Atheism and Anarchism

I'm a Christian anarchist. In the Tolstoyan sense. Many people don't get the philosophical ties between religion and anarchy.

I hear where you coming from. That being said there is a big difference between the two, even if different groups may use each in their own way to try and gain an advantage over people.
I think there is also a big difference between things on a personal level versus grand scale. Anarchism works on an individual level, but fails horribly when it comes to humanity as a whole. I find religion to be the other way around. But even though politics and religion can get hijacked from time to time, its a mistake to just dismiss them completely. Both have played huge roles in shaping the course of history, and the people who are driven to shape world events tend to gravitate towards controlling them for that reason.

I'll stick to governments for the sake of not writing a novel.

A lot of people tend to rag on the notion of governments without completely thinking over just how much they accomplish. Its not all mass manipulation and slavery.

We need power grids to power cities, food distribution to feed the masses, medicine to fight death and on and on; even simple shit like road regulations so we can all get around, all of that comes from governments. Look around you and ask yourself how any of it came to be, its not the crust punks down the street. That all comes from a collective attempt to improve our existence which we call government, that does not come out of anarchy. People seem to forget just how far humanity has come and will continue to go because of different governance bodies

Just because some people take advantage of the system to make more cash for themselves, doesn't mean the whole thing is worthless. I guarantee you the same people who corrupt political systems, would corrupt another system, no matter how rainbows and lollipops you think it may be
I also find it amusing when crusty kids harp on corrupt governments while promoting the same kind of theft culture at their own level (usually with some bogus anti capitalism excuse). I think if anything it shows humanity is the same on every level. There are bad people who from time to time do wrong, that doesn't mean the concept as a whole is wrong. We are actually improving as a whole, you would have to be blind to not see that.

I for one could care less about urban planing, power grids, economics, yadda yadda, so I'm happy as a pig in shit that its taken care of by others. I can take advantage of it all whether I contribute or not, that's pretty great. So what if buddy pockets a few bucks from time to time. If I'm being honest, I'd probably try to fuck the system to.

Sometimes it seems like the people who want to make the most changes to our word, are the ones doing the least. Why is it the world is run by criminals and all the good guys are at home talking about community gardens?

Take a moment to look around and see how much we have, it wasn't even a lifetime ago when things were much different. My parents childhood vs mine is completely different. That difference came from good governance.

I know a lot of people on here hate authority and that's fine, but to honestly believe that no good comes from it is misguided to say the least. What steps are we taking to make the world a better place?

You're right about the ambiguity of civilization. ....On one hand people 5000 years ago didn't live very long. But on the other hand who wants to rot in a nursing home for the last 10-20 yrs of life?
In the current reality we have cops, politicians; all manner of dingledorks wanting money and power...5000 yrs ago there was some ass of a tribal chieftain wanting 1/3 of your coconuts or grain...

@wizehop for President!

Wow...just...wow, what a post!!

Bravo!

Haha...you want to discuss religion and politics in the same thread.

I'm far from an atheist and I believe in anarchism

I think the problem always resides in man's application and not the ideals. Both anarchism and religion (for this argument christianity) have good points, unfortunately humans have a tendency to pick and choose what they like instead of the overall idea.

I recently had a debate with a Catholic friend who tried to explain to me the need for Jesus in my life. Thing was, when I explained how in the stories, his motivation was to become a non materialistic helper to the poor that traveled with no monwy, my friend refuted the ability to live that way in modern society; basically disproving the validity of her own ideals. Granted this is a single example, not meant for the whole, but I have had this same discussion many times in my life.

Point is, if people who choose to follow the ideals of a man who was a traveling helper of the poor, there wouldn't be a problem. The problem exists in man's wanting to follow their own ideals under the guise of that man's ideals for image sake; which for the most part don't line up.

According to personality psychologists, many people have a strong need for order, dominance/submission, and authoritarian structure.

Everyone has a personalized version of God and Heaven.

Christ wore sandals. He was Jewish. Homeless. Blue collar. He distributed free food and healthcare. This is difficult for many political structures to accept.

Asceticism is one of the most beautiful aspects of any religion: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, or Christianity.

When was the last time you heard of ascetics starting a war or messing with people?

Key point: it is when religion or government...when society abandons simplicity and asceticism that is when trouble starts.

wizehop said:

I hear where you coming from. That being said there is a big difference between the two, even if different groups may use each in their own way to try and gain an advantage over people.
I think there is also a big difference between things on a personal level versus grand scale. Anarchism works on an individual level, but fails horribly when it comes to humanity as a whole. I find religion to be the other way around. But even though politics and religion can get hijacked from time to time, its a mistake to just dismiss them completely. Both have played huge roles in shaping the course of history, and the people who are driven to shape world events tend to gravitate towards controlling them for that reason.

I'll stick to governments for the sake of not writing a novel.

A lot of people tend to rag on the notion of governments without completely thinking over just how much they accomplish. Its not all mass manipulation and slavery.

We need power grids to power cities, food distribution to feed the masses, medicine to fight death and on and on; even simple shit like road regulations so we can all get around, all of that comes from governments. Look around you and ask yourself how any of it came to be, its not the crust punks down the street. That all comes from a collective attempt to improve our existence which we call government, that does not come out of anarchy. People seem to forget just how far humanity has come and will continue to go because of different governance bodies

Just because some people take advantage of the system to make more cash for themselves, doesn't mean the whole thing is worthless. I guarantee you the same people who corrupt political systems, would corrupt another system, no matter how rainbows and lollipops you think it may be
I also find it amusing when crusty kids harp on corrupt governments while promoting the same kind of theft culture at their own level (usually with some bogus anti capitalism excuse). I think if anything it shows humanity is the same on every level. There are bad people who from time to time do wrong, that doesn't mean the concept as a whole is wrong. We are actually improving as a whole, you would have to be blind to not see that.

I for one could care less about urban planing, power grids, economics, yadda yadda, so I'm happy as a pig in shit that its taken care of by others. I can take advantage of it all whether I contribute or not, that's pretty great. So what if buddy pockets a few bucks from time to time. If I'm being honest, I'd probably try to fuck the system to.

Sometimes it seems like the people who want to make the most changes to our word, are the ones doing the least. Why is it the world is run by criminals and all the good guys are at home talking about community gardens?

Take a moment to look around and see how much we have, it wasn't even a lifetime ago when things were much different. My parents childhood vs mine is completely different. That difference came from good governance.

I know a lot of people on here hate authority and that's fine, but to honestly believe that no good comes from it is misguided to say the least. What steps are we taking to make the world a better place?

Click to expand...

Good post but lets be honest... If government didn't appear to do some good then the people would finally take action for change. People just don't realize how hard they are being fucked because the majority don't understand how money is created.

wizehop said:

I hear where you coming from. That being said there is a big difference between the two.....
.
.
.

Click to expand...

I think you've missed the point. I'll try to explain as to why is that, and then switch back to arguing against religion and the actual topic. What government does isn't necessarily evil , otherwise it couldn't exist. The world isn't all black and white. But the basic IDEA of government is inherently evil ( just for the sake of argument I'm talking only about the non-horizontal government, so that there's no confusion of any kind ). The idea that minority holds power over majority is wrong. Just the idea that human beings are not capable of handling everyday life issues by themselves is pathetic. There's nothing that government provides that can't be provided by the same people in egalitarian society. The authority government represents threatens your own liberty. I could elaborate this into more details, but hopefully it's not necessary.

Is it just me who sees the irony in saying "We are actually improving as a whole, you would have to be blind to not see that." and then saying you don't give a shit about humanity and that you're just trying to pursue your own selfish needs while using everything you can ? I can only guess that you rely on the power of the system more than needed. Why not get out of the grid ? The institutions and the government didn't make any progress, people did. If anything, institutions and bureaucracy slowed it down. "That difference came from good governance." seriously, are you some kind of statist ? The progress was inevetable. You can't claim that it came from good governance when there's nothing to compare it to ( define good and bad governance and compare it to progress in utopian world ). If anything, it came from capitalism which supports extream rat race. Also, since money means power, a lot of people are actually motivated purely by the hunger for power. Anarchists hate authority because of what it represents, not necessarily by what it creates. Government built a new park in my hood, awsome, did anyone actually vote for that apart from few people in power ? No. I'm sorry but I find your support of authority in general funny.

Now back to religion. Anarchism is against every organized mainstream religion. It's really simple to understand the reason as to why. It represents authority, and I'm not ONLY talking about institutions such as Church having actual political power and influance in state or Islam, as a religion, controlling lives of most of the ME people, I'm also talking about moral authority. Religion ( mainstream ) creates a moral codex that anarchists simply deny. If there's a moral authority that imposes its rules which are completely wrong and you obey them, what does that make you ? When it comes down to actually believing in something supernatural such as god, as far as I'm concerned I have no arguments against it except personal attacks which are probably not welcomed nor will I try to do any. Now, I have many Christian friends and I mean no disrespect to anyone. I surely wouldn't put a bullet between your eyes just for being a christian but I do have to argue against christian anarchism. What makes one a christian ? The belief in god made by a book. If you claim that the god wasn't made from Bible, then you're simply not christian since there's nothing else to hold on to. Your god simply isn't the one christians are praying to because they are following the only thing that actually matters - the Bible - the thing that created the above mentioned religion. There's no need to call yourself a christian just because you believe in a god a follow some moral codex which is more or less ( !!! ) basic humanity. And on the other hand, if you're following the Bible, you can't consider yourself to be an anarchist and I seriously won't explain why ( gay bashing, women degrading etc. ). And if you say that you follow only what's good in Bible, then you're just an inconsistent retard who likes to be labeled.

There isn't a clear connection between a religion and government. People don't like their moral being controlled by something not real, while they do like their salary being sorted out by some accountant who works in public serivce. What I'm trying to say is, there will always be more atheists simply because the authority these two sides represent isn't quite the same ( it sure can be ). People of science will probably argue against religion but might fully support capitalism and the way it works. The power of god hasn't been proven, the power of money has.

most damaging to humanity is humanity itself - that very small % that has the talent to hoard wealth and put the poor to work. it's less than 1% of the world of course but that's who does it. govt. is a joke of a facade/puppet of this ruling class. the bluebloods of yestereons have not simply disappeared. french revolution came and went but they stayed. religion? it's just a good opiate for the general public. unbelievable that a rational person would believe in a talking snake (like bill maher said in his film) or ridiculous stories based on said religion. still, i think research has shown that atheist nations have caused more deaths overall than religious ones. i think stuff like mao zedong, hitler, and pol pot among others were cited. i won't get into crusades or islamic spreading by the sword but society needs religion. it's what most ignorant people have. it's all they've got. very small % of ppl. accept that we are no different than a cockroach or a kfc chicken sandwich we had for lunch - that life is nothing but a circle that has a start and an end for species. nothing more or less.

i grew up in a religious household and only saw reality when i started college. i was told bullshit fables and stories about god and blah blah blah as a kid, and as a kid, clinged onto them because i wanted miracles to happen. i was a part of that mass till college kicked my ass and i grew up.

like wizehop said above, you need govt. to establish structure and at some point police a society/tribe. you could just disappear into the forest away from civilization but you are likely to die from hunger, disease, or an animal attacking you. there are societies today without written govt. such as tribes down in south america or parts of africa. they function in their own ways but even they (the members) have limited say after a point. religion or not, once you have society, members have rules to be followed. that's just how it works. this in turn means that you must give up some freedoms. that or go off into the woods but you will likely die in a few days or months at the most (barring the super survivor skilled guy/girl) for the avg. joe.

I guess I'm kinda a religious/spiritual anarchist - I'm very connected to my roots in the Jewish culture and the many parallels it has with eastern and indigenous traditions, and it has a lot to do with my outlook on life. For starters, capitalism and the left are agreed that the universe is just a bunch of physical stuff to be distributed in one way or another. To me, this is a very impoverished view of human existence; we have a need for metaphysics in order to find meaning in life. For another, the prophetic books are full of condemnations of idolatry - which to me means investing any piece of the world with authority - and images of justice and peace coming with the destruction of kingdoms and cities. That all sounds pretty anarchistic to me...

So I know this isn't what you were saying, you were saying why aren't more atheists anarchists. Without getting too much into anarchism - since I'm not too invested in arguing that or disputing its meaning - I think the materialistic worldview is part of it. A lot of atheists almost follow science like a religion - science is (not coincidentally) a product of capitalism. Atheism is an easy belief system that meshes nicely with consumerism.

@PotBellyFatGuy ..........Ummmm You dont believe in talking snakes???!!....Obviously never spent much time in the Ozarks-Great Smokies corridor...

At any rate, Count Tolstoy managed a great merger of Christianity and anarchist tentets: a pretty successful commune on his land which I think still exists...??? Correct me if Im mistaken. All in all Tolstoyan anarchy works for me: as a true anarchist I would encourage others to find their spirituality and political truths where they may:however I would add the caveat that regardless of the individual's Path to Truth, the eternal quest for Truth is your duty. Period. Willful ignorance is unforgivable atrocity.

Tolstoy wasn't a Christian, at least not a real one. He might have labeled himself as one, but he had nothing to do with christianity as religion. I've had many discussions with people who label themselves as Christians and they reject Tolstoy the same way he rejected Bible ( and, if I'm not wrong, he even REWROTE some of it ). He picked a religion, completely reworked it and created a non-hierarchical, mortal and natural idea of Jesus ( son of man, his words ). He even rejected every supernatural aspect of religion ( even life after death ). His interpratation indeed doesn't have anything to do with christianity. But, all that aside, he was religious in his own way and as I've said before even though I have so many arguments against spirituality I don't mind people who actually take it seriously and believe in something metaphysical.

From Wikipedia/Leo Tolstoy:

In 1884, Tolstoy wrote a book called "What I Believe", in which he openly confessed his Christian beliefs. He affirmed his belief in Jesus Christ's teachings and was particularly influenced by theSermon on the Mount, and the injunction to turn the other cheek, which he understood as a "commandment of non-resistance to evil by force" and a doctrine of pacifism and nonviolence. In his work The Kingdom of God Is Within You, he explains that he considered mistaken the Church's doctrine because they had made a "perversion" of Christ's teachings. Tolstoy also received letters from American Quakers who introduced him to the non-violence writings of Quaker Christians such as George Fox, William Penn and Jonathan Dymond. Tolstoy believed being a Christian required him to be a pacifist; the consequences of being a pacifist, and the apparently inevitable waging of war by government, are the reason why he is considered a philosophical anarchist.

Later, various versions of "Tolstoy's Bible" would be published, indicating the passages Tolstoy most relied on, specifically, the reported words of Jesus himself.[25]


Mohandas K. Gandhi and other residents of Tolstoy Farm, South Africa, 1910
Tolstoy believed that a true Christian could find lasting happiness by striving for inner self-perfection through following the Great Commandment of loving one's neighbor and God rather than looking outward to the Church or state for guidance. His belief in nonresistance when faced by conflict is another distinct attribute of his philosophy based on Christ's teachings. By directly influencing Mahatma Gandhi with this idea through his work The Kingdom of God Is Within You (full text of English translation available on Wikisource), Tolstoy's profound influence on the nonviolent resistance movement reverberates to this day. He believed that the aristocracy were a burden on the poor, and that the only solution to how we live together is through anarchism.[citation needed]

There isn't much writing on it, but you may be a political nihilist. From what I understand, Nihilism pretty much debases state and religion, as well as many other things. I'm a bit hard headed when it comes to anarchy. Some think anarchy means atheism too, it means no oppressor, simple as that. This leaves room for those who have a direct relationship with god, spirits etc (no clergy). However, it is indeed logical that one may jump from one to another.