Category Archives: Anti-Authoritarianism
INDEPENDENT THINKER: “On Rank and File” / Albert Einstein
VIDEO JOURNALISM: “Top Five Most Absurd Pretexts for War in Modern History” / Brainwash Update / Abby Martin
ISRAEL WAR CRIMINALS: “Examining the ‘Israel Has a Right to Defend Itself’ Narrative” / Chris Hedges / Linda Sarsour
RELIGION: “Religion is Like an Appendix . . .”
RELIGIOUS INDOCTRINATION: “Religion is Often Just Tribalism: . . .” / Penn Jillette
DOUBLETHINK AND WAR CRIMES: “Why Israel Lies” / Chris Hedges
All governments lie, as I.F. Stone pointed out, including Israel and Hamas. But Israel engages in the kinds of jaw-dropping lies that characterize despotic and totalitarian regimes. It does not deform the truth; it inverts it. It routinely paints a picture for the outside world that is diametrically opposed to reality. And all of us reporters who have covered the occupied territories have run into Israel’s Alice-in-Wonderland narratives, which we dutifully insert into our stories—required under the rules of American journalism—although we know they are untrue.
MORALITY: “The Greatest Speech Ever Made” / The Great Dictator / Charlie Chaplin
EVOLUTION: “To Put it Bluntly but Fairly, . . .” / Daniel Dennett
CRITICAL THINKING: “Are There Emotional No-Go Areas Where Logic Dare Not Show Its Face?” / Richard Dawkins
Are there kingdoms of emotion where logic is taboo, dare not show its face, zones where reason is too intimidated to speak?
[…]
I believe that, as non-religious rationalists, we should be prepared to discuss such questions using logic and reason. We shouldn’t compel people to enter into painful hypothetical discussions, but nor should we conduct witch-hunts against people who are prepared to do so. I fear that some of us may be erecting taboo zones, where emotion is king and where reason is not admitted; where reason, in some cases, is actively intimidated and dare not show its face. And I regret this. We get enough of that from the religious faithful. Wouldn’t it be a pity if we became seduced by a different sort of sacred, the sacred of the emotional taboo zone?
[…]
I deliberately [want] to challenge the taboo against rational discussion of sensitive issues.



