"Barbarians always win"... this must be why most people believe the Earth is flat and revolves around the Sun.

Wait, I'm just being sarcastic.

Then again, there's a dating site for flat-earth believers... but that just goes to show that idiots exist, not that they "win" anything.

Stop bashing moderates, this is the same argument of extremists. With other extremists we can fight because there is no moral high ground, it is open warfare and we are in advantage in numbers, By victory!!!
Alt right do it, extreme leftists do it, fundamentalists do it etc.
The moderates you can talk, you can be rational, it might be impossible to change minds but at least you can bargain, you can find common ground.
Extremists is just win or loose, and the endgame is always open conflict, and anyone that thinks that escalating the conflict towards open conflict is the best way to deal with a situation is because he/she will not be on the front line doing the dirty work.
We need to de-escalate any conflict to a point that people can listen to each other.

The problem with moderates is they still think of atheism as evil and therefore will be subject to pressure through religious belief to side with the extremists....

Moderates are usually much nicer than fundies and the rigidly orthodox, but they often have a blind spot for the fundies' religious nastiness -- and often a total unwillingness to challenge it. It is almost as if they would enjoy being sent to fundie re-education camps.

Neither of your views are supported.

"The real villains" sound like something the endless Harris bashing youtube channels might use to smear him.
Harris is on record saying religious moderates are better than extremists, so your choice of words seems suspicious to me.

I don't know the full context of the quote but given what I've heard him say, I suspect the point he's making relates to moderates giving the extremist their power and their cover by indirectly supporting the same doctrine - even if they interpret those differently.

Calling moderates "villains" is ridiculous but one can make an argument they are not exactly a problem for the extremists recruitment programs.

"Get rid of the moderates, the argument goes, and we can have a fair fight: scientific atheists versus religious extremists. If Sam Harris knew history, he would know the result of all such encounters. The barbarians win. They always do."

• Are you suggesting Harris is advocating an all out war between religious and non-religious people?
  If he is talking about having a discussion - an intellectual debate - as I suspect he is; the barbarians do not always win. The barbarians didn't win me over and I believe that is true for most of the people here.

I like your criticism too his book, you probably will give a good debate on stage, I havent been convence 100% in either side, but your argument is very fascinating.

Somehow, and no offense, but if I hear the arguments of Sam Harris on one hand and the arguments of some dude called Matias on the other, Sam Harris will always get my vote regardless of your baseless doubts on his knowledge of history.

For someone who is perceived to be so smart, that is badly considered phrasing I would suggest. I understand he needs to use rhetoric to sell books but, unless one is going to read the book to understand his argument it seems to set up two distinctly seperate good guy/bad guy camps. Not helpful in these PC and unpredictable times.

I am not fond of the moderates, though I would never call on any point of view to be suppressed if that is truly what S. H. claims.

The moderates however are not without responsibility for the doings of even the most extreme fundamentalists, since by normalizing religion and the idea that faith based belief is healthy, plus creating isolated communities which become defensively tribal and detached from public scrutiny, in an attempt to protect their unique moral values, which are the only thing they have to market. They create the seas though which the fundamentalist shark swims a hunts in safety, even though they may themselves genuinely claim to oppose everything the fundamentalist stands for.

Worst are the religious none believers who claim not to believe a word of it, except as allegory, but do not care enough for the rest of the human race to stop supporting often evil institutions, in order that they may continue enjoying their childish pleasures, rituals and in the worst cases deluding the more vulnerable into putting money and power into their collecting boxes.

And the fundamentalists are at least sincere.

Get ride of the moderates and the extremists have no cover.

I've never read anything by Sam Harris.

"Get rid of the moderates, the argument goes, and we can have a fair fight: scientific atheists versus religious extremists."

I dare you to support this. Harris never makes this argument, nor does anyone else. It's so far outside of anything anyone has ever said or written that it is hard to imagine how or why you claim they did.

Matias, just a question: did you read the book? Or just find that quote?

I read the book (recently) and actually does go on to explain in great detail what he means about how the religious moderates are easily manipulated in vast numbers. When push comes to shove, these moderates will not side with since over their religion and that’s when they let the fanatics take over.

How can you control what anyone believes? I have no control over what I myself believe. We don’t decide what to believe—belief creeps up on us.

I don’t care what people believe. In the final analysis no one knows or understands what reality is about, especially Sam Harris. Beliefs are nothing but opinions—emotional value judgments of little importance.

Sounds like the new atheists are insecure in their non-belief.

Religion can be used to convience people to do , what ever it is , that the person teaching it , wants to people to do . Mostly what the heads of religions want is money and more power .