Also, given that the most brutal, repressive eras in Russian and Chinese history coincided with enormous breakthroughs in the technology of repression and slaughter, could we not make a powerful, if not overwhelming case for the argument that there would have been a massive increase in repression and killing in those countries, in those eras, under ANY guiding ideology, any economic model, and any possible relationship between the state and religion? Is it not just as plausible that there would have been a massive increase in the number ofthose arrested, imprisoned, tortured or executed in Russia had the Tsar remained in power and the power of the Orthodox Church remained unchallenged , or had an essentially conservative "liberal democratic" regime replaced it?

Can we not also strongly argue that China would have seen the same level of brutality had the Confucian/"Christian" hybrid regime of Chiang Kai-Shek, a regime known for its own brand of severe repression and economic malfeasance, as well as high levels of hunger, remained in power on the Chinese mainland? Why should we not conclude that any regime which held power in those countries, in those eras, would have seen a massive increase in repression and state savagery simply because the technology needed to carry out those crimes went through numerous improvements and breakthroughs in those eras? What could possibly support the argument that those countries only went in the direction of greater tyranny and brutality due to a lack of religious authority within their jurisdictions? Germany remained solidly "Christiam" throughout the Third Reich, after all.