Why do Neo-Marxists hate the "New Atheists"?

Page 1 of 3 [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

25 Jan 2012, 1:46 pm

Neo-Marxists, who generally are known for their obscurantist and Lit Crit style of writing, really seem to hate the "New Atheists". Just look at Terry Eagleton, Chirs Hedges, and Zizek say on the topic. Why is that?


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


NathanealWest
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 258

25 Jan 2012, 2:23 pm

Because they're capitalists? lol



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:      

25 Jan 2012, 3:13 pm

Because "Neo-Atheists" do not need Communism to tell them what not to believe in - they can think for themselves, which is anathema to secular religions like Communism.



abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

25 Jan 2012, 3:15 pm

Fnord wrote:
Because "Neo-Atheists" do not need Communism to tell them what not to believe in - they can think for themselves, which is anathema to secular religions like Communism.


Communism isn't a religion, it is a system of economics and government.


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Jan 2012, 4:23 pm

I wasn't even aware that they did. Go figure.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

25 Jan 2012, 4:32 pm

The only one of them I've read is Hedges, and his pov wrt. atheism is that humanity needs a concept of sin and punishment in order to keep us in check. :(



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,748
Location: International House of Paincakes...

25 Jan 2012, 4:41 pm

Because they're smart. :wink:

Also, what LKL said...

Quote:
From the New York Times bestselling author of American Fascists and the NBCC finalist for War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning comes this timely and compelling work about new atheists: those who attack religion to advance the worst of global capitalism, intolerance and imperial projects.

Chris Hedges, who graduated from seminary at Harvard Divinity School, has long been a courageous voice in a world where there are too few. He observes that there are two radical, polarized and dangerous sides to the debate on faith and religion in America: the fundamentalists who see religious faith as their prerogative, and the new atheists who brand all religious belief as irrational and dangerous. Both sides use faith to promote a radical agenda, while the religious majority, those with a commitment to tolerance and compassion as well as to their faith, are caught in the middle.

The new atheists, led by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris, do not make moral arguments about religion. Rather, they have created a new form of fundamentalism that attempts to permeate society with ideas about our own moral superiority and the omnipotence of human reason.

I Don't Believe in Atheists critiques the radical mindset that rages against religion and faith. Hedges identifies the pillars of the new atheist belief system, revealing that the stringent rules and rigid traditions in place are as strict as those of any religious practice.

Hedges claims that those who have placed blind faith in the morally neutral disciplines of reason and science create idols in their own image -- a sin for either side of the spectrum. He makes an impassioned, intelligent case against religious and secular fundamentalism, which seeks to divide the world into those worthy of moral and intellectual consideration and those who should be condemned, silenced and eradicated. Hedges shatters the new atheists' assault against religion in America, and in doing so, makes way for new, moderate voices to join the debate. This is a book that must be read to understand the state of the battle about faith.

It's a great book. (click)


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


Last edited by GoonSquad on 25 Jan 2012, 6:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

NathanealWest
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 258

25 Jan 2012, 6:30 pm

So what we need is the Ubermensch, Goonsquad? :)



fraac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,865

25 Jan 2012, 6:39 pm

Probably because once you align yourself with a group you have to beat the other groups. Herd instinct 101.



artrat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,269
Location: The Butthole of the American Empire

25 Jan 2012, 10:58 pm

I am a neo-Marxist and I have no problem with the respectful non-nihilistic atheists.

The reason is that modern atheism is often associated with nihilism. Marxists usually believe that there is meaning to life.
Many Marxists are atheists so I don't understand why any Marxist would be opposed to all atheists.
That's no way to achieve a Marxist society.


_________________
?During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" ~George Orwell

"I belive in God, only I spell it Nature."
~ Frank Llyod Wright


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Jan 2012, 11:01 pm

artrat wrote:
I am a neo-Marxist and I have no problem with the respectful non-nihilistic atheists.

The reason is that modern atheism is often associated with nihilism. Marxists usually believe that there is meaning to life.
Many Marxists are atheists so I don't understand why any Marxist would be opposed to all atheists.
That's no way to achieve a Marxist society.


As I understand it, Marxists in Latin America tend to be devout Christians, taking Christ's call for brotherly love between all people as inspiration for communism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:      

25 Jan 2012, 11:04 pm

abacacus wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Because "Neo-Atheists" do not need Communism to tell them what not to believe in - they can think for themselves, which is anathema to secular religions like Communism.
Communism isn't a religion, it is a system of economics and government.

I said secular religion - a fanatical belief system that is mostly faith-based, yet does not require belief in anything supernatural. Similar "religions" include Hitler's Naziism, the Tea Party, the Occupy movement, and major-league sports.

Sorta like the Anti-NT sentiment that seems to pervade WP.

You could also consider Communism a religion in the sense that the people (are supposed to) hold Marxist doctrine as sacred, and believe that they are already living in (a worker's) Paradise.

I mean, religion is the political expression of faith, after all; so why not also accept the fact that when a political system crosses the line from a simple philosophy to a way of life, it becomes a religious system as well?



Last edited by Fnord on 25 Jan 2012, 11:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

25 Jan 2012, 11:04 pm

artrat wrote:
That's no way to achieve a Marxist society.


Not in modern times, but it *is* possible. Look at the culture the North American Indians had before the Europeans arrived, it could be defined as Communistic or Marxist.


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

25 Jan 2012, 11:21 pm

GoonSquad wrote:


I liked the book (despite disagreeing with it fundamentally) when it first came out. However, as I've matured, I've realized that Hedges offers nothing but flowery, unverifiable, literary critic nonsense and tangential ramblings.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

25 Jan 2012, 11:41 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
... nothing but flowery, unverifiable, literary critic nonsense and tangential ramblings.


Sounds like most of PPR in a nutshell to me... :lol:


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


artrat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,269
Location: The Butthole of the American Empire

26 Jan 2012, 12:39 am

abacacus wrote:
artrat wrote:
That's no way to achieve a Marxist society.


Not in modern times, but it *is* possible. Look at the culture the North American Indians had before the Europeans arrived, it could be defined as Communistic or Marxist.

Imperialism,modern philosophy and European colonization destroyed that.


_________________
?During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" ~George Orwell

"I belive in God, only I spell it Nature."
~ Frank Llyod Wright