Comment: Hiroshima & Nagasaki - Secularism Failing Humanity
Last Friday (6th August 2010) marked the 65th anniversary of the slaughter of 220,000 innocent human beings from the first atomic bombs in history. The bombs landed in Japan, destroying the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This cowardly act has remained symbolic of secular regimes' modus operandi in trying to achieve their foreign policy goals. The outdated political cliché, as expressed by Lord Louis Mountbatten, "if the bomb kills Japanese and saves casualties on our side I am naturally not going to favour the killing our people unnecessarily..." must now stand to scrutiny as it obviously avoids the fact that Japanese soldiers were largely murdering soldiers, while American soldiers were largely murdering Japanese civilians.
This is no different to the massacres in Fallujah where the American army decided to use white phosphorous on the civilian population, and let us not forget the stealth nuclear war in the region due to the depleted uranium bombs which created uranium dust in the atmosphere, subsequently effecting the region's population for decades.
We have all seen the pictures of deformities and the anguish of mothers not knowing where and how to breastfeed their children as they couldn't recognise or find the innocent baby's mouth. In spite of this secular foreign policy, there is another policy of 'desensitising' by using cold abstract words like "collateral damage". So why does this happen? Why do secular regimes have a repeated history of slaughter and murder, cowardly wiping out civilian populations when their military objectives seem distant and unobtainable? The answer lies in the concept of a worldview.
A worldview is a philosophy of living that enables us to make sense of life and our daily experiences. The worldview we adopt affects the way we process ideas, and allows us to understand society and our place in it. A worldview is important especially in our society today - this is because the contemporary world has had a huge effect on human psychology. We seem unable to deal with the unpredictable changes and increased complexity of life - subsequently stress, uncertainty and frustration become common and our minds are overloaded with information. A worldview is the framework that ties all of this together, and allows us to understand life's complexity and unpredictability, it helps us make the critical decisions that will shape our future and our own selves, and it aids us in providing a picture of the whole. Worldviews vary and can range from being shallow to comprehensive.
A shallow worldview is one that just gives us the framework to react to day-to-day experiences, such as work and friendships. This type of worldview is usually formed via our previous experiences in life and it develops by creating templates of understanding the world from our history with it. This type of worldview is problematic as it makes us stuck in the past with no possibility of viewing the world in a positive or different way that will enable our transformation. It is limited in its scope as it becomes only as comprehensive as your experiences, and individually our experiences are every limited.
A comprehensive worldview, as discussed by the philosopher LeoApostel, encompasses everything in life and it includes various components. For instance, it provides a model for the world by answering the basic question "who are we?" In addition it provides an explanation usually answering "why is the world the way it is?" and "where did we come from?" Another important part of a comprehensive worldview includes extrapolating from the past into the future to answer the question "where are we going?" It should also answer "what is good and what is evil?" In other words, to include morality and ethics, while giving us a sense of purpose, direction and goals for our actions. Additionally, the answer to the question "what for?" may help us to understand the real meaning of life and a comprehensive worldview must answer "how should we act?" thereby helping us to solve practical problems. Lastly a comprehensive worldview should answer the question "what is true and what is false?", this is equivalent to what in philosophy is called "epistemology" or "the theory of knowledge", therefore it would allow us to distinguish between what is correct and what is incorrect.
The slaughter of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are practical examples of how worldviews affect our outlook on life. The secular worldview views nationalism and self preservation as key values, in addition to the fact that, according the secularist, human beings have no purpose other than the one we make for ourselves. So from this worldview the senseless killing of hundreds can be justified. In contrast to this, the Islamic worldview perceives the fulfilment of our purpose for existence as a key value - which is to worship God and therefore be moral. Therefore someone adopting the Islamic worldview would argue: that if our existence is to worship God and in order to preserve our existence we have to break our purpose for existing, then what is the point of our existence in the first place? In other words the killing of innocent lives en mass could never be justified. As the companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) said, which can be found in the hadith collection of Imam Malik’s Muwatta in the Book of Jihad,
"I advise you ten things: Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly."
In light of above it can be seen why the secular regimes destroy humanity in order to ‘preserve’ humanity. Something that deservedly should be called the 'humanity of inhumanity' - in other words the paradox of the secular worldview.