Religion is certainly the prime candidate. In every example of secular entities that go bad, there is a leader. Hitler, Stalin, etc. It is these charismatic leaders that enable things to get out of hand. In democratic countries our leaders are not very charismatic.
This statement is wrong on so many different fronts.
To start with, you have just nulled your previous statements about Kony being representative of christianity
And secular/democratic society is most certainly not an automatic safe guard against going off the rails (waterboarding?)
Esp where free speech is the case. While many look at our current president as charismatic, most do not. We can say all kinds of bad stuff about him. And in 4 or 8 years he is gone. I can't remember the last time I voted for candidate and not just for the best of the two. Several times I voted against a candidate and not for one. No one I know would blindly follow any US politician. We see all their flaws. Our system of government is far less likely to produce a monster leader. Now in societies where there are leaders for life, or leaders that have complete control you might have a point. Kim Jong Il or now his son for instance.
Each system has its inherent weaknesses. Arguably democracy is simply a protection measure for a society that can only manage inept/corruptible/etc leaders (or at the very least, forces them to relegate their nefarious activities to subterfuge or a shroud of political speak). The problem with democracy is that it rides on the back of the lowest common denominator, so its not the best tool for dealing with some sort of crisis thoroughly embedded into the psyche of its communities (environmental issues vs "but who is going to give me a job" is a good example).
IOW democracy is an unlikely system to come across as capable of navigating a socially catalyzed crisis
The problem with religion is that even though a leader might be flawed, he may still be God's favorite. And so people will follow him. Jim Jones for example.
Jim Jones?
God's favorite?
wtf?
The leaders are just a proxy for God and we must all do what God commands of us. If that means destroy the evil and wicked atheists (or any other group) then so be it. Would you risk your eternal soul going to hell by disobeying?
religious communities are a zillion times more complex than this caricature you just rendered.
The fact that the world is dealing with a handful of angry muslims (in geographic regions inextricably tied to internationally valued commodities I might add) instead of several billion plainly illustrates otherwise
The thing about Atheists is that we don't tend to be a cohesive group. We have no leaders. There are some famous atheists that we look up to. But we would be unlikely to follow them on any crusade.
Its kind of silly to suggest that if a system has no leaders it is not capable of violence (since human society, by its very nature, requires authority, leadership etc in some form or other - if you don't believe me just try driving on the wrong side of the road).
History is full of examples of the banners of atheism being drawn up for the very reason you are denying - to form groups.
I mean what to speak of notable atheist philosophers, its a hard stretch even on this site to find an atheist that doesn't have a contingent social agenda and ideology.
:shrug:
