Remembering Avijit Roy

I cannot think of any other words to supplement this anniversary eulogy of Avijit Roy (see below).  However, beforehand I would like to take this opportunity to add a few remarks about the struggle against international Islamic theocracy and the moral ambiguity that has come to enshroud any rational debate about it.

The tragic fate of Roy and the plight of atheists and secularists in Bangladesh- as I have written about before- is a real and nasty strain of phobia, i.e. atheistophobia, which is not receiving the fractional attention it deserves (with exception to some secular circles in the blogsphere).  The hyperbolic “Islamophobia” meme can’t even pale in comparison to the bloodied trail of Islamic atheistophobia.  Of course sanctimonious Islamopaths, from the likes of Mehdi Hassan and Linda Sarsour, coasting on the guilty white liberalism of western sympathies, could care less about the real global injustice taking place by the clutch of these outdated nomadic dogmas.

Instead, the sensitivity mongers are whining about “free speech fundamentalism” and a few isolated and statistically overblown cases of anti-Muslim backlash in the West.  Certainly none of these incidents represent actual centrally organized activities directed against Muslims, they are just a few bad apples.  In contrast, the brutal and savage killings being coordinated against secularists and freethinkers in Bangladesh are almost always traced back to militant Islamic factions, such as the Ansurallah Bangla Team which claimed responsibility for the murder of Roy.  These radical groups have also produced “hitlists” of blasphemous heretics marked for elimination from the land of God.  Couple this with the fact that just two days after another atheistophobic murder took place in Bangladesh, the Inspector General of Police responded by placing the blame on those who insensitively criticize the Islamic religion.  Never mind the pledge of many other state authorities, at the same time, to double-down on those who dare to upset the sensitivities of the religious, while it is the religious who are slaying down the impious thought-criminals in their own homes and in front of their own families.  Can you imagine the outrage after an anti-Muslim hate crime in America or Europe, if a government bureaucrat of the respective nation reacted by reminding the Muslim community that the best insurance policy of public safety would be for Muslims to practice less of their religion? What about apprehending them for failing to comply? Such an outcome is unimaginable because no civilized free nation would engage in such blatant illiberal incivility, at least not without facing a political media storm.

In fact, a Pew Research poll found that in 2014 the French public had the most favorable attitude toward Muslims (when compared to other European nations).  However, even more remarkable, after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in 2015 Muslim favorability went up (from 72 to 76 percent).  Evermore, when the distribution was broken down to the category of respondents who registered a “very favorable view” of Muslims, that number almost doubled (from 14 to 25 percent).  On the other hand, according to the French government, 50 percent of European recruits who join the Islamic State come from France.  In America, the post-9/11 figures increased in the favor of Muslims as well, according to the same Pew study, while in 2014 more than 50 percent of hate crimes were actually anti-Semitic and less than 20 percent were motivationally anti-Muslim.  These numbers are sobering and boggling when compared to the polling data gathered by the Center for Security Policy, which found 1 in 4 Muslims expressing support for violent action against anyone who insults the prophet Muhammad (though the sample size was only 600 people).

Muslim culture warriors have made a career out of hijacking every Islam-related tragedy and turning it into a stage for their own pity party.  This is not groundbreaking news per se.  What is more irritating is having to swallow the apologia of their liberal lapdogs who, instead of weeping for the real victims of theocracy, would rather waste time and space to bandaid the hurt feelings of the religiously offended.  I am sorry, but I could care less about the insensitivities of the “free speech fundamentalists” while psycho-theocratic sadists are poaching bloggers and writers as if it were a bloody hunting contest.  If liberals and humanists want to stand up for justice, they should provide a platform and shelter to Islamic critics and freethinkers whose very lives actually depend upon such accommodations.  A good example to follow would be the secular Center for Inquiry, which recently provided refuge for the Bengali writer and humanist, Taslima Nasrin.  Instead of emulating such good deeds, commercial liberals have become cultural engineers and sensitivity counselors employed to feed the needy irrationalities of a certain religious minority of thinking.

Take Mehdi Hassan, already briefly alluded to above, who has become a poster child of the multicultural left, a photogenic face for Muslim interfaith relations, an advocate of free speech and equally a critic of Islamophobia. All sounds pretty reasonable so far, right?  I also forgot to mention, he thinks slanderers of Muslims should be threatened and censored with punishing sanctions.  It also turns out this ambassador of “moderate Islam” has spoken distastefully about non-Muslims, stating they are not intelligent enough to comprehend or appraise the truth value of Islam.  This is the same man who wishes to lecture everyone about the impropriety of “demonising” minority communities in the free press.

So next time left-wing columnist Owen Jones wants to cry a river in the Independent about “standing with Mehdi Hassan and other Muslims facing Islamophobia”, he should first familiarize himself with Hassan’s poisonous rhetoric towards unbelievers- those “unintelligent cattle”, according to the resident victim of Islamophobia.  Now, do we secularists demand censure of Hassan’s foul mouth, “demonizing” speech if I may say, as our fellow unbelievers are being mutilated in the streets of Bangladesh or imprisoned in Saudi Arabia? Have we been afforded the benefit of a protective term like “secularophobia” out of solidarity with the destroyed victims of international theocracy? Was Hassan outed for supplying maddened Islamic religious audiences with the hate speech they so anxiously hunger for and thrive on? No, this hypocrite can comfortably continue his double career of being both a preacher from the podium of hate and a victim at the receiving end, when it suits him.  As to the claim Jones makes (in his 2012 article) about measuring French Islamophobia by the electoral success of the anti-immigration National Front, the latest 2014/2015 Pew numbers (mentioned above) thoroughly refute this claim.  Jones reechoed his liberal concerns in a recent column for the Guardian.  Following the Orlando shooting (which caused Jones, a homosexual, to emotionally erupt on public television), liberals now seriously need to recalibrate where their values and principles lie.  As the law of contradiction would have it, one does not need to be a bigot or a hatemonger to call out the bigotry or hatred of a certain ideology.  Whoever considers this a moral paradox has certainly confused the rules of logic.

In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx (whose number one fan I am not) excitedly called upon the workers of the world to unite against the oppressive bourgeoise class.  Well, in the same revolutionary spirit, I am pleading to the better sensibilities of sincere liberals and humanists worldwide to rise up against the impending threat of Islamic theocracy.  As the radius of Islamic violence has reached an international scale of destruction and mayhem, scores of lives have been claimed (both Muslims and non-Muslims) across the board.  We have been offered a frightening glimpse of the competing narrative for universal truth, a civilizational future secured by the terror of divine justice- an Orwellian plot with a theocratic adaptation.  Many brave souls have endured great pain and struggle so humanity can persevere in spite of the horrific alternative.  Let us not allow their noble sacrifices to go in vain.  We must stand up against theocracy and authoritarianism.

Avijit Roy was a fighter. He was a fighter, relentless against the oppressive forces of superstition and dogma closing in around him, suffocating society, poisoning minds, mangling thoughts. He was a fighter against those maligning the most valuable of human virtues–reason, science, and compassion. He was a fighter against those peddling pseudoscience. He was a fighter against those suppressing skepticism and promoting the vice of blind faith. He was a fighter against those promulgating baseless myths and bronze-age ethical values.

(Read the rest of the eulogy on Roy here)

(For further information about Islamist killings taking place in Bangladesh, visit my personal blog)

4 Responses

  1. Pete says:

    Hi! Identifying myself as a liberal and now a humanist after too many years getting over my Christian upbringing), I never the less believe Islam is the greatest threat to all free thinkers. It is a fascism, and being authoritive, is against my left libertarian principles.

    Thanks to your article, I am no longer in conflict with my conscience. To not be any longer fearful of being called an Islamophobe when I encourage apostasy.

    This lefty will now proudly fight for our freedom and also make others aware of the ‘Secularophobia’ #Secularophobia.

  2. Face_The_Truth says:

    My sincere apology to all readers at FaithFreedom.Org website for my writing in a previous post in this current thread by my own saying:

    Amongst so-called “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”, one common feature is visible and that is tolerance and support for Muslims and Christians…

    As usual, I often miss WORDS in my typing; so, please pardon my unintentional mistake(s).

    My sentence should read:

    Amongst so-called INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”, one common feature is visible and that is tolerance and support for Muslims and Christians…

    Because, I observe there are differences in thought processes amongst INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, “Atheists” AND American or European “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”.

    INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists” always find faults with “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma).

    BUT, INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists” NEVER SEEM to criticize Muslims and Christians!

    INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists” will FALSELY claim, Muslims are VICTIMS of Islam, rather than telling the actual TRUTH that Muslims are the followers of bloody, genocidal ideology of Islam!

    “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma) is ALWAYS the “culprit” and the “evil-doer” in the minds of INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”.

    In the minds of INDIAN “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”, ONLY IF “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma) disappears from earth, there will remain NO problem.

    In another sentence I wrote:

    But, from them, Islam or Christianity — in one way or another — is very scientific as well as very monotheistic.

    But, it should read as:

    But, from them WE OFTEN HEAR, Islam or Christianity — in one way or another — is very scientific as well as very monotheistic.

    This mindset of people who were (are) born “Hindus”, but denigrate “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma) at every opportunity they get boggles my temperament.

    But the reality is, if all Indians suddenly become “Christians” overnight, India’s economic problems will NOT go away.

    Various parts of Indian subcontinent were ruled by both Muslims and Christians for centuries; but the historical fact is, both Muslims and Christians DID NOT solve the economic problems of native Pagan people, rather looted with full fists everything that native Pagan people had and inherited from their forefathers!

    Yet, we’ve heard very noted and highly influential Indian “Hindus” proclaiming the followings:

    1. ‘…These (British Christian) Gurus have been sent by God from far off lands.’

    — G.H. Deshmukh alias “Lokhitawadi” in 1848 A.D. in Shatapatre No. 46

    This view was also shared by Justice M.G. Ranade and “Mahatma” Phule.

    2. ‘It must indeed be considered our good fortune that when Christian missionaries set out to spread Christianity in the world, they did not forget India…”

    — Keshava Chandra Sen, Brahmo Samaj Leader in 1860 A.D.

    3. “Mahatma” Phule started Satya Shodhak Samaj (Society for Search of Truth) in 1873 A.D.

    Everyone joining the Society had to take an oath of allegiance to the British Christian Imperial Crown.

    4. ‘How can Hindus, who were ruled by Muslims for 700 years and are being ruled by the British for last 75 years claim to have a glorious past?’

    — G.G. Agarkar in ‘Sudharak’ (Reformer) in 1885 A.D.

    Of course, G.G. Agarkar would NOT say the same about the Spaniards or the Portuguese who were ruled by the Arabs for 600-700 years.

    G.G. Agarkar’s native Maharashtra was ruled by Muslims for 380 years (1296 A.D. to 1674 A.D.) and not 700 years, but that historical TRUTH did not matter!

    5. Gopal Krishna Gokhale founded Servants of Indian Society in 1905.

    The members of this order were committed to a frank acceptance of the British Christian connection as ordained in the inscrutable dispensation of Providence for India’s good.

    (Ref: Political India 1832-1932′, J. Cunning, editor, 1932, p.186)

    This despite the horrors of British Christian administration during the plague outbreak of 1897 A.D. and 7 years of suppressive reign of British Christian imperialist Lord Curzon (1898-1905).

    6. ‘The Hindus’ has been a life of continuous defeat. It is a mode for survival of which every Hindu will feel ashamed’

    — Dr. B. R. Ambedkar in 1937 A.D.

  3. Face_The_Truth says:

    Amongst so-called “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”, one common feature is visible and that is tolerance and support for Muslims (i.e., followers of Islam) and Christians (i.e., followers of Christianity) at the expense of “Hindus” (i.e., followers of Sanãtana Dharma).

    There’re people like Avijit Roy and M.N. Roy who were born “Hindus”, but from time to time denigrated “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma); because, they believed (or believe) that “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma) is full of SUPERSTITIONS.

    For them “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma) is bad, because it is UNSCIENTIFIC.

    But, from them, Islam or Christianity — in one way or another — is very scientific as well as very monotheistic.

    It never occurred to the so-called “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists” that, throughout our known history Islam and Christianity prospered through Pagan people’s wealth.

  4. Truth Seeker says:

    @All

    Indian were always great in ancient history specially

    enlightened sages who reached state of Samaadhi were far higher in wisdom than Jesus it reflects from their writing according to which

    Creation of our Solar System: Why, how, where and when it all started. The three causes – the efficient cause, the material cause and the common cause (skill/knowledge, time, space and labour/instrument.)

    Nothing in this world can be produced without proper application.” Mimansa Darshan Written by Jemini

    “Nothing can be done or made without the expenditure of time.” Vaisheshika Darshan written by Kanad

    “Nothing in this world can be produced without the material cause.” Niyaya Written by Guatam

    “Nothing can be made without the requisite skill, knowledge and thought.” Yoga Written by Patanjli

    “Nothing can be made without the definite combination of atoms.” Sankhaya Darshan wirtten by Kapil

    “Nothing can be made without a Maker.” Vedanta Darshan written by Rishi Vyas

    FACT: Creation of the world or anything created by man can never come into being without a maker, material, skill/knowledge, time, space and labour/instrument.

    According to Darshan Scriptures

    There are three eternal (without beginning and without end) entities, God (primary efficient cause, Soul, the secondary efficient cause and matter, the material cause. Since God, soul and matter are eternal entities, creation and dissolution have to be an on going eternal process and not one time phenomena.
    WHY:The purpose of creation is two-fold: The Creator gets to exercise His creative energy and souls need to reap their rewards or punishments of previous actions virtuous or sinful.

    The first combination is called the beginning of Creation. This is the joining of the highly subtle, indivisible separately-existing particles called atoms (or more appropriately correct – electrons) derived from the primitive ether. The various combinations of atoms, in different proportions and ways, give rise to various grades and conditions, of subtle and gross matter until it reaches the gross visible multiform stage called the universe. That which brings about the first combination existed before the combination, and shall exist after the component parts are pushed asunder. This is called the Cause. That which comes into existence after the combination, and ceases to exist after it has come to an end is called the Effect. That out of which something is made is called a Cause. Whoever produces an Effect out of a Cause is called the Maker.

    HOW: God energized the subtle Eternal Primordial Matter (Atoms) and the first principle, WISDOM was produced. This reduces matter to one degree less subtler which led to the principle of INDIVIDUALITY. However, it is still less subtler than the five Subtle Entities, optic, auditory, olfactory, gustatory and tactile: (the spiritual senses or the media through which these senses make contact with the soul through the mind).

    As per Sankhya Darshan

    This further led to the creation of the principles of SENSATION (hearing, seeing, smell, taste and touch) and the five principles of ACTION (speech, grasp, locomotion, reproduction and excretion) plus the principle of ATTENTION. These are all less subtle by passing through various stages of less subtle conditions of matter (action and reaction) give rise to the five subtle principles (the five elements- inanimate objects of creation) SPACE (MATTER), AIR ( or gas), HEAT (fire or electricity), LIQUIDS, and SOLIDS respectively. The order of dissolution is the reverse. Of these twenty-four, matter in the primitive state is uncreated. After solids come all the formation of the planetary systems which, by the way, is not the only one since space is infinite these systems are infinite also and beyond counting. They then start to rotate and revolve, thus the concept of time began and when the condition of the first region is right for habitation, vegetation and living creatures and then intelligent life forms take hold.

    WHERE: That region was called Trivistaph, now known as Tibet, northern part of Aryavarta which is India today. Thousands of people were created and among the four purest souls were revealed four Vedas, instructions of ethics, morals and all sciences in the language of Sanskrit which were then taught to the rest of the population. These instructions are necessary as physical man is 100% matter and evil is inherent in matter.

    “That condition of matter in which the intellect-promoting, passion-exciting and stupidity-producing qualities are found combined in equal proportions is called the eternal elementary matter.” The Light of Truth.

%d bloggers like this: