Sunday, September 09, 2007
Neville Chamberlain Would Love this one!
Most of you probably don't realize that Richard Dawkins has a new book called The Fascism Delusion. Those people who criticized his earlier book (The God Delusion) have been quick to jump all over this one. Check out this devastating review at the Valve [More on Dawkins]
[Hat Tip: PZ Myers at Pharyngula (Dawkins demolished]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
10 comments :
is it a parody?
Fascinating business - full of ironies, paradoxes and quirkyness. I like it.
And oh yes, anyone done a review on Dawkin's "The Marxist Delusion" yet?
... "The Alien Abduction delusion"?
..."The Illumnati Delusion?"
don't you guys think you should be a tad above replacing "religion" for "fascism"?
Or is this kind of thing the sheer delight of the dawkobot?
I am an atheist. I have to agree with Sanders that this is going too far. I understand the point being made, but fascism has wholly negative associations that some other erroneous belief systems that could have been used instead - astrology, for example - do not.
I know that many creationists explicitly liken atheists and evolutionary biologists to Nazis. And that is a despicable thing to do.
Do atheists want to use rhetoric that approaches the intemperance of that of some theists?
Tupaia
From what I know of fascist ideas it seems to me they are necessarily connected with atrocity. But is religion necessarily connected with atrocity, as is the innuendo of the spoof review? No – that’s a bit like using the ‘Stalin experience’ to hint that atheism is necessarily connected with atrocity; or suggesting that Darwinism is responsible for the Nazis.
True, horrible things have been done in the name of religion as they have in the name of atheism. The troublesome common factor is human nature in my view. As a theist I accept that atheists have a right to satirize my position even by using hyperbolae, but I would find a spoof that used astrology (as suggested by Tupaia) less paranoia inducing than the review in question. And is this why: members of any ideological grouping – whether they are atheists or a religious sect – always have the worry that their ‘sins’ will be perceived and portrayed by belligerent parties as so malign that should those parties be a in position of political power they will feel justified in using that power against them.
I honestly don't get the commenters that complain about the chosen strawman in the satire.
Would a spoof have worked with, say, astrology? Yes.
Would it have been satire? Yes.
Would it have been the best satire, seeing that many theists equate atheism with fascism and similar movements, and consistently thinks atheism is about as trustworthy? No.
[Follow up question: Is satire supposed to protect anyones feelings by not exploring the depth of a position? Of course not.]
I'll give it up for d'a man Adam Roberts. To quote an antimony describing good satire, it was seriously funny.
It might wise, torbjorn, to protect the feelings of a person who has power stake of some kind - like he might be holding a gun!
Post a Comment