Just because people in the past have made a certain claim does not mean it is true or false. The claim that the Earth is round, not flat, is a reproduction of a very old claim but that doesn't make it false. My assertion is that any ism named after a person has a strong tendency to become what you call a "secular religion."
> In fact, the charge that "X is a secular religion with its own dogma"
> must be at least as old as conservative reactions against modern
> revolutions in the age of the Enlightenment. Here's an example from
> Edmund Burke: "It [the French Revolution] is a revolution of doctrine
> and theoretic dogma. It has a much greater resemblance to those
> changes which have been made upon religious grounds in which a spirit
> of proselytism makes an essential part" ("Thoughts on French
> Affairs," 1791). In short, your rhetoric is stuck on the right in
> the 18th century!
Just because people I disagree with made claims that happen to have a superficial resemblence to mine centuries ago does not make it false. Burke also claimed that the world is round, does that mean everyone making the same claim today is false? Of course not.
-- Joe R. Golowka JoeG at ieee.org Anarchist FAQ - http://www.anarchyfaq.org
"If the Nuremberg laws were applied today, then every Post-War American president would have to be hanged." - Noam Chomsky