Talk:Anti-clericalism/Archives/2010/February

pov?

This article is just idiotic religious propagandistic shit. Wikipedia isn't great.

POV

This article is not balanced - it is Catholic propaganda that attempts to present all defenders of Clericism as martyrs and all critics of it as murderers. Anti-clericism was an integral part of the philosophy of the Age of Enlightenment and was a response to the abuse of religious institutions by monarchs and tyrants to protect their power and oppose the spread of human rights. A balanced article would contain references to the anti-clerical writings of Enlightenment philosophers (and religious denominations) in a range of nations including Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin in America, Denis Diderot, Baron d'Holbach and Voltaire in France and the Deists, Quakers and Congregationalists in Britain. --Tediouspedant (talk) 20:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Most of the persecutors had an axe to grind as well, Henry VIII, Robespierre, Marat, Danton, Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, various Mexican tyrants. Enlightened? Proponents of "human rights?" France was a catastrophe, ultimately resulting in a world war (Napoleonic Wars).

You mention the US, where colonists, who had governed themselves, fought to get that right back. But not in most other places. And the US did not scapegoat clerics.

Pre-Keynes, busts were caused by whatever establishment was in power, collecting wealth to itself, which all government does normally. This resulted in a depression where sometimes, someone threw out the "bad guys" (people in power), then installed themselves, resulting in the same thing a few decades down the road. Most people murdered were guilty of nothing except existing and doing what they thought was right. Student7 (talk) 23:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)