Sam Harris
- Thread starter JLMACN
- Start date
Sam Harris really pisses me off. He is a reactionary. Same with Cristopher Hitchens.
The problem with both of them is that they blame religion for the worlds problems, but they fail to seriously analyze the factors that give rise to religion in the first place. Harris/Hitchens primarily target Muslims and never use the same harsh language when discussing Christianity and do so to defend American foreign policy. It's shameful. Harris is a huge defender of American Imperialism and his work is used as justification for American military use.
Sam Harris (and Hitchens) is a Bush supporter and admirer of the Bush Administrations foreign policies, including the Iraq & Afghanistan wars and the use of torture. He seems to play a specific role for the republicans or right-wingers - demonize Islam while defending the atrocities committed by Bush Co. and attack the "liberal left." (Of course he largely ignores the negative effects of Christianity and other religions and focuses primarily on Islam.).
I read some of his book, The End of Faith, which he began to write days after 911 (which shows just how much of a reactionary he is). It was a horrible book - he declares Islam (religion) responsible for the attack and all terrorism and fails to even consider any social and political factors that leads to terrorism in the first place.
Richard Dawkins also is guilty of failing to seriously analyze the reasons as to why religion continues to exit and to grow, but at least he is smart enough to figure out the American wars are fraudulent and have little, if anything, to do with religion.
The problem with both of them is that they blame religion for the worlds problems, but they fail to seriously analyze the factors that give rise to religion in the first place. Harris/Hitchens primarily target Muslims and never use the same harsh language when discussing Christianity and do so to defend American foreign policy. It's shameful. Harris is a huge defender of American Imperialism and his work is used as justification for American military use.
Sam Harris (and Hitchens) is a Bush supporter and admirer of the Bush Administrations foreign policies, including the Iraq & Afghanistan wars and the use of torture. He seems to play a specific role for the republicans or right-wingers - demonize Islam while defending the atrocities committed by Bush Co. and attack the "liberal left." (Of course he largely ignores the negative effects of Christianity and other religions and focuses primarily on Islam.).
I read some of his book, The End of Faith, which he began to write days after 911 (which shows just how much of a reactionary he is). It was a horrible book - he declares Islam (religion) responsible for the attack and all terrorism and fails to even consider any social and political factors that leads to terrorism in the first place.
Richard Dawkins also is guilty of failing to seriously analyze the reasons as to why religion continues to exit and to grow, but at least he is smart enough to figure out the American wars are fraudulent and have little, if anything, to do with religion.
I watched some videos of both Hitchens and Harris. I did see the support of the right wing from Hitchens (on the Bill Mauher show). Its surprised the shit out of me honestly, but I also saw a video of him ridiculing the shit out of Jerry Farewell on Hannity and Combs. I was relieved to see someone actually point out, on National TV, how much of a fraud Farewell is/was. I am new to both of these guys and look forward to reading their books. They didnt not necessarily come off as "islam hating" individuals, rather, they came off as conservative hating folks. They both believe, as well as Dawkins, that conservatism, gives way to fundamentalism. Something we all know is true when you look at the big picture.
Seeing Hitchens flip off the Bill Maugher audience was priceless though....haha..
and seeing him dog the shit out of Jerry Farewell is priceless too....
Hannity hated that shit.
5000
Seeing Hitchens flip off the Bill Maugher audience was priceless though....haha..
and seeing him dog the shit out of Jerry Farewell is priceless too....
Hannity hated that shit.
5000
When you read more of their work you will understand exactly what I'm talking about. Yes, they both will attack christianity, but they never as harshly as Islam.
Regarding Hitchens - there is no doubt about it, he is a Bush supporter.
Here is a great quote that reveals what kind of douchebag Hitchens is:
"George Bush may subjectively be a Christian, but he—and the U.S. armed forces—have objectively done more for secularism than the whole of the American agnostic community combined and doubled." Source (The title of his article reads, "The left apologizes for religious fanatics. The president fights them.")
Uhhh, what?!?! This is such a blatant lie my head hurts. George Bush and the US armed forces have done the complete opposite - they have done more for Islamic fundamentalism than anyone else and they have served as the #1 recruiter for Islam. Not to mention what the Bush Administration is responsible for in the US!! Is Hitchens really going to imply that Bush is fighting religious fanatics here in the US?!?! They are his biggest supporters!!
And again, my main problem with them is their lack of analysis. They fail to understand (or neglect such obvious reasons) that the terrible conditions are what drive people into the camp of Islamic fundamentalism, i.e. things are so bad that the burning anger amongst the youth and others find an echo in Islamic fundamentalism due to its "promises" of a better way and to "target the evil that is the root of it." They seem to be fueling reactionary right-wing Islamophobia. These guys are like bad doctors - they find a problem, but they don't study the causes or put forth a cure for the problem.
Regarding Hitchens - there is no doubt about it, he is a Bush supporter.
Here is a great quote that reveals what kind of douchebag Hitchens is:
"George Bush may subjectively be a Christian, but he—and the U.S. armed forces—have objectively done more for secularism than the whole of the American agnostic community combined and doubled." Source (The title of his article reads, "The left apologizes for religious fanatics. The president fights them.")
Uhhh, what?!?! This is such a blatant lie my head hurts. George Bush and the US armed forces have done the complete opposite - they have done more for Islamic fundamentalism than anyone else and they have served as the #1 recruiter for Islam. Not to mention what the Bush Administration is responsible for in the US!! Is Hitchens really going to imply that Bush is fighting religious fanatics here in the US?!?! They are his biggest supporters!!
And again, my main problem with them is their lack of analysis. They fail to understand (or neglect such obvious reasons) that the terrible conditions are what drive people into the camp of Islamic fundamentalism, i.e. things are so bad that the burning anger amongst the youth and others find an echo in Islamic fundamentalism due to its "promises" of a better way and to "target the evil that is the root of it." They seem to be fueling reactionary right-wing Islamophobia. These guys are like bad doctors - they find a problem, but they don't study the causes or put forth a cure for the problem.
I am into the first chapter of End of Faith and I must say I was skeptical after 2-0 pointed out somethings about Sam Harris, but he has not disappointed me thus far.
I like the correlations (or lack there of) of progression in religions Vs. Medicine, Science, Technology, Engineering, Physics, etc. Sam asks his readers (if Christian) why they do not hold the same standards for their religions as they do for anything else? The examples he gives are decent as well, especially the one when he says to imagine a day if all the 6-7 billion people in the world woke up and forgot everything they knew. When would Jesus being born of a virgin become important compared to reading, writing, growing crops, building shelter, etc....
Very good read so far...
Just thought I would share.
5000
I like the correlations (or lack there of) of progression in religions Vs. Medicine, Science, Technology, Engineering, Physics, etc. Sam asks his readers (if Christian) why they do not hold the same standards for their religions as they do for anything else? The examples he gives are decent as well, especially the one when he says to imagine a day if all the 6-7 billion people in the world woke up and forgot everything they knew. When would Jesus being born of a virgin become important compared to reading, writing, growing crops, building shelter, etc....
Very good read so far...
Just thought I would share.
5000