applied then. Longde declared that to be revisionist history and you've made it clear you consider the Israeli war of independence a terrorist act. I never said anything about Israel's many crimes being justified because of the holocaust. I just stated that when considering the civil war between Jew and Arab in 1940's Palestine, the holocaust absolutely sways me in support of the Jewish minority. All the more so when the entirety of the Arab world decided to join in and attempt to exterminate the Jewish people for the second time in a single decade.
Would you condemn the extremists who helped establish the Jewish state?
Yes. Would you condemn the very establishment of that Jewish state because of those extremists? I certainly am not willing to, and if you are I'd ask if Hamas has then similarly disqualified the Palestinians from the right to a Palestinian state?
For the record (in case you've actually read this far), I condemn Hammas and Hezbollah for their crimes. I condemn the right wing government of Israel for it's crimes and it's Nazi-esque policies. I condemn any Jew who supports them and wants to see Palestine gone. I condemn Jews who misuse terribly the suffering of those involved in the Holocaust to silence dissent to Israels current facist actions.
And I can agree whole heartedly with this entire paragraph. We see 100% eye to eye on it. I do differ in going a touch further though and requiring the observation that Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and a great many arab populations in surrounding countries are all as nazi-esque in their racism towards Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah also go further still in being less discriminate in their hatred and use of violence. The only thing holding them back from exterminating all Israeli's is they lack the ability to do it. At least the right wing nuts in Israel like Netanyahu are held back by the will of the moderate Israeli's, because there can be no mistaking that if Netanyahu's kind wished to turn the West bank and Gaza into lifeless rubble they could likely do it inside a week.
I'm perfectly content to condemn Israel for it's crimes and extremists. I will not settle for disproportionate blame being laid on them for all the hate, violence and atrocities befalling the region around them. The Palestinians aren't the only ones who's extremists have arisen from existential threats to their people.

Here is what I wrote above: "I define her opposition as the people on the other side using extrremism and killing to achieve their ends. Perhaps I have defined it too broadly. I certainly don't think it encapsulates all Jews or Isrealis, but I do think it includes the Israeli government and military."

Again, you are putting words in my mouth, unless all Israelis and all Jews use extremism and killing.


>> ^bcglorf:

He merely said that people will not tolerate this woman espousing her hateful and ill conceived views, but we extend that courtesy to the Jews/Israelies who want to wipe out the Palestinians, likewise hateful and ill conceived.
He went a touch further initially and characterized all opposition to this girl as hypocrites that extend the courtesy to Israeli and Jewish acts of terrorism and excess. That by extension paints all Israelis as wanting to wipe out the Palestinians, and I do consider that a hateful view and will oppose it as long as it remains untrue. He did later clarify that as too broad though, and my last response had been to Drachen_Jager.
You've done the instinctive jump (I'm surprised you didn't start waving the holocaust flag sooner tbh) to go on the offensive as if Longde was some jew hating white supremicist when you have nothing, from what he has said, to base that on.
And yet you both failed the litmus test. When Drachen_Jager stated his willingness to extend leniency to oppressed peoples, like Hamas and Hezbollah, I pointed back to 1940's Israel and asked if the same standards applied then. Longde declared that to be revisionist history and you've made it clear you consider the Israeli war of independence a terrorist act. I never said anything about Israel's many crimes being justified because of the holocaust. I just stated that when considering the civil war between Jew and Arab in 1940's Palestine, the holocaust absolutely sways me in support of the Jewish minority. All the more so when the entirety of the Arab world decided to join in and attempt to exterminate the Jewish people for the second time in a single decade.
Would you condemn the extremists who helped establish the Jewish state?
Yes. Would you condemn the very establishment of that Jewish state because of those extremists? I certainly am not willing to, and if you are I'd ask if Hamas has then similarly disqualified the Palestinians from the right to a Palestinian state?
For the record (in case you've actually read this far), I condemn Hammas and Hezbollah for their crimes. I condemn the right wing government of Israel for it's crimes and it's Nazi-esque policies. I condemn any Jew who supports them and wants to see Palestine gone. I condemn Jews who misuse terribly the suffering of those involved in the Holocaust to silence dissent to Israels current facist actions.
And I can agree whole heartedly with this entire paragraph. We see 100% eye to eye on it. I do differ in going a touch further though and requiring the observation that Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and a great many arab populations in surrounding countries are all as nazi-esque in their racism towards Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah also go further still in being less discriminate in their hatred and use of violence. The only thing holding them back from exterminating all Israeli's is they lack the ability to do it. At least the right wing nuts in Israel like Netanyahu are held back by the will of the moderate Israeli's, because there can be no mistaking that if Netanyahu's kind wished to turn the West bank and Gaza into lifeless rubble they could likely do it inside a week.
I'm perfectly content to condemn Israel for it's crimes and extremists. I will not settle for disproportionate blame being laid on them for all the hate, violence and atrocities befalling the region around them. The Palestinians aren't the only ones who's extremists have arisen from existential threats to their people.

He merely said that people will not tolerate this woman espousing her hateful and ill conceived views, but we extend that courtesy to the Jews/Israelies who want to wipe out the Palestinians, likewise hateful and ill conceived.

He went a touch further initially and characterized all opposition to this girl as hypocrites that extend the courtesy to Israeli and Jewish acts of terrorism and excess. That by extension paints all Israelis as wanting to wipe out the Palestinians, and I do consider that a hateful view and will oppose it as long as it remains untrue. He did later clarify that as too broad though, and my last response had been to Drachen_Jager.

You've done the instinctive jump (I'm surprised you didn't start waving the holocaust flag sooner tbh) to go on the offensive as if Longde was some jew hating white supremicist when you have nothing, from what he has said, to base that on.

And yet you both failed the litmus test. When Drachen_Jager stated his willingness to extend leniency to oppressed peoples, like Hamas and Hezbollah, I pointed back to 1940's Israel and asked if the same standards applied then. Longde declared that to be revisionist history and you've made it clear you consider the Israeli war of independence a terrorist act. I never said anything about Israel's many crimes being justified because of the holocaust. I just stated that when considering the civil war between Jew and Arab in 1940's Palestine, the holocaust absolutely sways me in support of the Jewish minority. All the more so when the entirety of the Arab world decided to join in and attempt to exterminate the Jewish people for the second time in a single decade.

Would you condemn the extremists who helped establish the Jewish state?

Yes. Would you condemn the very establishment of that Jewish state because of those extremists? I certainly am not willing to, and if you are I'd ask if Hamas has then similarly disqualified the Palestinians from the right to a Palestinian state?

For the record (in case you've actually read this far), I condemn Hammas and Hezbollah for their crimes. I condemn the right wing government of Israel for it's crimes and it's Nazi-esque policies. I condemn any Jew who supports them and wants to see Palestine gone. I condemn Jews who misuse terribly the suffering of those involved in the Holocaust to silence dissent to Israels current facist actions.

And I can agree whole heartedly with this entire paragraph. We see 100% eye to eye on it. I do differ in going a touch further though and requiring the observation that Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran and a great many arab populations in surrounding countries are all as nazi-esque in their racism towards Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah also go further still in being less discriminate in their hatred and use of violence. The only thing holding them back from exterminating all Israeli's is they lack the ability to do it. At least the right wing nuts in Israel like Netanyahu are held back by the will of the moderate Israeli's, because there can be no mistaking that if Netanyahu's kind wished to turn the West bank and Gaza into lifeless rubble they could likely do it inside a week.

I'm perfectly content to condemn Israel for it's crimes and extremists. I will not settle for disproportionate blame being laid on them for all the hate, violence and atrocities befalling the region around them. The Palestinians aren't the only ones who's extremists have arisen from existential threats to their people.

>> ^longde:

Revisionist history



Please enlighten me to what part is revisionist.

I'm quite afraid that the narrative that describes Israel's independence as foreign Jews occupying the homeland of Arab Palestinians often starts it's revisions with questioning the holocaust itself.

Not even Arab scholars question the main points I've outlined. The Jewish Palestinians had significant numbers before 1900, and the 40's saw a civil war between Jewish and Arab Palestinians. Arab scholars are even well agreed that the entire Arab world united to drive the Jews into the sea. The main difference between their version and the one I described is that they remember it as the great catastrophe, for the failure to exterminate all Jewish Palestinians. I'm content to see it as a triumph of the Jewish people after having just lost several million to the holocaust 5 years earlier.