On behalf of the atheist community, etc.

[sabotabby]

So this happened. Lest I be accused of jumping to conclusions, I will state that I am not absolutely sure that some New Atheist Reddit troglodyte cracker fuck murdered three innocent young Arabs in a vicious racist act of terrorism, but it looks like that's what happened. And if that's the case, it's not really surprising; I know people like this IRL and not a one of them is all that far from a newspaper article that ends with, "...before turning the gun on himself." Pity this jackass didn't have the decency to do the last bit, but that's besides the point.

The point is, like any other white man that kills women or POC because just having straight white male privilege isn't enough for his special snowflake self, he is now mentally ill, a lone wolf, and the act will not be classified as terrorism even though it totally is. Other people made this point, and in a less ragetastic way, before I managed to get home to my computer, so let's talk about the other thing, which is the connection to New Atheism.

New Atheism, as I've said before, is Western imperialism by other means. The history of Western imperialism has consistently been one of smug, know-it-all privilege. Libertarianism being a strong current in American political culture, and one linked to atheism, it's not surprising that there's a substantial population of über-privileged, slighly educated, entitled shitbags who still hate and fear brown people but just can't get behind the whole Onward Christian Soldier thing. And these people increasingly have a voice. If you spend a lot of time online, you'll discover that they in fact have most of the voice. They certainly—particularly through their figureheads like Dawkins, Harris, Maher, and before he died, Hitchens—seem to be adept at grabbing the mic and speaking for all atheists everywhere, and in light of what appears to be a hate crime carried out by an atheist, I feel the need to speak out about it.

I'm an atheist. They don't get to take that label from me. Nor will I accept them being labeled as "fundamentalist atheists," or "atheist extremists" or any variation thereof, because no, they are not, I am. I'm not a moderate just because I get along with religious people and think the Flying Spaghetti Monster is lame and unfunny. I am, in fact, the most fundamentalist atheist you will ever meet. At a very basic level, possibly even at a genetic level, I am not just unwilling to believe in God, I am incapable of it.

So incapable that I do not feel the need to shout from every rooftop that I don't believe in God, because I actually don't give a fuck. As Elie Weisel put it, "the opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference." I am indifferent to religion. Accordingly, I do not feel the need to go around converting everyone to my way of thinking, and I don't think I'm superior to believers (except New Age types; fuck those guys). It's maybe because I'm Jewish and most of the so-called New Atheists are from Christian backgrounds and feel kind of insecure, maybe, or feel the need to evangelize even though that's really fucking stupid, but it grates. There should be no atheist organizations, no atheist church. Should one spring up, all of the atheists should be run out of it (I volunteer to do this; just call me Atheist Jesus) and the building should be converted into affordable housing for the homeless.

The murders in Chapel Hill were only a matter of time. Violent racism—and in particular racism directed at Muslims—is socially acceptable amongst whites of means and education in a way that it wasn't a decade ago. (Of course, it was always there, but it was institutional; the personal variety was on the wane, as white robes and burning crosses were a bit of an embarrassment.) It has found, among other channels, an outlet in what BoingBoing termed the Redpill Right, that fetid swamp of conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers, MRAs, and GamerGaters. These are people who are tolerated to a degree in circles that I am tolerated in, and it scares the shit out of me.

Hold the would-be leaders of this would-be movement accountable. Drag them into the sunlight. Demand Maher and Dawkins apologize for the excesses of their followers, just like we demand apologizes from Muslims every time some unhinged asshole who shares their religion kills someone. When they sprew their bile on the internet, dogpile and shame them. Turn being a Redpiller into something as socially unacceptable as being a soulbonded otherkin who never leaves their parents' basement. It was social media pressure that turned these murders into a story—I mean, Buzzfeed broke the story, ffs—and as this is primarily an online movement, it is probably up to us to do something about it.

Comments

[jackspryte.livejournal.com]

I loved this rant hard.

[sabotabby]

Thanks. I have more thoughts but they're still in unadulterated rage form and can't yet be distilled into words.

[misslynx.livejournal.com]

Me too - thank you for writing it.

Although I have to say, you are definitely not a fundamentalist atheist or atheist extremists by my definition, because the way I tend to define those terms (whether with regard to atheism or any other belief system) is based not so much on how strongly one feels or believes a particular thing, but on how convinced they are that it is the only right thing to believe and that everyone else is wrong/bad/stupid/inferior/delusional/evil/whatever, and how much of a dick they are willing to be to other people about it. By that standard, you are one of the least fundamentalist atheists I have ever met.

It's funny - I keep hearing about how supposedly religious people all believe they have the One True Way and can't stand everyone who believes anything different, while atheists are supposedly all noble free thinkers and what not... And yet, out of my circle of friends, which encompasses people of quite a lot of different religions and lack thereof, the number of religious people who actually do believe they have the One True Way is holding steady at approximately zero, whereas the proportion of atheists I know who seem to believe that is ... I don't know exactly, but well upwards of 50%.

Personally, I don't really care what anyone believes, so much as I care what their particular belief does for them. Whether someone believes in lots of gods, one god, no gods, or that there's insufficient data to draw any conclusion on the matter, if that belief makes them happy and makes them a better person, then that's a good belief for them. If it makes them unhappy and/or a worse person, then it's a bad belief for them. And it is entirely possible for the same basic belief system to be good for one person and bad for another.

In conclusion:

[gansje.livejournal.com]

Excellent post.

[sabotabby]

Thanks!

[robby.livejournal.com]

"A review of the Facebook page of the man charged in these murders, Craig Hicks, shows a consistent theme of anti-religion and progressive causes. Included in his many Facebook “likes” are the Huffington Post, Rachel Maddow, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Freedom from Religion Foundation, Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” Neil deGrasse Tyson, gay marriage groups, and a host of anti-conservative/Tea Party pages."

[sabotabby]

That's part of what I'm getting at here—this is not an us-them problem. Part of the fallout from the Third Way and the general tendency towards historical amnesia in North America is that the lines between left and right are not so sharp in many people's minds. That's why we get 9/11 Truthers in Occupy and people who think it's cool to wear hammers and sickles but also believe Darren Wilson's narrative of Mike Brown's murder.

Of the handful of people I know who I think are capable of something like this, 100% of them hold some left-wing beliefs, and some identify as left-wing.

Which is why this shit is our shit to clean up.

[kakodaimon.livejournal.com]

I'm an atheist. They don't get to take that label from me. Nor will I accept them being labeled as "fundamentalist atheists," or "atheist extremists" or any variation thereof, because no, they are not, I am. I'm not a moderate just because I get along with religious people and think the Flying Spaghetti Monster is lame and unfunny. I am, in fact, the most fundamentalist atheist you will ever meet. At a very basic level, possibly even at a genetic level, I am not just unwilling to believe in God, I am incapable of it.

I love this paragraph and relate to it from the Jewish side, but have learnt that when people call someone a "fundamentalist X," they mean an X that hates outsiders and women, because that is always, always perceived as more authentic and pure, even when it literally contravenes important aspects of X. If a Dianic Wiccan man were to go shoot up a women's centre, people would call him a fundamentalist and think he was just 2 edgy for the Wiccan mainstream. According to patriarchy, anything which appears to be not-patriarchy is a sham, laughable revisionism, denial of cold hard facts, etc.

[sabotabby]

Yeah, I get what you're saying and what misslynx said above. I just think some redefinition is in order. XXTremeXXX atheism oughtn't be hatred of religion but the cool acknowledgment that religious belief doesn't matter.

No other atheist will ever agree with me, but maybe that's how it should be.

[mistersmearcase.livejournal.com]

It hadn't occurred to me that most New Atheists are converts from Christianity. I guess that makes (the vast majority of reform) Jews...Old Atheists. That's amusing.

I have to think about this. Though I'm an Old Atheist, I am more invested in the identity than you are, possibly because I grew up in the south among many Christians who were happy to tell me I was going to hell. I'm not indifferent. And I do think of Christianity-->atheism as a good thing, but I think maybe I haven't paid that much attention to what the whole New Atheist thing is about. Hitchens seemed like a dick but a sometimes smart and sometimes fun one. Sam Harris is nuts but when I read The End of Faith, I can't lie, it was in a weird way reassuring, because most of the time it seems like being critical of religion is this utterly fringe position without any influence. I don't know. Religion is one place my authority issues loom extremely large. A friend said "when you talk about religion, you sound like Pol Pot." Which made me laugh. I can only blame the gay thing. It really is hard to stop reacting against something that, broadly, has suggested your whole life that you are worthy at best to be pitied; at worst, extinguished. So because the New Atheist thing seems to have mobilized people to be critical of religion, I'm not quite able to be as critical of it as I should be.

[sabotabby]

It hadn't occurred to me that most New Atheists are converts from Christianity. I guess that makes (the vast majority of reform) Jews...Old Atheists. That's amusing.

I think they all are, at least the ones we hear from. It's evangelical in nature. The form remains the same, with different content—people who grew up in a church will probably seek a church all their lives unless they are really critically minded.

Hitchens was a dick but at least he was entertaining. The others are worthless human garbage, though.

I see your point; I'm not arguing that religion as institution is a meaningless force in the world because obviously it isn't. It's more that New Atheism is becoming as much of a religious institution as what it condemns, while following the same path of violent intolerance. It's largely how people act out their beliefs that's a problem; Dawkins, for example, supports Christian missionaries in Africa as a "civilizing" force against the Muslim hordes, while remaining blind to, say, Christian missionaries in Uganda who are responsible for some of the harshest persecution against gays anywhere in the world.

[immemor.livejournal.com]

Sadly, assholes are always going to find excuses to be assholes. They’ll use/misuse Jesus, Islam, Atheism, The White Album – whatever. There’s really nothing new about this.

I enjoy parts of this rant. Some of it is brilliant. Some of it is too saturated with blanket statements.

I don’t believe in demanding apologies from persons who did not commit crimes, be those persons Muslims or Atheists. What does that accomplish other than making the innocent accountable for another person's criminal actions?

[sabotabby]

I was being somewhat ironic. These are people who call for statements from "moderate" Muslims every time a Muslim does something.

[sacramentalist.livejournal.com]

Hi! I'm new here, but word on the street is you're awesome. This post demonstrates that fact.

Anti-religion invective is disgusting. However, I do have a FSM on the back of my car, as a statement against anti-evolution and creationist efforts to sully public education.

This may just be a nut fighting over a parking spot, and this nut could probably have as easily become a fundamentalist Christian in the right circumstances. He sounds like reddit hive mind. I wouldn't be surprised he was all over #GamerGate being about ethics in game journalism while sending threats to feminists for touching his video games before trying to pick up in a child-free community.

[sabotabby]

Hi there! Oooh, a local—or close enough to one.

Oh, people can find the FSM thing funny or useful. I personally prefer the Invisible Pink Unicorn, and as a dedicated Cthulhu cultist (that has nothing to do with religion, simply the desire to be eaten first) I find the iconography befuddling.

Yeah, a lot of my thing is that there is little pragmatic difference between this guy and a fundie Christian, other than he got his beliefs off the intertubes instead of in a church hall. I would guess that your assessment is correct.

[radiumhead.livejournal.com]

I guess im a trogolodyte. Ive always thought Maher was 100 percent right. And no, hes not a bigot. Hes against any organized religion. Is it problematic that most muslims seem to be brown? Maybe. But islam is a religion, not a race. I hate christianity too, but honestly, theyre not the major fucking problem right now. And maher never advocated violence against anyone. If you asked him about this atheist killer guy, hed say yeah, thats fucked up.

[sabotabby]

Is he 100% right on vaccinations too?

I think most hatred against Muslims is race-based, not theology-based. Have you read Orientalism by Edward Said? It's old, but I don't think less accurate for any of that; it looks at the historical relations that still affect us now in terms of the Western drive to colonize and dominate.

I'm pretty sure Maher has advocated violence too, but I'd have to go reading his shit to confirm it, and honestly, he says the kind of shit that I got over when I was 14.

[radiumhead.livejournal.com]

And yeah, i think athiests should be as militant as possible. Short of violence. Religion's gotta be combatted somehow. Saying "i dont care" doesnt work. Most atheists dont care, thats why we're gonna lose.

Hitchiker's Guide: (paraphrased, i dont remember the exact quote): "they care. We dont. Thats why we're gonna lose."

[sabotabby]

I don't think religion has to be combatted. I think the things that people do in the name of religion needs to be combatted. People don't need a God to kill the Other, as this guy and Stalin's gulags aptly show.

[princealberic.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this rant. I hate dudebro atheists. I'm not religious myself but so much of rhetoric ends up being racist, patronising, and condescending. Most of the vocal ones seem unwilling (or unable) to see past their neighbourhood church; they seem bent on being vocal about religion without having a basic understanding of the history, beliefs, structure, etc. of most religions. Obviously, not everyone needs to know everything there is to know about religion to have an opinion on it, but if they hate religion so much while also spending so much time ranting about it (instead of being indifferent like you are), you'd think they'd bother to understand religion to have stronger arguments. I also hate the way they cry about being persecuted whenever people hate them for engaging in the same behaviours that are socially unacceptable coming from religious people, like being preachy and rude.

By the way, I think your point about you (not them) being the extremist atheist is interesting. I've always used "extremism" as more or less equivalent to "turns beliefs into something hurtful to others", like how in several religions someone who is genuinely sticking with the spirit of it would be compassionate, forgiving, not kill people, etc. but the "extremists" are not the ones who do that but the opposite. Do you know of a better way to describe the rotten apples? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely asking because you have a good point.

[sabotabby]

I also hate the way they cry about being persecuted whenever people hate them for engaging in the same behaviours that are socially unacceptable coming from religious people, like being preachy and rude.

To me, it's mainly straight white guys trying to act like they're oppressed, because they're jealous of oppression. I can't stand it. There are legitimate reasons to oppose things done in the name of religion, but I think people can be perfectly assholish without it, too.

By the way, I think your point about you (not them) being the extremist atheist is interesting. I've always used "extremism" as more or less equivalent to "turns beliefs into something hurtful to others", like how in several religions someone who is genuinely sticking with the spirit of it would be compassionate, forgiving, not kill people, etc. but the "extremists" are not the ones who do that but the opposite. Do you know of a better way to describe the rotten apples? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely asking because you have a good point.

This started bothering me when I—surprise surprise—got called an extremist politically, which is true in some ways (I'm far left of the official political discourse in most countries) but also kind of weird (because I'm really a stodgy person who likes old books and afternoon tea and wants people to be nice to each other and is no one's idea of a violent revolutionary, rageball tendencies aside.)

So for New Atheists I'd refer to them as symbioid suggests, "anti-theists," though even that seems a little tame. "Evangelical atheists," maybe. Or "dudebro atheists." That's actually my favourite.

[vaudience.livejournal.com]

*Clap*

very eloquently said.

One can Only hope that the next generation of Atheists are less like this guy (or Dawkins, Gervais,Harris,etc) and more like you.

[sabotabby]

They probably won't be. radiumhead is right in that the best lack all conviction, the worst are full of passionate intensity. And I haven't had anything to do with atheism as a movement since high school, since that's how little fucks I give. It's just not the hill I'm dying on.

[symbioid.livejournal.com]

"Religions cause people to kill other people because they aren't the right religion. I'm an evangelistic atheist. Have you heard the good news of no god(s)??? Oh, you think there is a god? YOU are part of the problem of all the violence in the world..." KAPOW!

Yeah - Dawkins and Maher are pieces of fucking shit for a multitude of reasons. They absolutely should be held to the same standard, and I look forward to them crying 'No true atheist'.

Really, they're "anti-theist" I think is a better term, really. Evangelistic anti-theists.

And yes - it's this disgusting outgrowth of modern liberal secular democracy, the dark side...

What's interesting now that I think about it, this is really, speaking of Dawkins, a perfect example of memetic viruses replicating in the, as you call it, fetid swamp ... of intellectual decay combined with western imperialist and privileged attitudes. I remember hearing about memes... "The Church of Virus"... and how it really was like a new insight on the replication of patterns and ideas.

What is interesting, to me, is that there's this weird thing that has these types of people who are either anti-Christian (new-agey type conspiracy theorists, or the evangelical anti-theists), combining with the "free speech" rhetoric, combining with patriarchy and geek/nerd privilege, and they're all just so smart and clever and TRUTH-seekers, and down with the system, maaaaaaaan... And so they're caught up, along with Dawkins' the original purveyor of the meme idea, with being yet just another game in the meme scene. And of course, somehow, they act as if THEIR truths lie outside that whole thing, when they're just as enmeshed in it as ever.

And of course, because it all ties INTO the patriarchy (well, except for anti-vax, but that's still just... wtf?) it all gets along with the right-wing so well, but then they run into conflict with religions who are on the right wing.

I think fostering support for left-wing religious views is probably the best thing we can do right now. As much as I dislike religion as a social entity, it clearly has served a purpose, both positive and negative. If we're stuck with it, we should use it for its good sides. Of course, since we're atheists/agnostics, etc... (I consider myself a strong "no" agnostic (vs the more open-minded "maybe/yes" agnostic) we can't really influence that movement much.

But we have to make allies where we can to stop the spread of this kyriarchical filth that's spreading amongst the so called "intelligent".

I 100% support a woman's right to choose, but I wonder what would have happened if the patriarchy had kept hold of the left and a socialist economics combined with a more conservative social view had arisen in the US (something along the lines of the Catholic Church) - what would have happened?

I would have fought a lot of it, but in terms of social programs and the right-wing, it would have been interesting to see people who end up voting for Republicans in the US possibly going the other way had anti-abortion stances been taken up by the Democrats instead (while still keeping the other populist/progressive economic ideas). It's an interesting thought experiment.

I would still oppose it on the anti-woman (and probably corresponding anti-QUILTBAG attitudes it would have probably retained), but it would be something to see a large religious movement supporting at least some form of social democracy.

It'd probably end up some form of Distributism.

part 2 cuz 1 was clearly not enough!

[symbioid.livejournal.com]

Anyways. I think this sort of pseudo-intellectualism/pseudo-skeptic movement is so often painted as "left-wing" because of the baggage of the right-wing being in opposition to New Age, Atheism/Anti-Theism/Modern Pop Culture, that its hard to accept that these people are ending up making their allies with the very people they claim to despise, and really all because of Middle-Class White Male NerdistUnderdog Privilege (mix and match to suit the specific case). It hurts to know that people we would normally have thought of as allies start to turn into something so far afield of what we thought things should be working towards.

It's like when people say "there is no such thing as a right or left" and then try to act like they are independent somehow (usually with some sort of Libertarianism - but also along with a 'don't label me, man' attitude).

God this is rambly, sorry not very sensical today :(

But yes, 100% with you. Something has to be done.

[smhwpf.livejournal.com]

I'm not always sure what is particularly 'new' about New Atheism. A lot of the characteristics of NA aren't actually that new - the insistence that atheists hold a monopoly on rationality, the belief that religion is not only incorrect but an obstacle to progress, a cause of wars, etc., are certainly to be found in 'traditional' atheism, though NA maybe adds an extra layer of bile and proselyting zeal.

But because Islam is the big Fear thing at the moment it means that NA both tends to particularly target Islam as the object of its opprobrium and that it reinforces existsing anti-Muslim sentiment, in a way that can contribute to a mindset that makes this sort of atrocity more likely. Old Atheism in the west was more directed at Christianity (and also more often associated with consistently left-wing politics? Not sure.)

I never like the word "extremist". It implied that being moderate and in the middle is always the sensible thing to be. "Fundamentalist" is a very poorly-defined term. I think I have a fair sense of what it means in relation to Christianity (centered on a particular view of Biblical authority), less of a sense of what it means in relation to Islam (other than when used by non-Muslims to mean "bad guys"), and no clue what it would mean in relation to atheism.

A term one can, I think, reasonably apply to New Atheists, which from what you say does not describe you is that they are "militant" atheists, i.e. they believe in actively promoting and advocating atheism and opposing religion. Not that being "militant" is by any means a bad thing in itself, depends what you're militating for.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

>>Old Atheism in the west was more directed at Christianity (and also more often associated with consistently left-wing politics? Not sure.)

Well yes, because Official Christianity was, and was seen as, an instrument of social control and a justification of the status quo, "the opium of the people" and "The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate. God made them high and lowly and ordered their estate." That latter from Hymns Ancient and Modern, the standard Anglican hymnal at one point.

Holy shit, Sabs ...

[ed-rex.livejournal.com]

Tweeting, for what little that's worth, but I might be asking permission to re-post it elsewhere, if you're willing. I know (and know of) far too many ageing leftists who are creepily sympathetic to the Dawkins brand of bigotry for comfort. And your piece might be a really useful lever for prying them awake.

Meawnhile, I just want to say that's one of the best pieces you've written, and you know I think you've written some doozies.

Re: Holy shit, Sabs ...

[sabotabby]

Repost wherever. As always, as long as my IRL identity is not directly connected with it.

And thanks. I'm blushin' here.

[ironed_orchid]

Demand Maher and Dawkins apologize for the excesses of their followers, just like we demand apologizes from Muslims every time some unhinged asshole who shares their religion kills someone.

Yes!

I fucking hate the 'more enlightened than thou' vibe that the atheist movement people have, it's the same shit idea that cult members and new agers have, that they know better than everyone else and that with time and lots of talk, other people will come to see their point of view.

[sabotabby]

If people ask me, I'll tell them. Or, on occasions like this one, I'll opine. But damned if I'm going to evangelize; among other things, I'm way too apathetic for it.

[nellorat.livejournal.com]

Having lived just miles from Chapel Hill for years--where womzilla was raised, also--I had a trigger reaction to "cracker." I don't think it's something you can use just for the bad apples without sharing in a general stigmatization.

However, as a thinking Christian, I really like a lot of what you say, in the entry and in comments. My data are just different from yours, including experiences that as an aggregate are difficult to impossible for me to explain as other than supernatural, even after decades of reading and exploration of sources from *The Cloud of Unknowing* to Prometheus Press books. (I miss *The Zetetic Scholar*.) I've tried to read Dawkins et al., but the smugness puts me off--I am open to recommendations you personally might make.

[sabotabby]

Sorry! May I ask why?

My data are just different from yours, including experiences that as an aggregate are difficult to impossible for me to explain as other than supernatural, even after decades of reading and exploration of sources from *The Cloud of Unknowing* to Prometheus Press books.

Which is cool, and why I say that I think I'm incapable of it rather than simply unwilling. We have a lot of religious people in my family and I don't think any of them has ever had any spiritual experience or ever believed in God.

I've tried to read Dawkins et al., but the smugness puts me off--I am open to recommendations you personally might make.

You know, offhand, I can't think of any, which has always been my problem with atheism as an organized movement. The analyses I graft on to are Marx, Goldman, etc., who were largely concerned with other factors and saw religion as a symptom, not a cause.

[sabotabby]

Hah, I have a massive ego. By all means.

You rock

[(Anonymous)]

Just sayin.

Re: You rock

[sabotabby]

Thank you!

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

*reads, nods, takes notes*

[sabotabby]

:)

[pofflewomp.livejournal.com]

gah I just saw this post and want to read it all and comments but have to rush off. I never get time for LJ!
I do feel the need to go AAARRGH about religions as an atheist but I think maybe it is different being in the UK as we are still a religious country and have so much church stuff. It wouldn't bother me perhaps if I had not had to go to church and pray every day at schools, had not been singled out of runChristianness as a child (spawned by unmarried parents shock horror etc.), had the choice of non-faith schools for my child and had a government without unelected Bishops in it!

[sabotabby]

We're still a religious country here, too. But much of it is religion under the guise of secularism, which is my issue with New Atheism—it's a religion minus the God, and the God tends to be what keeps religious people well-behaved.

The secular schools here stem from the Protestant school system. The Education Act still requires teachers to model "Judeo-Christian values," which is to say "Christian," as there is no such thing as "Judeo-Christian values." The school year revolves around Christian holidays. The whole thing is designed to make white Christians the default.