Year: 2010

The behaviour of dictators like Ahmadinejad, Ghadafi, Idi Amin etc., is not solely a funny subject for people, a witty personage for media, and a caricature for satirists; such behaviour has the potential of catastrophes for a whole nation. They represent an Islamic, authoritarian or even totalitarian regime which is morally bankrupt and thus can commit any wrongdoing.
While many psychopaths are incarcerated in psychiatric hospitals and penal institutions, it has been recognised that a few of them were clever enough to enter the history of mankind, creating catastrophes. All these misfits need to rule is an insane ideology or belief system through which they surround themselves with mad people, devoted followers and blind killers who are equally clueless about what it means to be a feeling human being.
Psychopath as Leaders

Though it was in the nineteenth century that doctors began to elucidate the nature of that disturbing category of human beings that we now call psychopaths, history shows that they have always been with us. A mad leader can be mad about an ideology, religion, or cult, as Hitler is a symbol of Nazism, Stalin irreparably degraded communism, and Khomeini actualised political Islam. Megalomania is a common character for any dictator; no wonder we had Hitler as “Führer”, Nero who exalted himself to a god and Stalin who became father of Russians. All of them used their intelligence in the service of their immoral drives (belief, aggression, power). They use lofty words and emotional speech — an easy thing for a fairly intelligent psychopath — but there is no genuine content to them. Being fairly bright, they learn how to imitate emotional expressions suggestive of some higher emotions (compassion, sympathy, sociability, patriotism and morality), through which they fool the grassroots. However, they hardly fool any intellectual observer because they ring hollow as there is no truth and authenticity in their words. Their fraudulent but emotional speeches distinguish them from sane leaders.

Fear

 
It is nothing new or surprising, a dictator in uniform or suit, also in a robe and turban, would never abandon the idea that he is above all. He would consider himself a God’s handpicked leader. Therefore, lasting compromises with him are impossible and thus he would refuse to allow other ideas to cramp his authority. The guiding principles and policies they use are based on fear. Fear has always been used to silence people and groups in a population. Fear is widespread in all dictatorial systems. Fear is a powerful motivator in enforcing tolerance, obedience, and making people submit to authority, it is a pillar of religious and totalitarian systems. Fear from god or State has always been tangibly present in all totalitarian, religious, and cult systems, such as Italy under Mussolini, Nazi Germany under Hitler, China under Mao, the Soviet Union under Stalin, and Iran under the Islamic regime. The threat of punishment, torture and being killed is widely dispersed enough to cause fear. Fear has systematically been spread by state and religious institutions throughout history.
 
The psychopathic Signs

 
According to psychologists, dictators are the individuals whose narcissism is so extreme and grandiose that they exist in a kind of splendid isolation in which the creation of the grandiose self takes precedence over legal, moral or interpersonal commitments. While the psychopath gives no real affection, he is quite capable of inspiring affection of sometimes fanatical degree in others. Indeed, he has no genuine human qualities, but opportunistically adapts himself to any situation. This is not a normal type of behavior we need to adjust ourselves to, but purely an opportunistic trick.
Psychopaths have no human feelings

 
Psychopaths have no feeling of guilt or remorse no matter what happens. A good example is the famous Khomeini’s response when he was asked about his feeling in his flight to Iran after 15 years in exile, when he surprised a whole nation by saying: “I have no feeling on my return to Iran!“ His spontaneous, unscripted and unadvised reaction to a simple obvious question that would require him to express either empathy or caring and compassion for others, including the millions of his followers waiting enthusiastically for his arrival, shows his real side and his lack of human feelings. Although this little statement in itself was very revealing, it was not seriously taken in consideration at the time. Khomeini’s fumbling with statements and phraseology was not a proof that he was merely unintelligent in the conventional sense, but also showed a typical apathy, no sense of concern for his people.
 

Psychopathic dictators are not alone

 It seems that a dictator is often a product of a whole system. So, a mad dictator is not alone in the arena, his mad followers and supporters are the most reliable helps for him. A dictator would not win without his followers’ help.
A dictator’s subordinate has to be a devoted followers and blindly obedient. Without them Khomeini, Pol Pot, Stalin etc. would not succeed in forming  their dictatorship and sacrificing millions of lives. Devotees are there to cheer, identify, arrest, torture, and kill innumerable individuals as a sign of their loyalty to their leader. In other words, the more devoted they are, the more dictatorial the leader will be, and the more cold-blooded. Even though some of the devoted followers can be the future pathetic victims of the beloved leader, some remain so mesmerised that their last words before execution can be “Heil Hitler!” or “Long live Stalin!” — Hitler’s and Stalin’s purges of his communist comrades showed that depth of devotion.
In reality, Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were not born despotic, but became, at least for a period, heroes of people. People, especially powerless and politically underdeveloped members, rally around their “heroes”, seeing in them both a reflection of themselves and a promise of a “victory” that would release their fears and frustrations, and avenge their sorry and hopeless fate. Of course what they do not realise is that their leaders would not care about people’s fate. To such fanatical leaders, people are an echo chamber for their words and cannon fodder for their beliefs.
 
Religious leaders

 
Normally, political or cult leaders have an outstanding ability to charm and win over followers. They are good at rhetoric and present plausible solutions for any problem. They beguile and seduce through certain logic, but this is not the case for all leaders. Khomeini did not have such an intellectual ability. He was not even able to properly speak Farsi. His success at garnering attention was due to a fatal lack of honesty —many doubted his credentials but did not dare to say so. This is another odd subject to see how a character like Khomeini could seduce his followers. Even later, when Khomeini learnt to answer questions on advice of his advisors who reminded him to be sensitive, he could hardly express his sympathy for his people. Amazingly, this lack of emotion was rarely a problem for his followers. The devotees never expected Khomeini to be assimilated to their genuine problems or even to their Iranian identity.
 
Islamic leadership

All religions share, to one degree or another, a denial of the modern and civilised world. All “true” believers subscribe to a belief in delightful ideals of their archaic thoughts. Religious fanatics believe in a selective class of elite believers (Mullahs /priests /rabbis etc ). They eliminate the possibility of any critical thought. While all these aspects are true for most religions, they are particularly flagrant in Islam and practiced in its political form. The Islamic regime as a recent example of a political Islam characterises the dark period of the Inquisition in a time that the civilised world had already many centuries far from the effects of the Inquisition. However, the difference between these two archaic systems is the danger of religious ideology, which not only is found in mentalities as before but also in methodologies of Islamism. Islam as today practiced, denies the civilised world and forces an unhealthy backwardness of society. In its paranoid and naive fashion, it develops its own perverse ideology of a new “Dar-al-Islam” (territory of Islam), pushing the methods of divine violence into an extreme and dangerous level of a jihadist strategy.

When a dictator is enthroned 

It is in the realm of politics that the psychopath is at his worst. While seemingly in full possession of his political ability, the psychopathic leader demonstrates an inability to comprehend the meaning and significance of his own faults. This is why he never tries to remedy the faults; instead he punishes critics. The psychopath dictator is often astounded to find that people are upset by his exploits, as acknowledged by some enthroned despots. Although he knows intellectually what punishment is decreed for certain crimes, when caught for the same crimes, he puts up elaborate rationalisations and defences, and seems surprised when he is actually punished, as seen in Saddam’s process.

Our psychopathic dictator needs obedient followers. Such devotees are free of remorse. They can be under rare circumstances a national hero, war hero, symbol of pride, but mostly are traitors to their people. Some will ultimately find out that they can lose the head if they desert the camp of leadership; otherwise they remain symbols of shame. If a psychopathic follower becomes a hero of the system, who is very rarely acceptable for his fellow country people, then his “bravery” helps him to win the affection of his fellow followers, but he knows that people one day do not accord him a status of hero; he can be disillusioned by his subsequent comprehension, as shown by many deserters of totalitarian regimes including many ex-Islamists or ex-collaborators of the Islamic regime.
Royal psychopaths
 Another aspect of the thoughtlessness is the obliviousness of the psychopath to punishment. Not only does the threat of future punishment have no power to deter him, but actual punishment does not reform him. All historical experience and most psychiatrists consider such psychopaths untreatable. It is historically proved that there is no way to handle psychopaths when they possess political power. Tragically, as a nation, we will remain in the dark ages as long as some of our people keep choosing or tolerating psychopaths as their leaders.

Mr Mark Zuckerberg
Facebook Headquarters
156 University Avenue
Palo Alto
California 94301-1605

Dear Mr Zuckerberg,

I am writing to ask that you reinstate the Facebook accounts of Maryam Namazie and Mina Ahadi as a matter of urgency. Their accounts were disabled without warning on Monday 13 September 2010. As well as reinstating these accounts, we ask that an explanation is provided as to why they were disabled.

Maryam Namazie and Mina Ahadi are well known human rights campaigners who have worked globally to end the barbaric practice of stoning, as well as other human rights abuses. Both have been awarded Secularist of the Year by the National Secular Society (UK) and named in the top 45 ‘women of the year’ by Elle magazine in Canada.

Ms Namazie and Ms Ahadi’s campaign to save the life of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani – an Iranian woman recently sentenced to death by stoning for adultery – has undoubtedly contributed to the prevention of her execution. Therefore, it is vital that their Facebook accounts be reinstated and their campaigns allowed to continue unfettered; Facebook provides them with an important communications tool and method of increasing support for their work.

Not only were these accounts disabled without warning, but without reason. At present therefore, we have little choice but to assume that their Facebook accounts have disabled for political reasons.

Please clarify the reasons for these accounts being disabled, and whether or not Facebook respects the rights of human rights campaigners to work freely and without prejudice on your website.

We look forward to your immediate response.

Anne Marie Waters, Spokesperson, One Law for All, UK
Terry Sanderson, President, National Secular Society, UK
Ophelia Benson, Editor, Butterflies and Wheels, USA
Hassan Radwan, Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, UK
Joan Smith, Journalist, UK
Professor A. C. Grayling, Philosopher, UK
Fariborz Pooya, Iranian Secular Society, UK
Mahin Alipour, Equal Rights Now, Sweden
Annie Sugier, President, Ligue du Droit Internaitonal des Femmes, France
Nazanin Afshin-Jam, Human Rights Activist and President, Stop Child Executions, Canada
Maria Hagberg, Chair person of the Network Against Honour Related Violence, Sweden
Issam Shukri, Organization to Defend Secularism and Civil Rights in Iraq, Canada
Sonja Eggerickx, President, International Humanist and Ethical Union, Belgium

An opening address delivered by Leo Igwe at the 2nd Annual conference of the Free Society Institute of South Africa, co-hosted  by the International Humanist and Ethical Union.

Date: September 11 2010 Venue Cape Milner Hotel, Cape Town South Africa

Once again the FSI has demonstrated its commitment to the mission of promoting free thought and free speech in South Africa. Last year we all met in this hall for the first conference of this Institute co-hosted by the International Humanist and Ethical Union. And I must say that last year’s event remains one of the best humanist programs I have attended in Africa. I was deeply impressed by the quality of the presentations, debates, and discussions. I was inspired by the curiosity for ideas, search for truth, hunger for knowledge, the spirit of inquiry, critical thinking and openmindedness expressed by the participants. I left South Africa deeply convinced that this nation has got in the FSI a befitting humanist group. So I urge you not to relent in your efforts, commitment and support for the FSI and its mission of promoting free thought and free speech in South Africa. I hope that very soon your organisation will be reckoned one of the most active and vibrant humanist groups on this continent and in the world.

The emergence of humanist groups in Africa opens a new, exciting and promising chapter in the history of African emancipation and enlightenment. The struggle to promote humanism marks another phase in the struggle by Africans for independence and liberation. It opens another chapter in the quest by Africans for emancipation from mental slavery and other forms of slavery. It marks another defining moment in the struggle by African people for intellectual liberation and mental freedom, for true renaissance and enlightenment.

There are few countries on this continent where active humanist groups like this exist. There are few places in Africa where humanists and free thinkers can meet openly to discuss, interact and express themselves without fear. Even in my own country, Nigeria, there are states(in Northern Nigeria) where events like this will be met with death and destruction. Millions of Africans still live in societies or under conditions where they fear to speak their minds or to express their thoughts freely. That tells us how important this meeting is and why we should take this message of hope and renewal beyond Cape Town, to all states in South Africa. That tells you how significant  the work you are doing at the FSI is and the potentials in terms of change, transformation and civilization. I hope the FSI will continue to lead the way in terms of promoting free thought and free speech in South Africa and in Africa as a whole. I hope this Institute will continue to champion the cause of realizing a free society in this country. It is only when a society is free that it can fully realize its potential.

This conference is taking place on a crucial day and date in the history of the world – September 11. Nine years ago some terrorists hijacked planes and caused the death of at least 3000 people in the US. Similar attacks have been planned and executed in other parts of the world.

We are meeting here at a time when the forces of religious fanaticism are ravaging the globe, causing suicide bombing, death and destruction, conflicts and instability in many countries. We are gathered here at a time when millions of people around the world are living in fear for their lives, safety and security – in the air, on the land and on the seas – due to threats posed by religious fanatics. We are meeting here at a time when a new dark age looms around the globe; at a time theocratic governments have taken their jihads and crusades to the United Nations. This conference is taking place at a time people in most countries are confused – or are being confused – as to what constitutes the best moral guide.  

The issue of what should be the best  guide to moral clarity for humanity stares the world in the face. And we need an atmosphere of free thought and free speech to consider, tackle and resolve it. We need an atmosphere that is free from threats from fanatics, terrorists, suicide bombers, jihadists, religious mercenaries and other armies of God to chart out a moral path and discuss, debate, and decide what is best for ourselves.

To the question that brought us here today – is a secular viewpoint our best guide to moral clarity? – my answer is yes. The secular, not religious, outlook provides us a reliable framework for the expression and realization of moral excellence. The secular viewpoint is based on evidence, reason, science, common sense and human beneficence. The secular outlook is open to revision and improvement. Secular morality is a morality for this world and of this world, not for the next; it is a morality for our happiness and well being in the here and now, not in the hereafter. It is a morality for this temporary life not for an eternal afterlife in an imaginary paradise. Secular morality is a morality by us, from us and for us, not a moral decree of God from God and for us ‘wretched’ humans. Secular morality is informed by the quest to be good and to do good for goodness’ sake, not the quest to be good and to do good for God’s sake or for heaven’s sake or to avoid going to Hell.

Simply put, secular morality is a common sense morality. The secular viewpoint puts human moral destiny in human hands, not in the hands of god or clerics. But we must note that both secular and religious outlooks are human creations. They are human viewpoints with human limitations, but advocates of religious outlooks continue to cause confusion by denying this fact.They have done humanity a great disservice by refusing to tell the world the truth and by claiming that the religious moral norms are decrees and commandments handed down as an eternal and unchangeable guide for humanity ages ago. And it is this dogmatic lie and others told in the name of God or Allah by the self-proclaimed prophets and messengers of the ‘most high’ that are responsible for the lack of moral clarity in the religious viewpoint. It is these sacred myths, falsehoods and misconceptions  peddled by the supernatural faiths that morally disqualify religions as the best guide for humanity.

A brief analysis of the September 11 attack – what could have motivated the Islamist attackers – may help us shed some light on the confusion and contradictions embedded in the religious moral outlook – the dangers that religion’s lack of moral clarity poses to the future and survival of humanity, and the risks we human beings run by allowing moral norms guided by supernaturalism, blind faith, primitive superstitions and dogmas to guide society.

No doubt those who planned and carried out the September 11 attacks must have judged their mission to be morally right – yes morally upright by their own standards and by the standards of religious morality.

I dont think the terrorists were really anomic individuals, unaware of the pain, agony, death and destruction their actions could cause. The September 11 attackers were not really bereft of conscience, compassion and fellow feeling. Instead I think the terrorists considered doing such grevious harm to their fellow human beings as consistent with their sacred sense of what is good or right; what ought to be done. The religous outlook actually thrives on sacrificing the natural or the human on the altar of the supernatural and the superhuman. Remember the story of the Biblical Abraham whose horrifying attempt to sacrifice the son was reckoned as a demonstration of faith. So we must understand this warped sense of morality  or sanctity if we are to tackle and eradicate religion and faith-based terrorism in the world. We must strive to rid our minds of these blood-sucking gods that undermine the moral health of our society.

The terrorists believed that their actions were pleasing to Allah who would reward them abundantly for their deeds in the hereafter. Take note of that, reward in the hereafter – whatever that is – 72 virgins and a palatial home in paradise is the driving force of religious morality.

For the Septmber 11 attackers and those who uphold a religous moral viewpoint, what is deemed morally good is what is pleasing to Allah or better what is judged or considered (by whom?) to be pleasing to Allah; what ought to be done is what Allah says, directs and commands – sometimes through the prophets, priests and sheikhs. These commandments and norms are codified in the sacred texts – Torah, Bible, Quran – and traditions, which everyone is expected to read, believe and follow without question as regards the author, source or authenticity. Thus, on hearing that hackneyed expression, ‘In Jesus name’ ‘Thus says the Lord or Allah’, Or ‘In the name of Allah, the most gracious and most merciful’, one should be ready to swing into action without minding the consequences to oneself or to others. The religious moral viewpoint is insensitive to our feelings, to human feelings. Because the ‘words’ (or rather, supposed words) of God or Allah are ‘yes’ and ‘amen’ and should be obeyed without question, hesitation or examination.

Because Allah – an entity from nowhere, somebody that is nobody – is taken to be the best moral guide for everyone including those who do not believe in him or her. So whatever s/he says or is believed to have said – no matter how stupid it is – holds or must hold everywhere and for everybody in secula seculorum (forever and ever). It is believed that Allah had charted the moral path, even when there is no consensus among the religious as to what this moral path is. Our duty as human beings is to follow, obey and abide by this recieved moral code. That reminds me of a hymn that is sung in many christian churches. It goes this way:

Trust and obey. For there’s no other way.

To be happy in Jesus. But to trust and obey….

And the question is this – Trust and obey whom? An imaginary entity?

Why should I trust and obey him or her or it? Trust and obey what? Texts from questionable sources written centuries ago by ignorant people? Should I trust and obey somebody who should not be trusted? Should I just obey orders that are stupid and harmful?

As I noted above, the religious moral viewpoint is mired in vagueness and lack of moral clarity. It has caused many people to abandon doing good, and trying to be good. Instead most people spend (I actually mean waste) much of this short life obeying God or trying to please God. Human beings will continue to wallow in moral confusion and darkness until the advocates of religious viewpoints stop peddling those ‘revealed lies and falsehoods’.

In conclusion, human beings can be good without believing in God. We can be moral without the pretensions of primitive religions. There is no doubt about it. In fact the whole idea of god came about in the attempt by primitive humans to promote and enforce what they concieved to be good -good life and good behaviour. So the religious moral outlook is largely outdated. God is actually a corruption of the good, not the author and dictator of what is good. God has no moral capacity. It does not have the capacity to judge, reward or recognize what is good or evil. Those who think otherwise are greatly mistaken. And it is this mistake that is at the root of religions’ lack of moral clarity. Human beings created God and invested it with all the human and moral attributes in their quest for some order, stability and ‘sanity’ in primitive times. And religions have blindly adopted this primitive idea of organizing and understanding the world and society. Unfortunately many people across the world want these outdated myths and misconceptions to be the basis of our laws, policies, educational and justice systems in this 21st century. They want the world to continue to wallow in moral vagueness, obscurity and darkness. Humanity needs the best moral guide to make the best of this one life we have. And I hope that with programs like this we can initiate the much needed process of enlightening and morally reawakening people around the globe to realize that the secular viewpoint presents us with the best guide to moral clarity.

I wish you all very fruitful deliberations.