Something that’s has irked me for some time now is how many people latched onto the Atheist movement as an edgy teen but now look back on it in reverence and not shame. This seems to be a common theme in academia and is prevalent even in communities like this one. The lamentation of the “golden-age” of atheism is peak hubris. Dawkins, Hitchens, and crew were deconstructionists of the critical theory variety. Their lives were consumed by the need to disprove God and religion. However these were the shortsighted desires of pseudo-intellectuals, they accomplished nothing productive, and if anything, opened the door for the screaming children that replaced them. I don’t think Dawkins, in his wildest dreams, ever saw his fall come from his own hubris. The intellectual argument over dismantling religion somehow disproving the existence of a god is what fueled the SJWS and their own brand of hubris in the early 2000’s. BTW Dawkins, this is what happens when you remove the “tumor” of religion, you hack. As you see today, Dawkins was swallowed by the stupidity he helped bring about, the Maximilien Robespierre of the modern era, begging for trannies to not cut off his head.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (111)
sorted by:
But hasn’t popular Athiesm always been pretty anti-conservative?I mean I don’t really know much about Dawkins’ personal politics, I know he’s at least somewhat admitted there’s a link between race and iq, but hasn’t he always been pretty liberal? Athiesm and academia have been pretty closely linked for a while now so if there were ever a time it was co-opted it would have to have been a long time ago.
And for how long has the moral authoritarian and evangelical movements been tied directly to the Conservative movement?
I've never heard Richard Dawkins rail about Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, or William F Buckley in regards to Atheism. However, when the Evangelical movement was rearing it's ugly head into politics, it was basically with a tacit acceptance of Reagan, and then Bush onwards. Remember that George Bush Sr, once railed against The Simpsons for spreading poor family values to children and wanted it taken off the air back in 1990's. The Republicans establishment, which pushed Rockefeller and Nixon (who was effectively the most Leftist Republican president since TR, with none of the genuine leadership capabilities), co-opted Regan, and let the Evangelicals run absolutely amok in a party that was supposed to be about conserving American liberties.
For the entirety of the 90's and 2000's, Conservatism and Evangelism were bound together at the hip. Even if other Conservative factions didn't like it, they were all in the same boat, and it was the Evangelicals boat. If you opposed Evangelism, you opposed Conservativism, even though the tie between the two is actually tenuous at best.
Atheism wasn't co-opted by radical Leftists, particularly the 1970's variety, for most of this time period. Academia itself is not atheist by it's nature, though the sciences leaned secular since the mid 20th century. It is only, again, in the past 50 years that they have become bias to the left, and only in the past 20 that they have become damn near Communist.
Part of the reason Atheists mocked Feminsits and SJWs back in the 2014's was to point out that Science and the real world weren't going to tolerate this absolute nonsense. However, because the ethical corporate globalist elite realized it's potential, all of Academia and Science is being forced to.
If you're looking for the strongest and oldest centers of Leftist subversion in America, it's: