[lbo-talk] M. Parenti joins the New Atheists?

shag carpet bomb shag at cleandraws.com
Tue Mar 30 04:29:08 PDT 2010


I suspect that, on these 4 criteria, listed in your post of 3/22, Parenti would still be considered a new atheist in terms of points 2 and 3.

2. Parenti examines the god constructed by the religious right and finds that god mean, vengeful, jealous, etc.

Parenti occasionally quotes from the new atheists, mostly quoting Hitchens liberally when writing about Mother Theresa.

3. I'm still a little unclear about point three, but thinking about it, yeah Parenti appears to be a horse's ass (on your terms) when he writes about religious intolerance in Afghanistan:

- in 2006, the execution of a man on trial for converting to Christianity. If the trial didn't put him to death, the clerics called on the public "to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left." Considered by some to be a moderate, Cleric Abdul Raoulf declared, "Rjectig Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This man must die."

- 2008, a journalism student was sentenced to death for distributing an article that questioned the practice of men having multiple spouses. He was convicted for humiliating Islam. The Afghanistan government prohibits "media coverage that offended traditional values and the Islamic faith."

- "By early 2008, the once vanquished Taliban... had succeeded in destroying or shutting down 590 schools in Afghanistan, killing almost 200 teachers and students and wounding 250 others."

Most of his writing, until this chapter, was about right wing Christian theocratic movements. He concludes the chapter with this:

"Just about every Middle Eastern, Latin American, African and Asian country has had a secular political movement with economic democracy as its goal. Almost all were destroyed or short-circuited by Western counterinsurgency and economic strangulation. Denied a material means of betterment, many people turn to the "spiritual." The Christianist missionaries -- or the mullahs and the imams -- explain to victims why bad things happen to good people: They were not that good; they believed in false gods and evil material solutions such as leftists social revolution. Their suffering on earth is punishment for their sins.

Once their worldly struggles against colonizers and rulers are thwarted, the people 'lapse into obscurantism and misdirected otherworldly supplications" that mkae 'ppression more bearable and the ruling class more secure.'" (he's quoting DAvid S. Pena, "Judging the Immportance of Religious Teachings," in 'Nature, Society, and Thought' 17 no 3 (2004).

I think Jeff Fisher would have a lot to say about the thesis -- we've had the conversation before. :)

Meanwhile, I'd guess that on your criteria - at least two anyway -- Parenti's serving up a giant douche or turd sandwich only from a marxist perspective. So, boo hoo. Joseph Catron has to deal with the turds and douches on the left.

The god constructed by the christianist rightwing - the rightwing of religion -- and even the Jesus of the NT -- are found terribly wanting in terms of the morality peddled by the stories in the Bible.

And Parenti thinks that, whereas the rightwing Christian theocrats yearn for a theocracy, other countries already have theocracies or are dealing with their resurgence -- as with the Taliban making a mockery out of a constitution that ostensibly supports religious freedom. As with Christianity, Parenti writes:

"Islam too is inhabited mostly by moderate who adhere to a doctrine of peace, love, and mutual tolerance. But like their Christianist counterparts, the Islamist moderates are crowed out from public discourse or, worse still, intimidated into silence by militant theocrats." (he footnees Aayan Hirsi Ali, "Islam's Selent Moderates," NYT 12/7/2007 and Khaled About El Fadl, The Great Theft: Wrestling islam from the Extremists.

At 06:52 AM 3/30/2010, shag carpet bomb wrote:
>At 12:42 AM 3/30/2010, Joseph Catron wrote:
>>However, I'm really at a loss to imagine how you could possibly still think
>>that after everything else I've (over)posted here, like this:
>>
>>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20100322/004531.html
>>
>
>
>but everything you say there makes no sense to me.
>
>1. makes a point of assessing the text from the most obtuse perspective as
>possible...
>
>where did you get that idea?
>
>2. stands on the shoulders of midgets...
>
>who are these midgets? Dawkins? What's wrong with the things Parenti says
>about jealous, vengeful, unforgiving, etc. god?
>
>3. neocon revisionism....
>
>i dont' get that one.
>
>4. a cottage industry out of the obvious....
>
>yes, his entire book is about the bad crap done in the name of religion --
>for parenti, religion is used as a cover or figleaf. and this troubles you
>why? i still don't grasp your problem here.
>
>
>--
>http://cleandraws.com
>Wear Clean Draws
>('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list