• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are you a political "atheist"?

Are you a political atheist?

  • No.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No. I am a republican.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No. I am a patriot.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No. For many reasons I am not.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    16

Maximus Zeebra

MoG
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
7,588
Reaction score
468
Location
Western Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
YouTube - ' Worst economic collapse ever'

This guy is a trend forecaster and self proclaimed political atheists..

About 10 minutes out in the video..
when people look at the trends they colour them or shade them with their own ideology, their own belief. Its what they want, what they hope, what they wish for. I am a political atheists, I look at things the way they are, not they way I want them to be, nor colour them or try to change them because of an ideology.

Thats when it hits me, that I am a political atheist, and that this angers many people who aren't, especially the ones who always colour of shade their opinions with ideology or their own belief.

Personally I think only a tiny minority in general and a very tiny minority, even just a few people on this forum are political atheists.. It would be interesting to see what you yourself think.
 
Last edited:
I dont think its possible to look at a situation, political or otehrwise without colouring it with an ideology of sorts.

each person has been subjected to diffrent stimuli, news articles, views of their parents, diffrent moral codes, and experiences. It simply isnt possible to look at a situation abstractly enough to call yourself a "political athiest" in this sense.

Is this Gerald selente? I like him, but really i think its naive to think of yourself as a totally impartial news reader.
 
I dont think its possible to look at a situation, political or otehrwise without colouring it with an ideology of sorts.

each person has been subjected to diffrent stimuli, news articles, views of their parents, diffrent moral codes, and experiences. It simply isnt possible to look at a situation abstractly enough to call yourself a "political athiest" in this sense.

Is this Gerald selente? I like him, but really i think its naive to think of yourself as a totally impartial news reader.


Well, of course, but then again we are talking about political atheist according to the definition above. It is possible if you are open to every view but do not necessarily take anything but reality as facts or "ideology"..

The only things that somewhat makes me "partial" is that I am born in the west and somewhat under western influence. But I have the ability to overlook western perspectives if they do not fit in the reality.

Also some would call me "partial" over my support for the European Union(skeptical support), while I say that is exactly because I am a political atheist and just think its a better political process than my own tainted, bias and silly democratic government.

Some would say I am anti-American, but thats just because they do not understand that I am against strong ideology and that I hate nationalism. If they looked at it in a perspective of "political atheism", they would know that I only want what is best for the US and therefor is naturally pro-US, which is also pretty much a political atheist stand, because the US is one of the best countries in the world, just like the EU is one of the most progressive forms of governance.

I don't take emotional or instinctive stands on things, I take intellectual and unclouded stands on things. So both when I watch US news or Russian news I do so with utter skepticism, like I always view things. I am mostly also a skeptic, yes, and highly critical of all information I process.
 
No-"political atheism" does not exist. Much of modern bourgeois philosophy has hit the end of the road and so some are trying to claim that they are without or above ideology.

You claim that because you are a "political atheist" you support the EU and US. I think this clearly shows "political atheism" or whatever is not above ideology.
 
You claim that because you are a "political atheist" you support the EU and US. I think this clearly shows "political atheism" or whatever is not above ideology.

Its not as simple as that.. Thats not actually what I said.. Simplified its not correct.. Political atheism is only looking at the reality without any ideology, feelings and so on.

I assume political atheism is also about choosing the best solutions, without favoring any solutions based on ideology, feelings and so on.
 
Political atheism is only looking at the reality without any ideology, feelings and so on.
So "political atheism" is trying to divorce itself from reality? Like trying to look at a rock from every infinitesimal view? In other words, it tries to be so objective that it is an impossible state?
I assume political atheism is also about choosing the best solutions, without favoring any solutions based on ideology, feelings and so on.
One can go ahead and try, but it does not happen.

Also-
You said:
Also some would call me "partial" over my support for the European Union(skeptical support), while I say that is exactly because I am a political atheist and just think its a better political process blah blah blah
When waging support for some organization or action or whatever you should always ask yourself who benefits/ who loses. You will find the ideology of you/other person. Though may not think it, your support for the EU, "political atheism," and "anti-nationalism" can tell a lot about your ideology.
 
Last edited:
I voted yes, but on further reflection I'm really not. I view most things from a personal liberty perspective and it shades many of my perceptions.
 
I honestly don't think I am, and don't care.

I pretty much go with the Constitution as it is set down by the founders. I do not think it is a "living breathing" document to be changed.

So in the end I guess I am not because I pretty much apply the Constitution to everything politically speaking.
 
I've been participating/lurking in political forums for upwards of ten years now, and in my experience every single person has believed their position to be the one of calm reasoning and cool logic.
 
There can be no such thing as political atheism. Because political atheism would mean you'd have no political opinions what so ever. Atheism is an affirmation of non-belief.

You can not believe in Jesus, not eat porc because of Mohammed's teachings, not eat beef because of something you read in a Hindu scroll, follow the teachings of Buddha and still call yourself an atheist.

Likewise :

You can not : support the Democrats regarding welfare, support the Republicans when it comes to national security, be liberal about abortion, be conservative about illegal immigrants and still consider yourself a 'political atheist'.

It seems to me like the people who are calling themselves 'political atheists' don't seem to understand what an atheist is.
 
There can be no such thing as political atheism. Because political atheism would mean you'd have no political opinions what so ever. Atheism is an affirmation of non-belief.

You can not believe in Jesus, not eat porc because of Mohammed's teachings, not eat beef because of something you read in a Hindu scroll, follow the teachings of Buddha and still call yourself an atheist.

Likewise :

You can not : support the Democrats regarding welfare, support the Republicans when it comes to national security, be liberal about abortion, be conservative about illegal immigrants and still consider yourself a 'political atheist'.

It seems to me like the people who are calling themselves 'political atheists' don't seem to understand what an atheist is.

I think the way he means the term isn't like that. It's more of a viewing every single issue and fact for what it is rather than what one wants it to be. Ironically Max is one of the worst about this. He just doesn't see it.
 
I think the way he means the term isn't like that. It's more of a viewing every single issue and fact for what it is rather than what one wants it to be. Ironically Max is one of the worst about this. He just doesn't see it.

Seeing an issue for 'what it is'? And what 'is it'? Can I get an example of political atheism at work? Atheism doesn't make an affirmation that it see's things as they are. That's a realist. You don't even have to be an atheist to be a realist. Atheism just means you don't have any belief. I think the wording is flawed to be honest.
 
Last edited:
Well, of course, but then again we are talking about political atheist according to the definition above. It is possible if you are open to every view but do not necessarily take anything but reality as facts or "ideology"..

The only things that somewhat makes me "partial" is that I am born in the west and somewhat under western influence. But I have the ability to overlook western perspectives if they do not fit in the reality.

Also some would call me "partial" over my support for the European Union(skeptical support), while I say that is exactly because I am a political atheist and just think its a better political process than my own tainted, bias and silly democratic government.

Some would say I am anti-American, but thats just because they do not understand that I am against strong ideology and that I hate nationalism. If they looked at it in a perspective of "political atheism", they would know that I only want what is best for the US and therefor is naturally pro-US, which is also pretty much a political atheist stand, because the US is one of the best countries in the world, just like the EU is one of the most progressive forms of governance.

I don't take emotional or instinctive stands on things, I take intellectual and unclouded stands on things. So both when I watch US news or Russian news I do so with utter skepticism, like I always view things. I am mostly also a skeptic, yes, and highly critical of all information I process.
Uhu, and you're usually wrong anyway. So much for your unclouded intellectualism. You don't know Americans either.
 
Being what the OP calls a political atheist is much, much easier said than done. We are being asked if we are capable of thinking rationally about political issues. Most people would believe they fit the bill, but - as we can probably all agree - very few do. It must be concluded, then, that most people who think of themselves as political atheists are wrong. Which ones? Why, everyone else, of course.

We make the assumption that many social and economic issues can be reduced down to quantifiable, individual integers. If (A) is true, then (B) is true. If (A) is not true, (B) is not true. (A)'s true, so easy peasy, problem solved! I wish politics worked like this; I'd be able to liberate my brain from the foggy, ominous mire of ambiguity where most of my abstract thinking seems to wander, held captive by the ruthless overlord that is paranoid skepticism.

In the world of politics, one man's 'fact' is, at best, questioned zealously by an opposing ideology; at worst it is simply someone's feelings held together with enough dogma and loyalty to appear somewhat concrete from afar (I'm not going to cite specific examples because I don't want to derail the thread). For the most hot-button issues, a little patience and resourcefulness will find you a Panel of Credible Experts that will demonstrate, using copious data and exhausting research, the inexorable truth of whatever opinion you might care to have on the matter.

That's not to say that it's impossible to make rational decisions, or to get decent information. We simply have to do so with a respectful nod towards the intoxicating power of ideology and the inherent limits of our own human perception. We must be honest with ourselves about the reliability of the sources we get our information from. We try to be constantly aware of those misleading tricks of logic: Appeals to tradition and novelty, majority and minority, establishment and disestablishment; cherry-picking anecdotes and data; the use of ridicule, and vilification, and association; the strawman, that classic favorite...as well as any number of other emotional appeals or logical shortcuts.

I catch myself all the time...letting my desire for the truth or falsehood of something guide my pursuit and interpretation of information. The best we can do, I think, is to try to be humble enough to acknowledge our instinctive desire for verifying our worldview, and our instinctive fear of cognitive dissonance. These things are a part of the beauty of human nature, but they are not, unfortunately, facilitators of truth.
 
Last edited:
I think the way he means the term isn't like that. It's more of a viewing every single issue and fact for what it is rather than what one wants it to be. Ironically Max is one of the worst about this. He just doesn't see it.

Truly stupid of me to unshade your post, when I did in advance know it was trash, and I again was totally right.
 
Atheism =/= not subscribing to an ideology. It means not believing in a deity. Buddhists are an example of people who are atheists who subscribe to an ideology.

Webster's:

Main Entry:
athe·ism Listen to the pronunciation of atheism
Pronunciation:
\ˈā-thē-ˌi-zəm\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle French athéisme, from athée atheist, from Greek atheos godless, from a- + theos god
Date:
1546

1archaic : ungodliness , wickedness2 a: a disbelief in the existence of deity b: the doctrine that there is no deity


Clearly this is not about an ideology, but instead about the singular belief in a deity. Many religions do not have deities.

So the term "Political Atheism" is pure nonsense.



But let's see if perhaps the term "political agnostic" would be closer.


Websters:

Main Entry:
1ag·nos·tic Listen to the pronunciation of 1agnostic
Pronunciation:
\ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos known, from gignōskein to know — more at know
Date:
1869

1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>
— ag·nos·ti·cism Listen to the pronunciation of agnosticism \-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun
.

This doesn't quite fit either. Politics is NOT unknown or unknowable. And nobody is truly unwilling to commit to an opinion about politics. They have opinions, but they might not adhere to a prescribed ideology.

So political agnostic doesn't fit either.

I'd venture a guess that "Political Rationalist" is perhaps the best fit for this type of mindset. Again from Webster's:

Main Entry:
ra·tio·nal·ism Listen to the pronunciation of rationalism
Pronunciation:
\ˈrash-nə-ˌli-zəm, ˈra-shə-nə-ˌli-\
Function:
noun
Date:
1827

1: reliance on reason as the basis for establishment of religious truth
2 a: a theory that reason is in itself a source of knowledge superior to and independent of sense perceptions b: a view that reason and experience rather than the nonrational are the fundamental criteria in the solution of problems.
...

It seems clear that rationalism does not necessarily adhere to any ideology except that reason has primacy over all else.

When someone does not subscribe to a specific ideology in a blind fashion, without the benefit of reason, one must be construed as a rationalist.

Thus, I conclude that "Political Atheist" and "Political Agnostic" are terms that make no sense at all. Anyone who would call themselves such, should more accurately describe themselves as "Political Rationalists".

That is what I would call myself, BTW.
 
Naw, I'm usually here on Sundays.
 
Thus, I conclude that "Political Atheist" and "Political Agnostic" are terms that make no sense at all. Anyone who would call themselves such, should more accurately describe themselves as "Political Rationalists".

That is what I would call myself, BTW.

Have you met many people on political forums who would admit to being politically irrational?
 
Have you met many people on political forums who would admit to being politically irrational?

An irrational person could still be a rationalist, they just use flawed reasoning.

And a rational person might not necessarily be a rationalist. They might be an empiricist, for example.
 
If that is the definition of political-atheistthen I am one.
 
Name one thing you look that isn't tainted by America hating glasses.

Everything... I don't hate America, I hate some people of America, which is ruining "America". Like neo-cons and a large group of conservatives/republicans.
 
Everything... I don't hate America, I hate some people of America, which is ruining "America". Like neo-cons and a large group of conservatives/republicans.

Define neoconservative. Then explain why you hate Republicans and conservatives. They hate gays, adultery, and people who don't follow the bible just as much as you do.
 
Back
Top Bottom