In The Road to Serfdom, economist and political philosopher F.A. Hayek chastised the "socialists of all parties" for their belief that "it is not the system we need fear, but the danger it might be run by bad men." Today's "presidentialists of all parties" — a phrase that describes the overwhelming majority of American voters — suffer from a similar delusion. Our system, with its unhealthy, unconstitutional concentration of power, feeds on the atavistic tendency to see the chief magistrate as our national father or mother, responsible for our economic well-being, our physical safety, and even our sense of belonging. Relimiting the presidency depends on freeing ourselves from a mind-set one century in the making. One hopes that it won't take another Watergate and Vietnam for us to break loose from the spellbinding cult of the presidency.
Gene Healy, CATO Institute, "The Cult Of The Presidency" , June '08, Reason Magazine.
5 comments:
Hi Stan,
First time visitor to your blog. I noticed that many of your recent posts are concerned with politics rather than atheism, and wonder why this is so. I'm asking because I'm interested in the link between religion and politics, and understanding how they might affect one another, and hopefully you might have some interesting views on that subject.
Also, I noticed that you claim to be a former 40 year atheist. In the spirit of "ask any question", may I ask why you were an atheist, how you would describe yourself now, and why the change?
Thanks,
Brian
Hello Brian, and Welcome:
This will be the short version... I became an Atheist at the vulnerable age of 18 to 20 due to the attraction of materialist elitism and the failure of my church to even address the questions I had.
The elitism was attainable by merely grasping it and saying that God does not exist - therefore I am amongst the most intellectual creatures in the universe, those who understand materialistic science. This Enlightenment attitude led directly to Leftist arrogance, premised on the presumption that I, the elite, know better than the ignoranti what is good for them and the world in general.
The change came when I questioned everything that I thought I knew to be true, including my ability to be logical and rational, which I had taken for a given. After studying logic, formal and informal fallacy, rational thought processing, and the philosophical basis for truth, I focused those new faculties on my Atheism and my presumed elitism, as well as Leftist agendas.
I found those things - which had formed my worldview up to that point - were false, and not just false but dangerous.
Cutting to the chase, I now address the Atheist Left that is in control of the U.S. government. Their feigned Christianity is a false front for their elitist, godless, corrupt, eugenic and socialist agendas which are a worse threat than the attacks on religion by the "new Atheist" crew.
If you have specific questions about any of this, I'll happily try to answer them.
Hi Stan,
Thanks for the reply! I have several more questions, based upon what you've written.
First, you write that you were attracted to materialism and that your church had no worthwhile advice for your concerns. What concerns were these? Do you think that your conversion to atheism was based upon rational assessment of materialism that (at the time) was compelling to you, or was it more rooted in a rebellion against your church (or religion in general) because it could not deal with your concerns?
I assume that you are now a Christian, and were before your atheistic period. Along the same line as above, why did you question what you believed to be true when you were an atheist? Also, how could you tell that what you had believed was false, and in what ways were your beliefs dangerous? Do you think that your specific beliefs were dangerous, or that atheism in general is dangerous? Finally, why is it that (assuming you are now a Christian) you find Christianity a compelling alternative to atheism, as opposed to any other religion?
You seem to equate atheism, elitism, and political leftism, but I fail to see the connection. What do you mean by leftism, and why should leftism and atheism be linked? I have to admit that I'm not convinced that the US govt is atheist, leftist, socialist or eugenic (although calling govt corrupt is like calling the sky blue) but in what ways do you think they are? And in what way does the government threaten religion? You wrote that an Enlightenment attitude leads to leftist arrogance and superiority to the ignorant. Is this idea valid given that Enlightenment attitudes gave rise to the US govt, and placed power in the hands of the governed?
Thanks again for your replies. In the spirit of fairness, I'll also answer any questions you may have for me.
So Many Questions, So Little Time…
But I’ll try to answer you in the order of your questions.
I don’t remember the exact questions that I had concerning Christianity in my youth, but when these were presented to the pastor, his response was “Well, that’s just not a problem for me”. He essentially dismissed my issues as irrelevant and unworthy, but I interpreted it as him not having answers and never having given any thought to serious issues. I did not rebel against the church so much as leave it due to the insufficient philosophical foundations of the leaders of the day.
My conversion to Atheism was based on a desire for elitism during that period where I was looking for an identity apart from the ordinary / common, that vulnerable period where youth hasn’t formed any real wisdom and easily mistakes appearance for substance. I was science and math oriented, and made the common mistake of believing that the voluntary ontological limitation of empiricism represents the entirety of reality. More on this in a bit.
Before my Atheism gelled, I attended church but did not believe in anything more than the superficial recitations. My first real worldview was Atheist, after a short period of agnosticism.
Now I am not a Christian in the blanket terminology viewpoint; I am a student of the bible and of Jesus, of truth, of logic, of the processes of rational thought, of the limits of ontological reality vs. epistemological reality, and of Atheist thought and secular elitism in a worldview of relativism.
I began to question my beliefs as an Atheist elitist when I started noticing the irrationality that other Atheists spouted as “truth”. My first exploration was into the nature, existence, reality and source of truth. From there I questioned everything that I thought I knew, and that I thought was true. This was a brutal, disorderly process that was very disconcerting because most of my belief system and worldview was demonstrably fallacious.
After a very long period immersed in the study of epistemology and ontology, I studied the major religions, examining their principles for coherence. This took another very long and intense period of time.
Atheism is a naturally self-elevating philosophy. There is a release from the humility associated with being infrior to a creating being. Rather than humility there is an associated feeling of superiority to the "deluded masses". Elitism comes naturally. The elitism is easily assumed by the association with hordes of university “intellectuals” who evangelize Atheism.
The elitism is a delusion, but by believing oneself to be superior, it is easy to become arrogant, and to become classist, and through the tool of “ethics”, to invent a new, self-centered epistemology. These have occurred so frequently in the past that they have a name: “New Man”. Along with evolution as a scientific enabler, the New Man epistemologies formed a eugenics horror on the 20th century. New Man philosophies virtually require Atheism; they are non-coherent with Christianity. Atheism does not imply New Man epistemology, but the tendency is there, and the historical connection is strong. Since Atheism rejects religious authority and religious absolutes, the Atheist must either make up his own ethic, or adopt one from somewhere – either co-opting Judeo-Christian morals (as non-absolutes), or other manufactured ethics. Atheist elitism and New Man ethics fit together hand-in-glove. That’s why it is dangerous.
(more in the next comment box)
(continued)
The U.S. government is now packed with avowed communists and eugenists who are the president’s closest advisors, and unelected “czars”.
Abortion, which has always been focused most heavily on the black population, is eugenics in action, and now the U. S. is transporting it to third world nations, on the taxpayer’s dollars. Abortion is a case where the value of an individual’s life has been decreed to be less than is necessary to guarantee him birth. Valuation and killing of devalued individuals is eugenic.
The U.S. government has been driven into pure secularity (aka Atheism), via judicial action over the past century. Any deviation is pursued by Atheist watchdogs such as the ACLU.
As for the U.S. being influenced by the Enlightenment, that is somewhat the case, with the caveat that the foundation is based on absolute rights given by a supreme being. That is a major deviation from the Enlightenment values of the French Revolution, where the rights were determined by a small cadre of elitists – a model adored by communists and fascists alike.
Also, the U.S. overthrew a king, while the French overthrew both a king and a religion.
True Enlightenment values eschew any divine or diety involvement, and exist on the concept that ontology is total reality, and that epistemology is man-made, in the sense of ethics, not morals. But it is characteristic of the Left to declare their self-derived ethics to be "moral imperatives", which is indicative of a lack of absolutes in favor of agendas: Atheism.
I have to go now, if you have further questions, please let me know.
Post a Comment