Book Description
Throughout history, arguments for and against the existence of God have been largely confined to philosophy and theology. In the meantime, science has sat on the sidelines and quietly watched this game of words march up and down the field. Despite the fact that science has revolutionized every aspect of human life and greatly clarified our understanding of the world, somehow the notion has arisen that it has nothing to say about the possibility of a supreme being, which much of humanity worships as the source of all reality. Physicist Victor J. Stenger contends that, if God exists, some evidence for this existence should be detectable by scientific means, especially considering the central role that God is alleged to play in the operation of the universe and the lives of humans. Treating the traditional God concept, as conventionally presented in the Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions, like any other scientific hypothesis, Stenger examines all of the claims made for God's existence. He considers the latest Intelligent Design arguments as evidence of God's influence in biology. He looks at human behavior for evidence of immaterial souls and the possible effects of prayer. He discusses the findings of physics and astronomy in weighing the suggestions that the universe is the work of a creator and that humans are God's special creation. After evaluating all the scientific evidence, Stenger concludes that beyond a reasonable doubt the universe and life appear exactly as we might expect if there were no God.
Customer Reviews:
An excellent analysis!.......2007-10-17
Dr. Victor Stenger has made a very solid analysis of religion based on the scientific method. Throughout the book, Dr. Stenger painstakingly goes item by item debunking every conceivable religious argument. The author, as a scientist also leaves the door open to probability. Even when the possibility of a contrarian probability is implausible!
The author has a poignant flair for the classical apologist and pseudo-scientific religious apologists. The book is a required to reading for the serious student of the religious/faith/logic and reason.
Without any reserve, I do recommend the book!
Another Good Book On The Subject .......2007-10-13
I read this book by Stenger in just over an hour. Stenger is correct in his title of the book. The hypothesis of a god does not hold up to any scrutiny. It falls apart and its adherents always fall back on the sacred fictional book known as the bible. Very good book from a well known scientist. Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris are trying to open the eyes of the western world and I applaud them for it. My profession is science and I do hold graduate degrees as does Dawkins and Stenger. This subject and its exposure has long been overdue.
Basically there is no evidence for a supreme being. You may want to consider this.
Some questions you may want to ask yourself as a Christian:
1. Where is heaven? Christians believe in it so it begs the question of "Where is it located specifically or even generally?" In all my studies of astronomy, I can't seem to remember any place labeled heaven. Is it near Saturn or Jupiter?
2. Where is hell? In my studies in geology, I don't remember a place called "Hell" being labeled somewhere on this earth.
3. Where is God? Does he exist somewhere in our solar system or someplace else in the universe? If he exists, he sure makes himself, herself, itself conveniently mysterious and absent.
4. The Islamic god must be more powerful than the Christian god, because the Christian god sure didn't do anything to stop 9/11 from happening. The Christian god didn't lift a finger when more than 6 million people were murdered by the Nazis in concentration camps known as the "Holocaust". Not to mention all the other disasters, diseases and such that have occurred throughout history.
This god seems to impotent and very much absent.
This whole concept of god etc.. is all in your minds, put there by parents, pastors etc... You are basically playing psychological mind games with yourself.
As a PhD myself in the biological sciences, I have given up trying to explain things to Christian fundamentalists and Christians in general regarding their irresponsible disinformation that they put out about science and theories. I have (my own personal experiences) found that many "Christians" will bend, distort and even outright lie about scientific findings in order to twist it so they can either discredit a finding or distort things to the point that they are trying to put a square peg into a round hole. The Christian believe that a "god" created everything and that the bible as factual is an agenda of most Christians. Most Christians I have spoken to do not have the correct definition of "theory" Almost like robots, they recite the rhetoric "Evolution is just a theory" Their meaning that Evolution is just a hunch or a guess, when in fact this is not so.
You throw out the theory of evolution and that throws out the foundations of biology and microbiology. So we throw Darwin's theory, do we start teaching biology from the perspective of the bible and the Christian way of thinking. As scientists, we would scrap it in a heartbeat and replace it with a new theory if it did not work anymore; however, we do not scrap it because the evidence supports Darwin's theory. I have talked to several Christians who say, "The theory of Evolution has been discredited and proven false". Well that's news to me because most of the major universities (i.e.: University of California etc.) teach evolutionary biology. Another disturbing thought process by some Christians is that they also believe that the "Big Bang Theory" has been discredited. News to me again. So you can understand why I do not have time for people who distort the truth.
I find my encounters with Christians as being either having hostility toward those who do not believe in their god or they are very much lacking in basic understanding of biology and science in general, therefore, they express hostility toward science and are very convinced that they are right. If they want to think they are right, that is okay with me, but it is not the atheists and scientists who are knocking on people's doors, congregating in buildings to spread the word. It is the religious who want everyone else to think like them. I do not wish to bend and twist my mind around a bunch of untruths and I am sure many millions of others (Atheists) agree. The thing I find so insidious about the church is the "getting to the children when they are young" Putting this belief into a child's mind when their brains have not fully developed yet. I think this is something that is very bad in our society. So excuse me if I do not have time to convince every die in wool Christian that their thinking is faulty. Unfortunately at this time in history, it is the minority (The Atheists) who has it right. However, hopefully over the next 100 years that will change and the majority will have it right and only a minority will still believe in religion and all it's dogma that surrounds it. People will look back at the late 20th century and early 21st century and not understand why so many held on to a medieval way of thinking. We look back on the people who thought the earth was flat (a majority 300-400 years ago) and wonder how anyone could have such faulty thinking. Hopefully the majority of our citizens will be saying the same thing about us 100 years from now.
I am amazed how aggressive some(not all) Christians get if you challenge their belief in this "God". Why does this all powerful "God" need you to come to his/her/it's or whatever defense.
Postscript: A friend of mine asked me in a joking manner. So if you get married and divorced and then remarry. Do you meet both of your ex-wives in heaven and how about if you end up getting remarried to your first wife after something happens to your second wife (Passes away, divorce). So who are you meeting up there in heaven he asked me. Good question I answered. I guess the Christians will know.
How do you prove the unprovable?.......2007-10-10
Stenger has bitten off a large argument here, and done a fairly admirable job at tackling certain aspects of it, but his larger premise is faulty based on his belief that humans, at present, have the ability to disprove the existence of a supreme being. While I agree with some of his goals, he takes it one step too far. Rational scientific evidence suggests that a god does not exist, and never has. This, however, is far from conclusive. Strong atheism requires almost as much faith as fundamentalism.
Perhaps the day will come when human knowledge will be such that we can provide a scientific proof against the existence of a god, but that day has not yet arrived. Stenger can disprove the "proofs" of the faithful quite convincingly, but that is all. The larger question remains unanswered, and will for some time; perhaps for all time.
Conversely, Stenger IS convincing in his assertions against religious visitations, miracles, and the answering of prayers. These are mythical stories perpetuated by those who want to believe. In all cases of so-called miracles there is a logical scientific alternate explanation. Remember Occam's Razor: the simplest solution should be the right one. Are we to believe a scientific explanation, or call it divine? Science is simpler and makes much more sense. Same goes for prayers allegedly being answered.
As for the historical evidence of the resurrection, I'm afraid the tales in ancient books of mythology do little to sway me. Many have faith that it, along with other biblical claims, did indeed happen. Faith does not equal proof.
Perhaps a god does exist, and perhaps he/she/it did create the universe. The limits of human knowledge at present are such that this can neither be proven nor disproved. However, the burden of proof is on the faithful. If I claim that the Loch Ness Monster exists, I need to provide some proof. It is not the job of unbelievers to disprove my assertion. While I find Stenger's arguments interesting, we as a species do not yet have the ability to irrefutably claim that god does not, or never has existed. Just as the faithful cannot prove that a god does exist. Perhaps we should stop trying and just agree to disagree.
Whether a god exists or not, there is substantial evidence that such a god does not intervene in worldly affairs. The stories of divine intervention on Earth have a more rational, scientific explanation. For example, Dr. Michael Persinger offers a reasonable explanation for why people can feel as though they have communed with a divine spirit. Did the Virgin Mary really appear in a grilled cheese sandwich, or is there a more rational explanation? Did Moses really see a god in a burning bush, or did he perhaps make it up? He may even have been schizophrenic. Again, Occam's Razor.
My basic point is that we can't prove that a supreme being does not exist. The evidence against it leads me to believe that a god does not exist, but this is far from conclusive. However, there is ample convincing evidence against such a god being involved in the daily happenings of its creation.
Let's say, for sake of argument, that there was a god that created the universe. What has he been up to since then? Scientific evidence indicates that he/she/it has left the universe to its own devices. Is he collecting unemployment insurance? Did he tire himself out and decide to sleep away the eons? Is he like an innocent bystander who just doesn't want to get involved? Did he figure he was finished his work and willed himself out of existence? Did he die? We can't know.
IF a god created the universe, then I guess he deserves our thanks. So, just in case, "Thanks, dude." That is all you will get from me. Daily or weekly groveling and prayer accomplishes nothing tangible, from my perspective. For the faithful, it can act as a shield against the some of the universe's harsh realities. It can also compel less thoughtful individuals to live more ethically.
As for me, I believe and accept that this is the only life I have, so I should live it fully. I can live a moral life without divine guidance. Unlike militant atheists, I can also respect the beliefs of those who disagree with me. If faith provides you with comfort and/or guidance, who am I to try and convince you otherwise? Unless you are a Scientologist, in which case I might want to call you a wack-job.
I am uncertain that strong atheism does anything to further the cause of rational scientific thought. It merely polarizes viewpoints, resulting in, as an example, a mixture of five-star and one-star reviews.
Many strong atheists see the faithful as deluded and irrational, while fundamentalists see atheists in a similar light. One interesting difference between the two groups is who holds the political power in the United States. The first President Bush once made a claim that atheists should not be considered citizens and not have the right to vote; how very enlightened from a man who once had control of a nuclear arsenal.
The atheist/agnostic movement has much to overcome to be accepted by society at large. I am not convinced that this book will help the cause.
Pseudoscience and bad history.......2007-10-07
Firstly, I would just like to point out that Professor Stenger has no historical credentials whatsoever. He is a physicist and an astronomer, not a historian! It is quite apparent that the little historical research he did, if any, is extremely skewed and faulty.
Secondly, I would like to mention how science cannot disprove any event in history, such as the resurrection of Christ. It is pseudoscientific to the extreme if any scientist attempts to do so! What happened in history happened, regardless of where science takes us.
I will now reveal the most important historical fallacies Stenger made in this book. The first historical error in this book is the claim that no extra-biblical records corroborating the darkness and earthquake during the crucifixion of Jesus exist. That is simply incorrect! There were two ancient Greek historians, who were extremely critical to the early church, who acknowledge this event in their writings. Thallus writes that this darkness was the result of an eclipse, even though he tries to explain the reason he is indeed aware of this event in history. Another Greek historian, Phlegon, also describes the darkness and the earthquake as well. He includes in his writing that the earthquake destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and killed thousands of cattle. He also includes the fact that the entire Mediterranean area was affected by the darkness.
Another major fallacy in Professor Stenger's book is his reliance on the King James Version of the Bible. I would just like to point to the fact that the KJV Bible has been shown to contain several fatal misinterpretations of the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments. This is due to the fact that when the KJV was written, the writers had a scarce amount of the original manuscripts. Today, we have a vast amount of the original manuscripts, thanks to archaeology. The KJV Bible should no longer be used as a source of information!
Dr. Stenger's third error, more of a speculation, in his book is the claim that some of the prophecies from the Old Testament were not fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Now, the ancient Jews thought that the fulfillment of prophecies in the time of the messiah would depend upon Israel's moral state. When Jesus of Nazareth came, he fulfilled about half of the prophecies from the Hebrew Bible. The rest of the New Testament shows that the second half of the prophecies will be fulfilled at the end of time, when Christ comes again. It is a matter of time which describes how the prophecies were, and will be, fulfilled, not Israel's moral state or a "failure" of certain prophecies!
List of Scientific proof of NO God usefull.......2007-10-06
I find the lists of Scientific proof that there is NO God are very usefull when countering the pig-ignorant primitive superstition of christians.
Book Description
The God That Failed is a classic work and crucial document of the Cold War that brings together essays by six of the most important writers of the twentieth century on their conversion to and subsequent disillusionment with communism. In describing their own experiences, the authors illustrate the fate of leftism around the world. André Gide (France), Richard Wright (the United States), Ignazio Silone (Italy), Stephen Spender (England), Arthur Koestler (Germany), and Louis Fischer, an American foreign correspondent, all tell how their search for the betterment of humanity led them to communism, and the personal agony and revulsion which then caused them to reject it. David Engerman's new foreword to this central work of our time recounts the tumultuous events of the era, providing essential background. It also describes the book's origins and impact, the influence of communism in American intellectual life, and how the events described in The God That Failed provide important lessons today.
Customer Reviews:
Reflections on the destructive nature of Leninism and Stalinism.......2007-02-27
The famous collection "The God that Failed" contains reflections by three famous writers/activists who were members of the Communist Party in their nation (Koestler, Silone and Wright), and three who were, at least in the view of some, fellow travellers (Gide, Fischer, Spender). Each of them explains in short anecdotal style, mixed with philosophical and political musings, how they came to be an orthodox Communist, and how they came to leave this position.
All of these contributions make for excellent reading, and together they form an entirely and incontrovertibly damning picture of both the strategies and the mindset of the various Marxist-Leninist Parties and their leading adherents. In that way this book forms an excellent companion to the works of Orwell, Edmund Wilson and similar people who were also sympathetic to socialism of various kinds, but came to see the "official" Marxism of the USSR and its followers as a destructive and evil force. Because that is what goes for all these writers as well as for Orwell - despite the claim of conservatives to books like this, all of the contributors to this collection still supported socialism at the end, only a different kind of socialism, more humane, more sensitive, and for some even more religious. None of them regretted their initial motives in joining the Party, but all of them felt that the Party is rather the kind of thing they wanted to fight against in the first place - the ultimate deception, caused by the political methodology of Marxism-Leninism.
It is well-known by now, but it wasn't so evident then. Marxism-Leninism necessarily rests on two main axiomas: first, that the Party is inherently the most progressive force and representative of the struggle for socialism and the proletariat's role in this; and second, that the ends, as embodied in the Party, always justify the means. Together, these two rules form a deadly recipe for totalitarianism and tyranny over the mind, regardless of how well-intentioned its adherents may or may not have been. One need but look at the many revealing 'incidents' mentioned in this book, or even at Orwell's excellent memoirs of the Spanish Civil War (which Koestler has also written about), to see why this is true.
Conservatives and liberals use this book as ammunition, incorrectly assuming that this is meant for them and to support their views. That is not so. All of the writers in this collection despised professional anti-communism and went on doing so until their death. It is not they who should read this book, but all socialists in this world who should read it, so that we know what happens when we abdicate the search for truth and make it subservient to opportunistic politics, regardless of what goals we have in mind in doing so. People of unfree mind can never build a free world.
American Tax Dollars at Work.......2005-09-10
This is perhaps the most celebrated anti-communist book of all time. Incidentally, it was created using your tax dollars. The odd thing is that all of the contributors are very clear about why they left the Party, but still a bit confused as to whether the chimera they were pursuing in the first place was a good thing or not. One could get the impression that the main problem with communism is that the wrong people were in charge. This seems to be the basic position of the New Left. In reality, the only thing that communism and social planning have ever produced in abundance is human suffering and dead bodies. This is a very important book, not only for what it's writers have to say about communism, but for what their essays reveal about them. Pay close attention do what they do NOT say as well as what they say.
excellent insight.......2005-07-21
This book undermines the generic "communism = bad" adage high school history classes will have you believe by illustrating how intelligent, learned men could become so wholeheartedly dedicated to a simple idea of classless utopia. Each of the six essays take a unique approach (based on location and social standing) of communist affiliation and the eventual disillusionment brought about by the constantly shifting politics of the Communist International. It won't sway you to sympathize with the party itself, but it will offer an understanding of its allure among its members.
Important Book.......2002-08-16
This collection of six essays reveals why so many people not only feared communism, but were right to do so. From a variety of nations and perspectives, the authors recount the events that led to their involvement with, and eventual break from, "The Party." At times chilling, always fascinating, this short series of works is an important philosophical milestone in the (ongoing) fight against communism.
Glad The 20th Century Is Over!.......2002-02-27
Anyone who is a fan of George Orwell or P.J. O'Rourke should enjoy this collection of essays from intellectuals who made the journey to communism and back. Arthur Koestler's (sp?) essay captures perfectly the confusion of Weimar Germany before the rise of Hitler, and shows that the communists actually helped the Nazis to power. You will come away from the book wondering how some intelligent people believed - and still believe - that communism was the way of the future. If there is a book that will turn a diehard leftist into a subscriber to the "National Review", TGTF is that book.
Customer Reviews:
Democracy: caveat emptor :-)........2007-09-27
I liked this clearly writtten book with its novel viewpoint and analysis about the perils of government which is not limited in its scope and is firmly believed to be acting for the good by way of democracy. It occurred to me after reading chapter 1 that the current situation in Burma is simply the Junta exercising its high time preference to leapfrog the democratic process and go straight to the logical consequences of contemporary democracy. This would be a valuable book for the Burmese pro-democracy leadership to read, so that they might not repeat the mistakes of the world's most recently liberated states.
The conclusion that the state should be replaced by insurance companies and contracts is reasonable, and does currently work in certain classes of international business activity to circumvent the complications and delays of inter-state law, but I suspect--if computer security is anything to judge by--security and sophisticated scare-mongering would become a dominant preoccupation and divert capital from more productive activity.
The state as a monopoly is democratically granted its temporary monopoly, and although any constitution is simply a piece of paper which may be capable of abuse by interpretation and manipulation, it is up to the electorate to exercise good judgement in their electoral choices. Which is another good reason for many to read this book at this juncture in time. Furthermore--as a crude metaphor--just because a metal ladder doesn't specify hat it should not be leaned against overhead electricity cables, sufficient 'a priori' knowledge should avoid this from happening instead of having to legislate for the banning of metal ladders and pursue claims for damage or death through the courts and seek compensation by way of insurance.
A blueprint for liberty.......2007-09-14
This, for me, has been perhaps the most important book I have ever read, as it introduced me to the Austrian School and libertarianism more generally. In my earlier youth I had been a staunch monarchist (with somewhat anti-capitalist biases), and thus the book's defence of monarchy had piqued my interest. In short order I purchased the book. Given that I read it without a sufficient background in either Economics or Philosophy (both of which I am in my second year of studying now), it was a difficult read. Nonetheless, the author's clear prose and intelligent commentary and explanations aided me through reading and partially understanding the content of his work. The book is heavily packed both with theoretical and empirical insights, and the author makes a convincing case for his thesis that monarchy provided a better framework for liberty than democracy, that the logical conclusion of classical liberal thought ought to have been market anarchism and not minarchism, and that this largely is the cause of the movement's slow death, and that conservatism needs to make a return to basic principles. The author is particularly excellent when writing on the topic of private defence and the evolution of the city and cooperation.
A few problems I have with the book; although I appreciate Hoppe's tendency to include multiple footnotes, a lot of their content could've been integrated into the core text. Better editing of the book could've avoided instances of repetition. I disagree almost entirely with Hoppe's thesis on immigration in a democratic State (which has been the source of much undeserved controversy surrounding the author, mainly by unscrupulous individuals, and I also believe that the author overstates the necessity of the libertarian to be a cultural conservative (though the reverse certainly is true.) Hoppe also does not offer a full grounding of his theory on property in this book, but given that it is not the core topic of the volume, I can forgive the oversight. This is not a book for beginners in Economics, Philosophy or political economy. I recommend reading this book after one has read Rothbard's For a new Liberty, and after one has achieved a sufficient grounding in economic and philosophical theory (Economic Logic is an excellent place to start.) In spite of these flaws, the author's contribution is invaluable, and ought to be on any serious thinker's bookshelf.
the only book on political theory you will ever need.......2007-07-29
Personally I had never fallen for the myth of democracy (neither had any of the founding fathers of America; do a web search on James Madison quotes, for example). It ought to be obvious to any thinking person, or anyone who talks to the typical voter, that mob rule cannot work. But my objection was always more along the lines of that of Traditionalists, such as Julius Evola. Despite my knowledge of Austrian economics, of which Hoppe is of course a devotee, I had never thought of objecting on a purely economic basis.
That's what makes this book so valuable: Hoppe uses the only existing valid economic theory to demolish any illusions any serious person might have about mob rule.
The book is not perfect. Hoppe lacks the perspective that comes with an understanding of history as cyclical. This causes him to imagine that ideas are what drives social organizations; of course, ideas are only invented after the fact, to rationalize whatever stage a given society has reached. Humans act on instinct. All civilizations pass through the same phases. There is nothing that can stop the ongoing collapse of the West. Likewise, monarchies always follow the anarcho-capitalism phase Hoppe prefers (which in practical terms will reduce to a benign feudalism, as the natural elites emerge as rulers of small domains). Monarchies are in turn replaced by mobs as the society comes unglued. It is much the same on the individual level. The poor strive and save and become rich; the rich become decadent and spend their capital inheritance, and again become poor, and the cycle starts anew...
Nevertheless this is the best book on political theory I have seen simply because it is the only one written from the perspective of real economics. It gets extra points for not shrinking from very important ideas which are controversial, for example footnoting the work of social scientists such as J. P. Rushton, which of course the false schools of sociologists and egalitarians despise and fear. And personally I like this better than Evola's pro-monarchist works because it doesn't ever devolve into mushy mysticism. An absolute must for the bookshelf of anyone who wants to understand the exact mechanisms by which the West was undone.
Valuable but flawed work.......2006-03-16
Democracy: The God That Failed, by noted market anarchist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, is a valuable but flawed book. First I'll talk about the valuable, and then about the flaw.
First of all, Democracy is an invaluable resource (hah !) when Hoppe discusses the differences in the incentive systems of monarchy and democracy. In chapter 1, "On Time Preference, Government, and the Process of Decivilization", Hoppe explains the concept of time preference, how a future-oriented (low time preference) economy is the mark of progress, and how government, both because of its attacks against property and the legitimacy of these attacks, is inherently destructive to time preference, and thus progress. He also introduces the notion of monarchy as private ownership of government, and democracy as public ownership of government, and how the passage from monarchy to democracy raises time preference in governance, destroying all the remaining incentives for the ruling class to contain their attacks on private property.
In chapter 2,Hoppe gets into the meat of the incentive systems, and how they flow from the concept of time preference. While these chapters get a bit repetitive, they provide plenty of information on the topic. Here is a little list :
* The historical transition from monarchy to democracy (p50-54).
* The rise of the democratic income tax (p54-56) - while monarchies did not typically raise more than 5-8% of their population's resources, the income tax has brought this percentage higher than 50% in most countries.
* The rise in democratic government employment (p56) - government employees represented 3-5% of the workforce in the early 1900s, and around 15% by the seventies.
* The imposition of fiat money by democracies and the resulting inflation (p56-58) - transforming the gradual deflation under monarchies (with periodic failed attempts at fiat money) with the brutal inflation we know today.
* The absurd rise in national debts (p59-60).
* The rise in legislation and the creation of a legislative class (p61-62).
* The rise in interest rates, proving a rise in time preference (p62-65) - Between the 19th century and the rise of democracy, interest rates had attained a historic low of below 3%, while today they sit at 4-5% and higher depending on the times.
* The rise in military spending (p65) - while monarchies spent most of their budget on militaries, the amount of GDP taken by modern militaries is higher than it was in the past.
* The lower birthrates (p66) - which seems like a bizarre addition and not a very good argument, but is explained by Hoppe's conservatism, which I will discuss.
* A discussion about the numerous factors influencing crime rate, including time preference (p66-68).
This, to me, is the most valuable chapter in the book.
In chapter 3, "On Monarchy, Democracy, Public Opinion, and Deligitimation", Hoppe examines the phenomena of public opinion and how it is twisted by the democratic process. Hoppe also proposes, on pages 70-75 and 91-94, a process of deligitimation as the best solution to eliminate government. Chapter 4, "On Democracy, Redistribution, and the Destruction of Property", continues on this theme, discussing the destructive redistributive nature of democracy.
In chapter 5, Hoppe examines the concepts of centralization and secession, when one or the other can be conductive to freedom, and why secession would be beneficial in today's increasingly centralized democratic superstructures.
In chapter 6, "On Socialism and Desocialization", Hoppe changes gears completely and examines how the process of desocialization should have proceeded in former Soviet territories and how it should proceed in today's democracies.
I'm afraid this is where my praises end. Most of the rest of the book is dedicated to two main propositions : that immigration should be restricted, and that conservatism is the best social system. By conservative, Hoppe means "someone who believes in the existence of a natural order, a natural state of affairs which corresponds to the nature of things: of nature and man" (p187). While this is uncontroversial, what he really means is that a conservative believes, as an act of faith, that society should be "based and centered on families" (p201), "families, kinship relations, cmmunities, authority and social hierarchy" (p203), and that the "heads of families and households reassert their ultimate authority as judge in all internal family affairs" (p185). These are, to me, repulsive statements.
It seems he intends his conservatism to be an extension of the concept of natural aristocracy. Now let me be honest. I am not, in any sense of the word, an egalitarian, a populist, or a liberal. I agree that natural aristocracies must develop and are necessary. I am definitely "conservative" in Hoppe's general definition... but not in his more specific definition. His primitivist conclusion that family, race and community need to become the focus of society, and that family is the source of civilization, seems very unproven. Family, as Stefan Molyneux points out, is the fundamental source of coercion and collectivism. As such, the conservatism of Hoppe is no different from anarcho-syndicalism : it replaces one democratic state with a multitude of oppressive concentrated states (in this case, parenthood). Therefore his whole thesis seems futile : in trying to destroy both monarchy and democracy, he desires to create millions of familial monarchies.
In fact, it seems to me that family structures are definitely anti-aristocratic. Your family is not chosen, the "head of the household" is not chosen on the basis of merit, and neither is the right to have children. Traditionally, "reproductive rights" and familial supremacy have been associated with egalitarianism, not elitism. Historical anarchies also do not prove his thesis that familial supremacy is natural - they are definitely tribalist, but not so primitivist as to collapse back to family units as supreme. So I think Hoppe's argument fails the burden of proof and fails on the face of the evidence.
His points on immigration are also good on surface but flawed in depth. He makes the excellent argument that immigration would be much less of a problem if free trade was the norm. But from this, he uses dubious arguments about the need for distance between races and cultures to justify restricting immigration to unprecedented levels. Once again, I agree with his basic thesis - that multiculturalism is not good in itself - but once again he seems to be buying into liberal rhetoric (this time, about cultural exclusivity) to fuel his aristocratic position. It just doesn't work.
This book has extensive footnotes, sometimes dwarfing the main text, but usually for good reason. His quotes are often interesting additions to the book proper.
My final verdict is that I'm keeping the book on the basis of its first chapters, which make excellent reference material. The second half of the book is a case taken in weird directions and which lacks the rigor and justification of his excellent case that monarchies have better incentive systems than democracies. I would recommend this book to anyone who is either a family-worshipping anarchist or someone who can stand the bad parts of the book to get the good parts.
We need more books like this.......2006-03-15
Dr. Hoppe is one of the best libertarian/anarcho-capitalist writers out there. This book is well argued and well written. More writers should take Hoppe's lead in expanding on the themes here. Even if one finds contention with some of his ideas, largely one is left with a refreshing perspective not found in the usual drivel to be had in the social sciences. Highly recommended and worth having as a reference and an example of how to write well and reason well.
Certainly for a libertarian or anyone interested in the themes of freedom this is a must have. Highly recommended.
Customer Reviews:
Scary and Instructive.......2007-02-11
The Kama Sutra says, about the `public woman': After acceptance she should please him; when he is infatuated with her she should suck him dry of his wealth and at last abandon him. This is the duty of a public woman".
This, in essence, was the strategy Rajneesh, a balding potbellied holy man, used with the people who flocked to his flat in Bombay, his sprawling `ashram' in Poone and later to the commune in Oregon. Seduction, followed by indoctrination and total mind control. This book is an instructive story that should be a required reading for naïve devotees flocking to India to sit at feet of more than imperfect `holy men' who have no compunction about mind control and (sex)ploitation. Here is how Milne describes his first meeting with Rajneesh:
"One hand still holds mine as the questions continue, as if he is practicing the gentlest ever form of mind detection. There is no invasion of privacy, no alarm, but it is as if his soul is slowly slipping inside mine, and in a split second transferring vital information. Letting go of my hand, he moves his left arm behind me. I sense a presence hovering over the crown of my head. He rests his hand there and stares off into the middle distance, sensing, checking, listening, all his being attuning itself to mine. Then the soft hand moves to my forehead, waits, listens, wafts to my throat and presses so gently on the cartilage there. Every chakra is discretely touched. The chakras recognize the arrival of a friend."
Dangerous man. After his grandfather died at the age of seven, Rajneesh resolved to never become attached to another human being. As a youngster, he was an admirer of Gurdjieff, experimented with the occult, breath control, magic and hypnosis, making himself an outcast in his own family.
Milne, attracted at first by `tantra' practices (a Rajneeshi synonym for "free sex for all"), eventually became a personal bodyguard and, as a member of the inner circle, a close witness to the rise and fall of one of the greatest spiritual scam artists of the XXth century. When Rajneesh proclaimed that `sex was divine and natural' he became attractive to Europeans and Americans who were fleeing the straight-jackets of puritan morality. These people paid their price: they were made to renounce their wealth and work, sleep-deprived, 12-14 hour days/7 days a week. The earnest work by the Occidentals must have gotten a chuckle or two from the Indians, for whom any physical effort is a degradation to be avoided at all cost. The (mostly Western) devotees were controlled by a tight-knit group of Indians led by a truly scary `Ma Anand' Sheela character. Milne describes the woman as aggressive, greedy, amoral without any empathy or remorse. Sheela was responsible for creating a concentration camp in Oregon and committed what may be the first bioterrorist attack in the US.
Milne, who today is a well known teacher of alternative medicine in California, does not appear in a good light in his own book. He had aided and supported Rajneeesh through his worst excesses, watched coolly as the guru played at social engineering - putting together and dissolving relationships, forcing thousands of women (including 14 year old girls) into sterilizations or even prostitution... so long as he was able to be close to the guru and have a piece of the action.
In the end, both Rajneesh and Sheela managed to escape long prison sentences. However, in what appears now to be a sort of `karmic' retribution, the more he took advantage of people, the more Rajneesh began to suffer from mysterious diseases, allergies, headaches and nosebleeds. At the end, the man was expelled from the US and died in India embittered, an empty shell of a person with few disciples and no joy in life. Ma Sheela, on the other hand, these days runs two retirement homes in Switzerland.
This book should read by anyone about to join a cult, or any person with family members in cult-like situations.
Accurate and revealing.......2004-10-11
I'm a former Sannyasin (never went to Oregon) and reading this book helped me finally to leave the group. I am forever in debt to it's author.
Misreadings.......2004-05-14
A review can say so much more about the reviewer than the book in question. The Library Journal review wonders how people could "throw away" years of their lives, etc., to follow such a guru--and criticizes Milne for failing to explain. In fact, he does explain the attraction: it was experiential; living in the presence of Rajneesh and in the company of other followers proved more powerful and enlightening--felt better--than life on the outside. Therapists and body workers found their practices enhanced by Rajneesh, not merely his "teachings" but by their own transformation, mind-body-spirit, catalyzed by Rajneesh. Milne also points out that it is not unusual for people in mass movements or utopian communities based on "love" to experience the high bliss of community.
Readers seem to expect books by former Rajneeshees all to be sociological studies in cultism as well as expose's of crime & intrigue replete with interviews and testimonials. Sometimes the best source of information is one's own experience; that can be enough for one book to digest. Rajneesh drew people to his writings as well as to his meditations...and ultimately, in many cases, to his ashrams. People were 'hit' on many levels. The question posed by the Library Journal review--why so many normal people would throw away so much to follow Rajneesh--implies that a flaw in their collective character caused the phenomenon, when the cause is far more normal and common: people seeking 'truth' who make the mistake of diminishing their selves while elevating someone else to the status of hero-god. That phenonenon didn't stop with Bhagwan. And memoirs about that experience will probably continue to be ambivalent because of the very powerful, in many cases transformative, experiences people have vis a vis the brainwash and surrender of identity. The experience did not cost Milne, a young man at the time, his career as an osteopath. For all the lessons learned, it seemed to have enhanced it.
Bhagwan: The God That Failed.......2003-08-06
This is not a great work as writing goes but it is a really unique insight into a phenomenon that touched so many lives around the world. I really appreciated the undertaking of Hugh Milne in writing about his teacher, his world and identity for so many years and his ultimate separation from a heady movement gone berserk and ultimately destructive.
Never drawn to this movement I knew of others (American and Brits) who were. I was drawn to another'spiritual growth' movement when much younger and had some agonizingly lonely separation traumas myself once I questioned where it was leading - so I found the account by Milne a genuinely valuable read.
more like a demon that accomplished what he set out to do.......2001-12-26
How could this Bhagwan be "wise" when he was literally *killing* people???? Unfortunately, the book does not give much insight into how "normal" people get sucked into this kind of horror. And it would be nice if it also *named names* so we could know who the people were who cooperated with the Bhagwan's terrorist activities - there are probably many who are still at large ...
Average customer rating:
|
Other God That Failed: Hans Freyer and the Deradicalization of German Conservation
Jerry Z. Muller
Manufacturer: Princeton Univ Pr
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Germany
| Europe
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
History
| Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Sociobiology
| Anthropology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0691055084 |
Book Description
~~Why did some of the "best and brightest" of Weimar intellectuals advocate totalitarian solutions to the problems of liberal democratic, capitalist society? How did their "radical conservatism" contribute to the rise of National Socialism? What roles did they play in the Third Reich? How did their experience of totalitarianism lead them to recast their social and political thought? This biography of Hans Freyer, a prominent German sociologist and political ideologist, is a case study of intellectuals and a "god that failed"--not on the political left, but on the right, where its significance has been overlooked. The author explores the interaction of political ideology and academic social science in democratic and totalitarian regimes, the transformation of German conservatism by the experience of National Socialism, and the ways in which tension between former collaborators and former opponents of National Socialism continued to mold West German intellectual life in the postwar decades.
Average customer rating:
|
The God That Failed
Manufacturer: Bantam
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Mass Market Paperback
ASIN: B000H6LFY2 |
Books:
- Governance (Key Concepts)
- Habermas: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)
- Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America's Demise
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
- History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Schaum's Outline of Operations Research
- Jerry Baker's Backyard Problem Solver: 2,168 Natural Solutions for Growing Great Grass, Super Shrubs
- Birnbaum's Walt Disney World 2005: Expert Advice from the Inside Source
- Big Open: On Foot Across Tibert's Chang Tang
- Fire Officer's Handbook Of Tactics
- How to Housebreak Your Dog in 7 Days
- Fertilization Response of the Egg
- GIS, Spatial Analysis, and Modeling
- Accounting Principles Third Canadian Edition Reader's Guide
- The Coffee Trader: A Novel
God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
The God Delusion
Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person's Answer to Christian Fundamentalism
Letter to a Christian Nation
Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon
