My first writing on the subject of “New Atheism” and its vulgar, stupid adherents provoked a sort of predictable outrage you’d expect from a people unaccustomed to intellectual criticism. Most of the responses displayed the typical poor reading comprehension, lack of philosophy, and general absence of critical thinking skills I’ve come to expect from Vulgar Atheists. I criticized modern atheism for rejecting God, but continuing to use the same moral standards and “sacred way of thinking” common to religion, and how did these empty headed zealots respond? By regurgitating more drivel about how evil religion is! If you wish to oppose someone’s point of view, it helps to actually refute the point of their contention, not confirm it. These narrow minded rabble even accused me of being religious myself. After all, it couldn’t possibly be that I, too, was a non-religious ATHEIST author actually daring to call them out on their self-complacent, dogmatic BELIEF SYSTEM, could it? Isn’t the entire point of being an atheist in modern times about absolving oneself from criticism by anyone?
In point of fact, this is the central reason for all the uproar over my condemnation of New Atheism: Modern atheists do not select atheism because of a coldly rational intellectual consciousness that informs them of the almost certain non-existence of God. Rather, modern atheists are created by petty rebelliousness, narcissism, and subjective emotional reactions. Much as they like to do a criminal disservice to the idea of “rational thinking” by casting the title above their door, atheists are anything but rational. As others have noted, most modern atheists are drawn to atheism and circles of non religious people because the other cultural options available to them do not sanction their subjective preferences. To put it bluntly, the average atheist is just a rebellious deviant looking for a group that won’t judge him for his gender identity problems and wanton sexual desires. Rather than keep the fetishes in the closet like a normal adult, these attention starved children need to get approval for their tastes, and atheist groups are the only ones that are going to give it to them. Homosexuality, for example, is nothing more than a personal sexual orientation, but in the hands of New Atheists, it becomes an actual religious crusade! It isn’t enough to simply be gay, you must advocate for gay rights and relentlessly show support for ending the vile oppression of gender normativity. It should come as no surprise that these intellectually stunted groups of individuals become resounding echo chambers, completely absent of any legitimate criticisms of their shallow world views. “Theists” are the typical atheist adversary, and atheists can justifiably write off attacks by literal God worshipers as superstitious nonsense. Hence why my assault on them hit such a sore nerve, as an intellectual attack from a non-believer implied troubling things about their normally uncontested positions. After all, the atheists are supposed to be “right,” they can’t possibly be “wrong” about certain issues, can they?
The German philosopher Max Stirner wryly noted in the mid 1800s that “Our atheists are pious people.” and scorned the secular humanists of his day for not abandoning sacred modes of thinking along with the rejected sacred gods. While his words were influential on developing existentialism and caused Karl Marx to bend over backwards avoiding the use of faith or belief in his emerging political theory, it would appear that New Atheism is completely unfamiliar with Stirner’s criticism. Modern atheists in fact, worship a veritable pantheon of New Gods.
You could write volumes on the perverse love affair atheists have with socialism. While some of this fascination is just the logical conclusion of secular humanism and worshiping the plurality of mankind as a new god, the simple answer is, atheists tend to prefer what the general theist despises out of unthinking, rebellious contrariety. (In fact, the best rule of thumb to determine what social concepts a Vulgar Atheist values is simply to imagine the opposite of what a conservative Christian prefers) The “religious right” advocates free market capitalism, so the typical atheist cannot let themselves be associated with something their hated adversaries support.
The narcissistic self entitlement of Vulgar Atheists is also satisfied by the socialist promise that every human deserves something for mere existence, and that “all belongs to all.” Here they can reject the traditional notion that what a man comes to through his own strength and cleverness he “deserves,” and instead believe they have an intrinsic self importance as individual humans, quite unlike any other species on this planet. Why on earth would humans be absolved from the necessities of life common to other animals?
Atheists looking to fuel their boring, predictable secular humanism also like to use bizarre extrapolations of the naturalistic fallacy to justify socialism, claiming that since humans live in groups, they must be Communists. After all, partaking in any sort of social relationships just proves Karl Marx was right all along from an evolutionary perspective, right?
Since so many modern atheists are created by the conflict between their sexual orientation and religious precepts, it should be no surprise that they are quite pre-occupied with gender normativity, gay rights, and feminism. In the hands of Vulgar Atheists, gay rights goes beyond simply addressing legal inconsistencies in regards to marriage and admitting your sexual orientation in the military, and travels straight into the strident tones of demanding that society at large approve of your personal gender preferences and pat you on the back for them. To these juveniles, the fact someone, somewhere could express a dislike for their sexual orientation is deeply troubling.
They must characterize gender normativity as some sort of nebulous form of oppression, as if the average, normal sexual preferences of most humans constitute some sort of conspiracy against them. Naturally, much of their ire is raised against religions that specifically forbid sexual deviancy, but they’re quick to label any criticism of their tastes as “homophobia” or “patriarchy.” It’s not nearly enough to merely be a bisexual slut, you must re-organize society at large to condone and praise your behavior. One would wonder why a person can’t simply view their sexual preferences as a private affair, but that line of reasoning is far removed from the attention starved self importance of young atheists today.
Most obviously, the hijacking of atheist communities by political movements caused quite a rift in the non-believers as feminist agendas took deep root in Atheism+. The simple minded feminists, proceeding from an unquestioned premise, assaulted even the Four Horsemen with Righteous Indignation that these leading atheists were casually spewing SEXISM. After all, to imply something that could be seen as offensive by a woman must constitute a form of sacrilege against the secular humanist UnGod, whose total non-existence is no excuse for lack of adherence to His Holy Protocols. Feminists expressed total shock that the more consistent, educated atheists regarded their agendas as petty personal crusades for an insignificant cause, but you know what, the MEN were right this time…
Sanctity of Life
While theists pursue the idea that human life is sacred with such fanatical consistency that even human sperm must not be wasted, the atheists take a more hypocritical approach. To atheists, while killing a fetus is merely the free choice of each individual Goddess Woman, and while euthanasia is a relatively non-exciting issue, they can’t quite cross the gap to declaring all human life as being simply arbitrary existence with no intrinsic value. Despite claiming to be scientifically minded, atheists are rather uncomfortable with the notion that they are, in fact, just another specimen from an accidental species which will eventually go extinct or end up on an animal preserve somewhere, being tended to by superior creatures and looked on as bland historical relics. The psychology of the Vulgar Atheist, which hungers for group approval, simply cannot absorb the idea that there is simply nothing special or sacred about human life. While they are happy to claim there is nothing special about an imaginary God which might impose restraints on their narcissism, they cannot conscience the idea that they too are simply accidents of nature, genetic compromises, another in-between stage in human evolution. They simply MUST be special, after all. The nihilism of this cold, objective reality is a truth for adults, and Vulgar Atheists are still children.
Predictably these infantile brats continue to prattle on about how human death is somehow significant, and how as a species, we must learn to preserve human life. They are of course begging a question I have already answered: There is nothing special about human life and nothing remarkable about human death either. While they seek to limit certain kinds of human death, and insinuate that we must deprive humans of their weapons lest they cull the weaker members of the herd, these fools actually seek to interfere with the process of evolution by frantically claiming that all specimens of mankind must be preserved. How could you possibly believe in an evolutionary system that discards countless animal lives every day simply to sharpen and improve a species, and then wail and lament over the deaths of superfluous humans? Particularly hilarious given the atheist’s obsession with “human overpopulation,” isn’t it? “You must respect my right to life!” they cry, oblivious to the arbitrariness of this position. This hypocritical, self refuting belief is a childish moral stance for immature thinkers.
To conclude, modern atheism is still so haunted by the specter of nihilism and lack of meaning that it must unconsciously hobble through life with various idealistic crutches, never letting go of Sacred Modes of thinking.