History provides us with quite a few incontrovertible evidences of religious atrocities, grotesque deeds perpetrated in the name of Yahweh, Allah, or any number of deities. Mention the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the witch burnings of the middle ages, or other such examples, and many religious believers seem to become unsettled and defensive. One of the favorite responses of modern Christians is to cite what they believe are atheist atrocities, as if it would excuse their religion from its own "sins". What are atheist atrocities? According to Christians, they are acts of inhumane violence that are committed by "atheist regimes". These regimes are apparently the dictatorships of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, and Pol Pot, to name the most common examples.

Assertions like these are frequently made by people who exhibit little understanding of history, government, religion, or atheism. It is not all that clear that Hitler was an atheist, or that it factored into his rule, but it is no secret that he used religion as a tool of manipulation ("...today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator"[1]). However, I am not going to go into detail on the personal beliefs of each of the dictators mentioned above, because there is a much easier and more appropriate way to address these accusations.

I. Atheistic vs. Totalitarian

The religious critic may be correct to claim that the regimes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were atheistic, yet it is only in the context that they fiercely discouraged religious practice. Why would they do such a thing? Because they were convinced that there was no god? Or was it perhaps due to the fact that religion might threaten their power or control over the people? Is it a coincidence that all the regimes which Christians list as examples of atheist atrocities are also totalitarian regimes? Totalitarianism may be thought of as a form of state-worship, where the ruling class demands control over the lives of all its citizens.

It could even be argued that Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot's regimes actually resembled religion more than they resembled atheism. In either case, an authority figure demands unwavering support and devotion, observance is strictly enforced, and disobedience is punished heavily. Under totalitarian regimes, worship of God is replaced by worship of the state or dictator. Atheism does not advocate worship or intellectual surrender to any force, and promoting free-thought, reason, and logic can only help to eliminate blind compliance with such oppressive groups.

Let's consider what motivated these regimes to commit the heinous acts that they did. Was it an issue of religious belief or a lack thereof? Probably not. The atrocities of totalitarian regimes are typically motivated by the desire for power, as retaliation against rebellion, or other factors. Atheism provides no excuse or motivation for such things though, and atheism that is coupled with reason and rationality can only be the antithesis of the dogmatisms and anti-inquiry attitudes expressed by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. However, all these points are merely side commentary to the major problem with the assertion of atheist atrocities.

II. What Atheism is Not

Atheism is not a belief system or ethical system, and it is certainly not anything that you could build an entire government around. Atheism is merely one simple proposition: the rejection of theism - as I established in the article, Is Atheism a Religion?. If a Christian tells you that God exists and you reply, "I don't believe it", that is atheism. Anything more is a personal philosophy which is relative to each individual. Since atheism is no ethical code and really contains no moral instruction in its single proposition, it cannot be responsible for any atrocities. There is nothing to indicate that Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot structured their regimes around the rejection of theism, but Christians see something that actively seeks to destroy or suppress religion and they ignorantly label it atheism.

Atheism does not imply a desire to eliminate religion. If you do not believe in the existence of ghosts, does it also mean you want to see all belief in ghosts come to an end? There may be some correlation among the two groups, of course, but the former does not necessitate the latter. Similarly, not all atheists want to eradicate religion, and many of us would hate to see it come to its end through violence or injustice. Speaking from my own perspective, I believe that religion is a negative force of irrationality in our world, and I would like to see it eventually fade out. But I hope you will not assume this to be the case among all atheists.

III. Why Argue Over Atrocities Anyway?

It may be interesting to contemplate the apparent correlation between faith in God and some of the horrifying deeds that have been committed in the name of God, but I believe there is little we can factually state about the matter. Religion may occasionally lead some believers to atrocious behavior, but not every Muslim is a suicide bomber and not every Christian is a bloodthirsty crusader. It is better, in my opinion, to judge the merits of a belief system by its own doctrines, and not the examples of some followers who may be extreme or fundamentalist in their interpretations. However, if those doctrines support fanatical behavior, then that is another issue, one which will be discussed in a future article.

Charging atheism with responsibility for the atrocities of totalitarian regimes is flat-out dishonesty or ignorance. Some Christians contend that atheism must bear the blame, because those regimes adopted a man-centered worldview that was atheistic in nature. Yet as I have already stressed, atheism offers no complete worldview or belief system - no more of one than is created by claiming that you do not believe in unicorns, leprechauns, or fairies. Rejecting theism will impact or influence one's worldview, but atheism alone provides absolutely no justification for committing such atrocities as the totalitarian regimes have done.

1. Hitler, A. (1925) Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Ch. 2.