Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Who Do We Blame? (Religion? Government? Bill Maher?)

1 year ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
I was watching Bill Maher recently, and, as usual, he was clobbering his favorite target -- religion -- yammering away about it being being responsible for the annihilation of millions of people. Somebody on his panel asked, "What about Communist Russia?"To which Maher shot back, "Communism is just state-sponsored religion."

That's when I jumped in -- in my head. I wasn't actually on the show. I imagined myself a panelist, who'd been noticeably quiet to that point, but who now suddenly finds his voice. "You know," I tentatively begin, "My cousin Herschel used to joke: 'There are two kinds of bald people – those with hair and those without hair.'" The audience stares blankly. Maher immediately steps into the void. "What does that have to do with anything?"
Gay rights demonstratorsTo which I reply, "Lumping Communism in with religion is like saying: 'There are two kinds of religious people – those who believe in God and those who don't.' "

Maher had been careless in his computation. Communists, and the millions of deaths they inflicted, rightfully belong on the side of the ledger headed: "Murdering Atheists."
There is no question that religion is responsible for many wars, centuries of intolerance, and countless deaths. If there's an afterlife, I hope those champions of "The One, True Faith" have to face a very angry "Maker" who stares them straight in the eye and says, "What the hell were you thinking?" However, religion is merely one of a subgroup of culprits, all of which sit under an overarching umbrella of hate mongering and devastation, which I view as the primary culprit. That culprit is the seemingly universal concept of "Them."

Sure, "Them" is people of a different religion. But "Them" is also people from a different country. Or they could be people of a different gender, or the same gender, but they act differently. These, and dozens of others, are simply separating categories, distinguishing the good, righteous and deserving "Us" from the disgusting, subhuman and undeserving not "Us," which is "Them."

Throughout human history, the "We" have made the "Thems" targets and scapegoats. "Them" are demonized as "The Other." They're the monsters who walk among us. Our darkest, most shameful impulses, which we can't accept in ourselves -- because we're so wonderful -- we project them all onto "Them." Then we kill them. Or treat them to a lifetime of discriminatory abuse.

"Them" is anybody who isn't you, or people like you. Sometimes, the "Them" changes. Over they years, America has enjoyed serial "Thems." First, it was the Indians. Then, it was the immigrants. (It's always the immigrants.) Then it was the Communists. Then, it was the Iraqis. And now, it's apparently all Muslims.

Even I had a "Them" once. His name was Danny. Danny was charged with the unforgivable crime of being quiet. I treated Danny horribly. Why did I need a "Them"? I don't know. Everyone else had a "Them." I wanted one too.
I once heard this psychoanalyst named Vamik Volkan speak at a psychoanalytic conference. (My wife attended, and I went along for the ride.)

Volkan, who has been involved in international mediation efforts between longstanding enemies, spoke about his home country of Cyprus, an island shared by the Greeks and the Turks, but they hate each other. Over the years, the two sides have developed a number of signifying identifiers. Each side loops their belts in a slightly different manner. And each side smokes a different brand of cigarette -- I believe one side smokes Camels and the other side smokes Lucky Strikes, though I can't remember which group does which, which would be injurious to me if I happened to visit there and I smoked.

Espousing the idea of "Large Group Identification," Volkan believes that the concept of "Them" goes very deep. Apparently, we need "Them" to define what it means to be "Us."
If he's right, this issue and its destructive consequences will not be going away soon. Of course, we all know who's responsible for that.
Filed Under: Religion, Culture, Hate Crimes

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

11 Comments

Filter by:
roamingrv

Should we all not just look for the same "them" and there will be no "who".

June 27 2010 at 10:00 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jancf

Earl, I'm sorry, I tried and tried and still failed to still the obnoxious beast within that screams 'WHOM' not "WHO'!!!!! Some of us are marked for life by good early English teachers.

Otherwise, a fun article.

June 27 2010 at 9:21 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Chucky

Bill Maher wouldn't know what relgion was if it jumped up and bit him on his lips. By redefining what words mean if,you can make any body including elephant boy Bill into anything you want.; except in thias case, Maher has taken care of that himself....A neo-philosper with an intellect of Richard "out of touch" Dawkins

Pure religion is to visit and take care of the infirmed, widows and the orphans

June 27 2010 at 6:23 PM Report abuse -4 rate up rate down Reply
punnster

Actually, there are Christians that are tolerant of other religions, but will fight others that attack them just because of their religion.

June 27 2010 at 3:32 PM Report abuse +3 rate up rate down Reply
jn61385

Mahler is correct in comparing communism to religion, in that both reflect an extremist way of thinking. I don't oppose people engaging in religious beliefs, but I do oppose them imposing such beliefs Into policy decisions that affect all of us. Any system of thought based on absolutism is dangerous to human well being, and religion is one of the worst offenders of this.

June 27 2010 at 10:53 AM Report abuse -3 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to jn61385's comment
JohnR

jn,

You said, "Any system of thought based on absolutism is dangerous to human well being"

Without absolutism, where would we be? Whose "right" and "wrong" would we follow? From your words, and those of many of the other posters, I certainly would not be comfortable with your definitions.

I'm very happy with God's definitions of right and wrong.

Regards

June 27 2010 at 3:16 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
mrtbuck

thanks for the article. beautiful insight to see publicly available. Us against them has always been the issue. Duality is not reality even though our minds convince us that it is real. In the religious context of this article the concept is clearly shown in the Adam and Eve story. Told "do not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. That good and evil part is key and is most often left out. The knowledge of good and evil implying that before this there was no good and evil, no concept of duality. Only when we suddenly had some idea that some of creation was wrong and other parts were right did we lose that state of consciousness we can call Eden. Now we fight for good against evil when there, in reality, is neither. And as long as we do the garden will be lost to us.

June 27 2010 at 9:19 AM Report abuse +5 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to mrtbuck's comment
JohnR

MrT,

There absolutely IS evil in this world.

Why else would men all over the world try to eradicate people who are "not them?" Why would people deliberately fly airplanes into buildings, killing as many as they can?

Saint Paul knew that when he said, "Put on the armor of God, so we can stand against the wiles of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places."

Regards

June 27 2010 at 3:29 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mrhydemagic

Wherefore art thou "them?"
Territory is important to large primates like humans. Also important -- imposing order onto randomness. We do that in dualistic terms. Day/night, good/evil, us and them. We create idealistc forms in our "higher" consciousness

Art, music, religion are all institutions of the ape. Would an ape given a typewriter and enough time create "War and Peace?" The answer, of course, is that one already did. But he was one of "them."

June 27 2010 at 7:53 AM Report abuse -8 rate up rate down Reply
KMA

Maher is essentially right as organized religion is a governance body with all the amenities of most governmental processes. Fees for services, whether being gifts, tithing, donations, fees or taxes. They inflict penalties for not following their ways including imprisonment and death. The way the officials get in power varies a bit but in many cases are jobs for life without much input from the people that pay their way. In the end, both may be a necessity but also a curse

June 27 2010 at 7:40 AM Report abuse -4 rate up rate down Reply
ddan8719

bill..who"

June 27 2010 at 1:44 AM Report abuse +4 rate up rate down Reply

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>

News From Our Partners