China’s Communist Party Reaffirms Marxism, Maoism, AtheismNote the rationalizations and lies which are necessary to maintain Atheism as the lynchpin supporting the deadly Leftist totalitarianism.
" This prohibition against religion has been a “consistently upheld principle” since Mao Zedong, the founder of the People’s Republic of China, declared Zhou. “It’s impossible to have another choice besides the dialectical materialist worldview.”
Zhou warned that if CPC members were allowed to have beliefs in various religions, the Party “would become a loosely bound group that can be broken down due to individual gain.” Consequently, he wrote, members must have “a united worldview.”
Zhou noted: "Without the foundation of the worldview, the mansion of the Party's ideologies, theories and organizations will all collapse. We could no longer be called the 'Chinese Communist Party.'"
Faced with rampant corruption by top Communist Party officials and billionaire princelings who run many of China’s largest corporations, CPC leaders have been investigating and prosecuting some high-profile offenders and making examples of them (see here and here).
Some Communist Party critics have suggested that the spiritual values imparted by religion might help reduce the immorality and corruption that is now so widespread amongst the CPC leadership. Zhou avoided directly confronting the issue of rampant corruption among the CPC’s officials, but declared that “blaming atheism for moral decline is an old absurdity.”
“Whether the general moral level of Chinese improved or declined since the reform and opening up needs to be specifically analyzed,” he said, referring to the policies initiated by paramount leader Deng Xiaoping in 1978 that introduced elements of a “socialist market system.”
As we have reported recently, Chinese authorities have been accelerating their attacks on religious believers, imprisoning Christian leaders and demolishing churches, even though China’s top leaders continue to insist that the Communist regime allows complete religious freedom."
[emphasis added]
A former 40 year Atheist analyzes Atheism, without resorting to theism, deism, or fantasy.
***
If You Don't Value Truth, Then What DO You Value?
***
If we say that the sane can be coaxed and persuaded to rationality, and we say that rationality presupposes logic, then what can we say of those who actively reject logic?
***
Atheists have an obligation to give reasons in the form of logic and evidence for rejecting Theist theories.
Sunday, November 23, 2014
In China, Communism Depends On Atheism
Without Atheism, Communism collapses:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I just found out that China has the world's largest Atheist population followed by North Korea.
Yeah,I don't think Atheists outside of these two countries will be celebrating that anytime soon.
I recently had an online discussion with an atheist that avoided communist countries like China, the former Soviet Union and North Korea and insisted that Western Europe better represented the result of unbelief in God. At some point a percentage of atheists will question objective morality and turn to moral relativism. It doesn’t need to be a majority; just enough people with power that question why they need to conform to a moral standard and the abuse can begin.
John,
That absolutely is the case, and it is demonstrated in the current US government. Principles for behavior are shed in favor of pursuit of an objective - seen in all the Obama administration scandals and their refusal to police themselves. The principles of civilization are sacrificed for the holy objectives of Leftist dominance. Thus, civilization itself is sacrificed for the benefits of Consequentialism - the new tactical morality of the governing elites.
Stan,
True but I've also had people tell me similar things about Bush. We need to get back to an objective understanding of rights and morality with a government for the people and by the people.
I wouldn't define Obama's position as Consequentialism; I would say that he has an undefined morality that confuses 'rights' with social and economic standards of living. I think this is true with much of the Left.
Post a Comment