Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
29. the New Atheists seem a bit nervous, that people won't listen to their policy advice anymore
Mon Dec 28, 2015, 10:56 PM
Dec 2015

in the sense of kneejerk antitheism that sees fundamentalism as the epitome of theism (plus feeble attempts at legitimation through physics or biochemistry), New Atheism bubbled up before 9-11: after the attack it seemed like something that at least could simultaneously condemn the unprovoked bolt from the blue ("confirming" their books), the snake-handling yobs screaming for war, and the Iraqis blowing up our boys (who just happened to be in Iraq at the time)

but even by the time of the 2006 Euston Manifesto it and its larger associated movements were creaking--everyone just scratched their heads at the proposal that Bush and Bibi were the true torchbearers of leftism and that the onus of violence was all on those dang Mideasterners; after even 3 years in Iraq it seemed sick, perverse

so today Harris's Salon fans still yell about some hallucinatory pro-Salafist totalitarian-loving "illiberal left," but that sounds almost archaeological nowadays (like the attacks on Sanders for visiting Yaroslavl or Rand Paul saying he's gonna go all Khmer Rouge on us)

reality's steadfastly refused to humor the New Atheist view of the world (such as it is): theologians, historians, philosophers, and scientists are telling them to sit down before they hurt someone else after their cheerleading Iraq; Hirsi Ali, Darwish, Ye'or, Namazie, Shoebat, Gabriel, etc., all outed themselves as liars (about most things or literally everything in their lives)

and yet European refugees aren't joining IS like the Frontists and PEGIDA say, but instead are telling the rest of us that "these are the sort of people we fled" and that the reaction the terrorists want was to increase persecution (to prove their culture-clash): other than the surge in hate crimes I'm surprised by how mob-free the reactions to Paris and San Bernardino has been

even the facts of the Paris shooters themselves--that they seem to've been nebbish unchurched drunk stoners--doesn't jive with the assertion that "the trouble with Muslims" is that they take their religion too seriously and Grinchily lash out at us types who like to party; OBL and al-Baghdadi, it turns out, don't speak for most Muslims, who take issue with New Atheist assertions that those are the only guys truly following the Quran and Hadith--that theists can't be good people (however defined) if they were really following their own religion

their attempts to create a "science of ethics" was stillborn without them realizing it, already as ridiculous as the 60s calls to invade Cuba in the name of tribal evolution or EO Wilson saying women were evolved for the kitchen: and, after all, the main guys who derive their morality from chemistry turn out to be the Koch Brothers; Dawkins turns out to just have always been Trump without the dyejob

even the popular phrasing "Old Testament God" rubs everyone the wrong way after the first few times they blame Him for Pedro de Alvarado/Torquemada/Raynald of Châtillon: everything repressed and violent that did happen in Western history is being accidentally blamed on the Jews!

as the religious right ages and loses much of its GOP leadership it's facing a revived religious left boosted by the new Pope: to the antitheists this is the worse outcome, because it 1. keeps religion going after they said it'd be over by 1950 and 2. makes them unable to say that theists are all gay-stoning creationists; meanwhile Gohmert says we shouldn't get our science from religious leaders (what's wrong with that man) and much of our AGW denialism has deep roots in the skeptic movement; I smell another reshuffling of US religiosity like in the mid-70s--a historical curio, like Guatemala's temples to Minerva

I could never understand why ppl take him seriously Nyan Dec 2015 #1
He thought no one would notice. rug Dec 2015 #2
Thanks Nyan Dec 2015 #3
Some people seem to think it is such a big achievement becoming an atheist cpwm17 Dec 2015 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author cleanhippie Dec 2015 #6
Did you read the book mentioned in the OP? Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #7
I watched him debate Chris Hedges. Nyan Dec 2015 #9
Then I find it hard to see any statements you make about this book Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #10
No, thanks. Nyan Dec 2015 #15
Sam Harris is very much a right-wing neocon kook. cpwm17 Dec 2015 #18
Thanks for the link to that rational wiki page. Jim__ Dec 2015 #19
Thank you: it's good to see that many people can see Sam Harris for what he is. cpwm17 Dec 2015 #21
He's said some pretty stupid things, Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #25
I'm not familiar with lies told about him cpwm17 Dec 2015 #27
The advantage of book reviews is that they tend to separate the wheat from the chaff. rug Dec 2015 #11
The only people who seem to take him seriously Lordquinton Dec 2015 #12
What does ISLAMOPHOBIA mean? rug Dec 2015 #13
You have a page of questions to answer first. Lordquinton Dec 2015 #14
I see. I will assume then you are ignorant of it and thereby enable it. rug Dec 2015 #16
No, that's your reasoning Lordquinton Dec 2015 #17
hey sam DonCoquixote Dec 2015 #4
Couple things Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #8
your points DonCoquixote Dec 2015 #24
Fair enough Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #26
reply DonCoquixote Dec 2015 #28
does these people even *know* what happened with the IRL Reformation? MisterP Dec 2015 #20
Doubtful. rug Dec 2015 #22
Cold-War history isn't that well-taught--it's mostly "Truman did some nice things and mutual MisterP Dec 2015 #23
the New Atheists seem a bit nervous, that people won't listen to their policy advice anymore MisterP Dec 2015 #29
The Pope is not " religious left". He's a misogynistic, homophobic social conservative. Humanist_Activist Dec 2015 #30
By papal standards, the Pope is wildly liberal. kwassa Dec 2015 #32
No, he is not, where the hell do you get your info? Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #33
From here, for one place: rug Jan 2016 #36
That would be an alliance of convenience, so what? Doesn't make the Pope a leader of the... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #37
The phrase is "a like-minded thinker and potentially useful ally in a crucial battle of ideas." rug Jan 2016 #39
I get my information from the newspapers. I like Pope Francis. kwassa Jan 2016 #38
So I'm assuming you supported what his church did in Slovenia recently? Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #40
That is just a ridiculous argument. Goblinmonger Jan 2016 #35
I don't know that he is bigoted. kwassa Jan 2016 #41
Is a person who opposes legally recognizing interracial marriage racist? Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #42
Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer yes or no. kwassa Jan 2016 #43
I don't see how my question is equivalent to that gotcha question... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #46
He openly fights against gay marriage. Goblinmonger Jan 2016 #44
He does? kwassa Jan 2016 #45
Sounds to me like he wants to change the hearts and minds of young people to be homophobic... Humanist_Activist Jan 2016 #47
Yes he does. Goblinmonger Jan 2016 #48
You do know most of Dawkins non-biology books were written AFTER 9/11, right? Goblinmonger Dec 2015 #31
he's a crypto-creationist. Warren Stupidity Jan 2016 #34
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Sam Harris’ detestable cr...»Reply #29