Communion Of Dreams

Just down the road.

[This post contains mild spoilers about Communion of Dreams.]

I’ve had some people say that the Edenists I created for Communion of Dreams are just absurdly overblown – that I have unfairly mischaracterized both fundamentalist religion and radical environmentalists.  I don’t usually argue with people who say things like this – my goal is not to convince everyone that my book of speculative fiction is right in all of its particulars.  I just hope that they will continue to pay attention to the world around them, and see what is happening.

Like this item, via PZ Myers:

Should Evolutionists Be Allowed to Roam Free in the Land?

* * *

Clearly then, “evolutionists should not be allowed to roam free in the land.” All that remains for us to discuss is “What should be done with evolutionists?” For the purposes of this essay, I will ignore the minor issue of Western-style jurisprudence and merely mention possible solutions to the “evolutionism problem,” leaving the legal details to others:

  • Labor camps. Their fellow believers were high on these.  But, my position would be that most of them have lived their lives at, or near the public trough. So, after their own beliefs, their life should continue only as long as they can support themselves in the camps.
  • Require them to wear placards around their neck, or perhaps large medallions which prominently announce “Warning:Evolutionist! Mentally Incompetent – Potentially Dangerous.” I consider this option too dangerous.
  • Since evolutionists are liars and most do not really believe evolution we could employ truth serum or water-boarding to obtain confessions of evolution rejection. But, thisshould, at most, result in parole, because, like Muslims, evolutionist religion permits them to lie if there is any benefit to them.
  • An Evolutionist Colony in Antarctica could be a promising option. Of course inspections would be required to prevent too much progress. They might invent gunpowder.
  • A colony on Mars would prevent gunpowder from harming anyone but their own kind, in the unlikely event they turned out to be intelligent enough to invent it.

That’s an excerpt from the close of the piece, after the author has gone through some effort to define who ‘evolutionists’ are (he seems to mix up socialism, communism, Nazism, and support for slavery.  No, really, he says that ‘evolutionists’ are all of these things.)  Feel free to read the entire piece.

Now, as one commentor over at Pharyngula said, “that’s some weapons-grade crazy.”

My intent here isn’t to get into a discussion on this particular fellow’s pathology.  It is simply to point out that this stuff is out there, and in my experience is fairly widespread.  He’s just down the road from me about 100 miles, and growing up and living in the Midwest I have met plenty of his type.  There are a lot of people who would take such an eliminationist approach to all their perceived enemies.  Unfortunately, as we have also seen with the Earth Liberation Movement, there are also those who claim to be radical environmentalists who are willing to take violent action.  Melding two such groups was an easy step in my mind.

Don’t misunderstand me – I am not claiming that all religious adherents are violent extremists.  Nor are all environmentalists.  Hardly.  But these groups are out there.  They are not a figment of my imagination.  And if we forget that, or ignore them, we may find ourselves in a world akin to Communion of Dreams (or someplace worse.)

Jim Downey

4 Comments so far
Leave a comment

You know I was thinking of your Edenists the other day – I’ve found them a very useful concept to merge together two groups that I don’t like :D. It was over the colonisation of Mars, and if something like this might happen then.

Some environmentalists do portray humankind as a virus or something, and I could see attempts to sabotage the colonisation as a real possibility. As for religious motivations, Sagans ‘Contact’ comes to mind – the movie anyway.

On another note, dosn’t it worry you that people like Tom Willis are allowed to carry guns? Seeing something like this shocks my European values itself, but add that the US allows people to own small arsenals in their homes would frighten me.

I don’t know if you’ve come across the Orcinus blog, but they have an illuminating series on ‘Eliminationism in America’. Again, disturbing.

Comment by Troika21

Hey Troika, glad that you find the concept of the Edenists useful. And as I have mentioned in various posts, I do owe a great debt to Sagan – not just Contact, but most of his books.

On another note, dosn’t it worry you that people like Tom Willis are allowed to carry guns? Seeing something like this shocks my European values itself, but add that the US allows people to own small arsenals in their homes would frighten me.

Not in the slightest.

OK, take your heart meds . . . 😉

By probably your standards, and even by the standards of many Americans, I have what you would characterize as a “small arsenal” here in my home. In fact, I am carrying a pistol right now – as I always do, except as prohibited by law. Check the “RKBA” category there on the left, and you’ll see that I have discussed this issue many times.

Partly, this attitude is philosophical. Partly, it is pragmatic. Let’s talk the pragmatic part first. There are over 200 million guns in this country. Probably about 80 million handguns. That is simply too many to try and get rid of by fiat – particularly when a substantial number of Americans see nothing wrong with individuals owning such weapons. England has effectively eliminated the private ownership of most guns, and in particular handguns – yet death by firearm is a rising problem. Why? Because people don’t obey the law, and smuggle them in. With a country our size, it would be impossible to keep out all guns – just look at the problem we have with drugs being smuggled in here.

Philosophical . . . hmm, I see I don’t have “Do you own a fire extinguisher?” on this site. I will remedy that. In the meantime, check it out there on Daily Kos, the very left-wing blog where I also post a fair amount. Beyond that, I just think that people should be more self-reliant, and a firearm allows that to be the case – even a small, elderly woman can defend herself against an assailant, when armed.

Do I worry about Willis shooting me? Not really. And I would much rather have him try that, than to load up a van with a mixture of diesel and fertilizer and blow up a building. Individual firearms are not really a threat to the country – kooks deciding to be violent are a threat to the country.

Jim D.

Comment by Communion of Dreams

[…] Government, Guns, Politics, Preparedness, RKBA, Society, Violence Hmm. As noted in comments in the previous post, I seem to never have cross-posted this essay here from Daily Kos. So, I thought I […]

Pingback by Do you own a fire extinguisher? Why? « Communion Of Dreams

I didn’t mean to imply that Willis will be shooting anyone, it was more a comment on Eliminationism and kooks, of which America seems to have more than its fair-share.

Comment by Troika21

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: