Propaganster wrote:
Someone? Well, I would take a bullet for you. smile.gif 
Well that's very decent. I got your back too. smiley: happy

I asked you earlier to define ''Democracy.'' That began with ''a mere word (...).' Of course, I would not expect anyone to be prepared to die for a 'mere word.' But ''Democracy'' is a bit more than that to me. smile.gif
Well for example, if life for the average person was actually better under the dictator's rule (even if only because the country wasn't in turmoil due to war, terrorism and mass displacement) than it goes on to be under supposed democratic rule which proves to be more oppressive in terms of everyday freedoms, what meaning and worth does the word 'democracy' have then?

What 'belief' do you associate with atheism? In another reply, you used the word 'doctrine.' There is no doctrine associated with atheism in and of itself - because atheism is not a belief, or a conviction, in the traditional sense of the word.
Well not believing in god is itself a belief. I wasn't speaking of atheism in general when I referred to doctrine, I was talking about people like Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao, they did have a doctrine, which included an active intolerance and hostility to religion, and the belief that moulding a new nation without religion was the way forward.

Hitler was never an atheist, and many close to Staline have stated that he was actually a Deist (and he believed in Jesus Christ). That leaves (potentially) Pol Pot and (more certainly) Mao. But even then, their atheism is not what they relied on to build their communistic-materialistic doctrines, they created religions around that.
I never mentioned Hitler myself, I personally don't include him. As for Stalin, who knows what was in his head, but what we do know is that none of his actions included promoting deism as Russia's new religion.