--Heresy, by Neil Peart
Mourning. Weeping. Gnashing of teeth. That is what you do when you are dealing with the loss of tens of millions of lives and the destruction and deformation of millions more.
Soviet rulerJosef Stalin is known to be one of the world's most ruthless dictators. In 1932, a famine (Holodomor) was engineered by Stalin and the Soviet government in order to forcibly collectivize the farms of the free-holding Ukranian peasants. The death toll alone is estimated to have been between 2.6 million and 3.5 million people. Many more people suffered terrible privation, loss of opportunities, and loss of home and property.
Wherever I lie, I hear voices:
And that is only a partial toll of the dead.
And there are those whose dreams were shattered and whose hopes were never realized.
Whining? I don't think so.
Weeping. Wailing. Mourning losses that cannot be adequately mourned in a thousand years.
And this commenter, this one who called my objection to totalitarianism "whining" did not not make this statement in isolation.
He said: "...I consider religious education to be a serious form of child abuse."
Since parents, even parents of schooled children, teach their kids their own values in their own homes, this is a program for the censorship of citizens in the private sphere. No matter how much one may disagree with what a parent might choose to teach a child in the home, one may not dictate to private citizens what they may speak in public or private. One may not force upon others one's own ideas, no matter how reasonable or "objective" they may appear. One may not do this in a free society, even should one be able to prove that this would be good for those people whose rights are being violated, and further prove how good it would be for society to violate those rights, one may not. For to do so, is to violate the Constitution and make the law discriminate among persons. A person who is a Christian, a person who wants to pass his religious beliefs to his children, a person who questions "consensus" in science, all would be treated differently under the law than others.
I would think this last assessment of his motives is most likely, except for the "whining about totalitarianism" remark. That indicates a callous disregard on the intellectual level (at least) for the lives, liberty, and property of millions of human beings. Their lives, their happiness appear to be only a means to his end of an "objective" state ruled by science.
I am a scientist. I am proud of the many and varied ways that science has brought to humanity greater understanding of the universe, and has also bettered human lives. And there are times when I have been deeply ashamed of the evil uses to which scientists have put their scientific expertise. This happens because we are prone to forgetting that science generates no ethics and no politics. It is simply an empirical examination of the physical world. Nature does not have morality and cannot do evil. Humans beings do and can. When scientists have forgotten this, and impose upon others their own desires in the name of science, and then use it to coerce others, they have done great and lasting harm. Think about the roles of scientists in the Nazi destruction of European Jewry, and in the manufacturing of drug-resistant anthrax for biological warfare during the Cold War...and the list continues.
Note: I have edited this piece for the following reasons:
1) to fix spelling typos
2) to change a mistake in reporting of numbers. The number of people estimated to have been killed in WWII is 40 - 72 million, not 40 - 72 thousand.
3) to change the capitalization on the word objective from upper case to lower case.
The claim made by the troll is for an "objective" government, not an "Objectivist" government. Objectivism (capital "O")is a philosophy that would repudiate the use of force by government to control the minds of citizens in any way. For more information, see Rational Jenn's note. She is an Objectivist and an expert on the issue. I am not.