Stand with Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan -- with democracy and civilization against tyranny and barbarism
30 September 2022
For Blasphemy Day
September 30 is Blasphemy Day International, the date having been chosen in 2009 to commemorate the original publication of the Danish Muhammad cartoons in 2005. Its purpose is to affirm that freedom of expression must explicitly include the right to criticize, ridicule, and attack religious beliefs and ideas -- that religion is not granted any special exemption or sanctity different from any other kind of ideas.
Atheist Revolution blog recently posted about the issue of non-religious people who are reluctant to call themselves "atheists". His assessment appears to be that this reluctance is a problem and such people should be encouraged to embrace the label; you can read his views for yourself at his post. My own position is different.
In general I don't attach as much importance to labels as some people do. It's the thing itself that matters, not what label we attach to it; labeling something often encourages people to pigeonhole it and not seek a more nuanced understanding of what it actually is. For example, I don't think it's of any interest to discuss whether Giorgia Meloni is "fascist" or not. That's just an argument about a label. If you want to know what her election signifies, you need to look into the details of her political views and why people voted for her, without bothering your head over whether a specific label fits them or not.
Labels carry connotations beyond their literal definitions. In the case of "atheist", I think a lot of people reject the label because words ending in "ism" or "ist" carry the implication that one is a member of a group or an adherent of a cause, something which emphatically should not follow from the plain fact of not believing that any god exists. Most people who don't believe in a god seem to simply identify as "nones" when asked, and it's really a more accurate term, since it conveys the lack of religion without suggesting being a member of, or crusader for, anything.
I increasingly tend to do this myself. When I'm filling out a survey that asks about my religion, I generally just say I don't have one, if that's an option. It better addresses the issue of people who wrongly claim that atheism is itself a religion or a belief system. Rather than waste time arguing that point, it emphasizes that there isn't a thing called atheism which I'm putting in the "what's your religion" slot -- that I simply don't put anything at all in that slot.
I feel similarly impatient with the hairsplitting some people do about "atheist" vs "agnostic". Some will say, you can't absolutely prove that no god exists, so you should call yourself agnostic rather than atheist. While technically true, this defines the terms in such a way as to make the distinction between them useless. My position on this point is that I put "God" in the same category as unicorns, dragons, and leprechauns -- I can't absolutely prove it doesn't exist, but it's so implausible that it's not worth spending any time or mental energy on the question. This may technically be agnosticism, but in practical terms it is unbelief. "Agnostic" should be reserved for people who consider both the "God exists" and the "God doesn't exist" viewpoint to have some genuine plausibility.
I don't believe there exists any kind of "god", and I view religions as ridiculous nonsense. This does not make me a member of a group or a crusader for a cause, any more than my lack of belief in unicorns does. In a sane world, not believing in any god wouldn't require a label at all.
This post claims that "Amazon devices" will soon start "sharing your internet with neighbors". I'm not sure what that means, but if you have any "Amazon devices", you should probably look into it.
Whoever says "do as I say, not as I do", especially to a child, has forfeited all claim to be taken seriously.
I've made no secret of what I think of Amazon's abusive employment practices, but its deployment of the slur of "racist" against Tolkien devotees who object to its bastardization of his work is the final straw. I will never forgive this.
Inflation has been raging for a year or so, but only now, as the election approaches, has the Fed gone all-out with insane rate hikes calculated to strangle growth, destroy jobs, and crash the value of everybody's retirement accounts. It sure looks like a blatant and clumsy attempt to manipulate the election outcome.
It began on September 13 when Iran's "morality police" arrested Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman, who they claimed had been wearing her headscarf incorrectly. That might well have been the case; women in Iran commonly express their defiance of the theocracy by wearing headscarves in ways which push the limits of the mullahs' onerous laws. Within four days, Amini was dead. The regime's thugs claim she suffered a heart attack, but her family denies that she had any history of heart trouble, and there's evidence that she was brutally beaten in custody, as detainees in Iran often are.
(I have seen it claimed that her real name was Jina Amini, but that she was not allowed to use that as her legal name because "Jina" is Kurdish and ethnic Kurdish names are banned by the regime.)
Amini's death acted as a trigger, unleashing a wave of repressed anger in a society long seething at theocratic repression. See how protesters in Rasht swarmed and kicked one of the regime's enforcers, who was lucky to escape with his life. Others attacked police cars. This is the justified rage and hate of people who have suffered all their lives under religious tyranny, with no freedom of speech or action, with arrogant thugs roaming the streets enforcing religious dress codes, and with arrest, beatings, and even death as the potential price of any dissent.
While the regime is a theocracy, Iran itself is not a particularly religious society. A 2020 survey showed that self-identified "nones", atheists, agnostics, and humanists add up to about 30% of Iranians, comparable to the US. Real adherents of Shi'ite Islam, the official religion of the regime, are less than a third of the total population.
This is not a medieval country being ruled by a regime natural to it. It's a fairly modern society in which the religious-reactionary minority (a class that exists in many countries, including ours) are organized and empowered and rule over everyone else by brute force. It's not too uncommon for Iranian women to push back against the dour turban-wearing bullies who roam the streets being assholes to anyone whose clothing or behavior they disapprove of. The theocracy originally seized power during the chaos that followed the overthrow of the Shah in 1979 -- meaning that the Iranian people have been subject to this dreary religious totalitarianism now for 43 years. It's no wonder that anger and impatience are reaching a breaking point.
As the protests escalate, the regime has tightened restrictions on the internet in the hope of blocking people from communicating with each other, and of hiding the reality of the situation from the outside world. Even without that, some Western social media such as Twitter have long helped the regime hide its crimes.
The current wave of protests probably won't bring the regime down. But its rule, resting on nothing but force, can never be stable. The day will come when it will fall.
Individualist, pro-technology, pro-democracy, anti-religion. I speak only for myself and not for any ideology, movement, or party. It has been my great good fortune to live my whole life free of "spirituality" of any kind. I believe that evidence and reason are the keys to understanding reality; that technology rather than ideology or politics has been the great liberator of humanity; and that in the long run, human intelligence is the most powerful force in the universe.