I'm going to give everyone a heads up. I'm going to be a raging angstheist in this post. Some people don't like this, and don't like aggressive atheism, and that's fine, if you're one of those people, this post is not for you.
However, I saw a meme today that really put Stein's anti science views in perspective. It mentioned that yes, Jill Stein thinks Wi-Fi might hurt kids, but the other candidates believe in the stuff like virgin birth and the resurrection of a 2,000 year old Jewish guy.
This is quite accurate. I'm an atheist. I like to have a well grounded worldview. I like to have a "relationship with reality", but none of the candidates really have one. Jill Stein has her own flaws, but many of the other candidates are either religious or appeal to the religious. Their entire worldview and their entire political outlook on life is skewed in very significant ways.
I've torn Clinton apart on this before in some of my basic income posts. But Clinton is deeply religious, and she flaunts it this election. Heck, the entire democratic party this election has pandered hard to the religious elements of their party while seemingly ignoring the atheists. If we go by the DNC leaks, they even seemed quite hostile to atheism, since they toyed with the idea of using Sanders' religion against him. It's part of the reason the DNC went over with me poorly. It was very churchy. Religion was deeply woven into the candidates and prominent speakers and their lives. It was blatant, it was in your face, and while it might pander well to that crowd, I found it as alienating as heck.
I don't have the same worldview that the democratic party is trying to espouse this election. Quite frankly, I see the world differently on a basic existential level, and this leads to subtle, and sometimes more blatant differences in our politics. It could be as minor to our views on abortion (both Clinton and Kaine have issues with it on a personal level whereas I don't as long as it isn't late term), or it could be as major as our views on what the meaning of life is and how it relates to economics philosophically. I don't believe in the American dream. I dont believe in the protestant
work ethic. I don't believe humans have an objective purpose, and tend to be fairly nihilistic. I don't believe in objective morality as per divine command theory. These differences matter, and more importantly, they affect my life. Until Stein wants to ban my wifi I don't care what's going on in her head. But some of Clinton's views do affect me. We see the world differently, we see different problems, we see different solutions in line with our philosophical worldviews. It matters.
Then you have Trump. Trump is nominally a Christian, but his actions are anything but. The guy is totally a narcissist who worships himself. Still, he panders to religious people. He talks about wanting to ban porn, which is a blatant attempt to pander to the religious crowd. Pence talks about repealing Roe V. Wade and the GOP wants to nominate supreme court justices to do just that. The right has been heavily religious for decades now, and at this point they're one of their last remaining voting blocks holding them together. And once again, these guys and their distorted worldview affect my life and the lives of others. When they ban behaviors they don't like that some people may want to partake on based on their distorted religious worldview, that's a problem. When they are totally out of touch with the world, and believe stuff like the world is 6000 years old like some religious voters do, that's a problem. Their distorted worldview affects me. It affects their social, economic, and foreign policy views in dramatic ways, and I have to live with that if they're elected.
Gary Johnson is less religious. He appears to believe but isn't as preachy about it. I may have issues with the cultish belief some may have in libertarianism, and see that as a problem, but at least their views on a deity that may or may not exist are not affecting policies that affect me.
As for Stein, she's Jewish, but I haven't seen a lot of influence in her political views either. Same with Sanders, which is probably why the DNC wanted to spin him as an atheist. Their views are compatible with atheism. We see the world in somewhat the same way. I don't know where God fits into their views, or what they think about purpose or morality or any of that, but their views aren't shining through in their platform. It's not blatant, it's not in your face, people aren't expecting me to live in certain ways and structure society according to their beliefs in a being that may or may not exist.
As such, my opinion on people who are accusing Stein of being "anti science" while still supporting candidates who believe in fairy tales or blatantly pander to those who do shouldn't throw stones, since they live in glass houses. I don't agree with Stein's anti science views, and find them concerning, but all in all, outside of a potential moratorium on GMOs, I don't see her views affecting me in a big way. As long as she keeps that kind of crazy out of government policy in ways that affect me, I'm mostly fine with her. But we do have candidates like Trump and Clinton, who pander to people on religion and even base some of their deeply held convictions and/or politically convenient political views on it. As such, these criticisms of Stein's views seem very off base. Yes, her platform has problems. But honestly, the big difference between Stein and the two major parties here is really that the kinds of irrational beliefs that Stein holds are controversial, whereas most people accept, and even encourage the kinds of beliefs you expect out of Clinton and Trump and their platforms. We have a problem with anti intellectualism in America, I admit that. But honestly, the problem is just as bad in the establishment as it is for Stein and her platform. If not worse. Since I see religion as a way to control the masses in potentially malicious ways, the kinds of irrationality that the likes of the establishment parties push is far more dangerous in my opinion. Not saying Stein's views are great. They're crappy and irrational too. But if religion is a way to control the masses, candidates appealing to the masses based on these distorted worldview is a way bigger problem and does way more damage to the political discourse in this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment