I will keep post rant-based. If you don’t fancy this style then close this page and move on. If you are easily offended by your religious, atheist or otherwise beliefs then also do move on.
Most neo-atheists worship people like Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, Sam Harris... These four horsemen as they call them were the ones that revitalised the atheist movement through new rhetorics. The spiritualised deprived millennials were hungry for something edgy and soul seeking ideology and so they swallowed the narrative, became SJW’s and never looked back. Because really, atheism is rather simple. Is simply a non-belief. Neoatheism on the other hand is a whole new level of politicial and ideological clustefuck.
I debated Dawkins back in the day when he was shilling his first book in one of the first groups of facebook. Me and others in the group suspected the "neo atheist angle" he was trying to shill. His audience? Half-baked millennials that wanted something "new" and "different" while they were pretty much ignorant about what was going around them, what atheism meant and how it should be applied in their world.
Most people had their suspicions that religion was shady but they weren't sure why or even how. Exploiters like the aforementioned four discovered an easy and exploitable market — as gullible as religion itself. Hitchens was the second guy that joined this party, managing to turn his political —or rather imperialistic — stance against middle East into a more generalised religious crusade. Pretty comfy flipping if one considers how religion and politics intertwine.
Neo-atheists worship these guys because they believe a given narrative — as much as a religious person believes the narrative of the pastors. You see, given the right angle on things and given that an audience is blind to at least one form of perspective, one can pretty much shill anything as far as religion goes whether that is pro or against.
For one, these 4 neo-atheist preachers always debated people who were usually pretty ignorant. It was like watching an adult making fun of a toddler. A monkey could have debated the opponents they were choosing. In other words, they were going against pastors, philosophers and the like who had no idea about general scientific findings, knowledge in other disciplines or possessed an ability to use critical thinking. They chose pastors and religious folk that were all too stuck up in their little bubble. The neo-atheist arguments obviously made more sense.
In this video, some old fashioned guy (who probably doesn't know much) asks Hitchens: "Hey man, why you are so obsessed with religion, talking about it so much?"
Hitchens then goes into one of his eloquent rants that involve fancy words, parallelisms, references from English literature and the like to demonstrate that religion has a negative impact on society. He focuses on explaining how religions long for world destruction and that as a defender of humanity he goes against that. How very fucking noble right? I mean, how could you possibly not absolutely love this brilliant man!
The neo-atheists get all wet from Hitchen's "superb knowledge on shit". Really, this is what they mostly like. We hear a guy talking nice and we assume they are educated. This douchebaggery meme dates back to England where people trained to speak a certain way in order to appeal a certain class of people. Needless to say that this behaviour is as superficial as the taste of Kim Kardashian.
Their feeble minds, atheist or not, just give up even if there is no argument. By the way, same shit happens with Christians when eloquent philosophers go into poetic narratives about the importance of God. You are not really sure what they are saying is right but they say it so darn right that you absolutely feel the argument is correct. You just feel it. Dam it!
Back in our little video, the Hitchen’s case can be easily debunked from a simple understanding of an anthropological reality. Human beings are teleological beings. This much, even neo-atheists agree. More or less, in an attempt to explain the world around us we believe that everything was made for us. At the same time this teleological belief makes us long for something better due to the cycles we observe in nature. Forests burn down and then they get revived again. Rivers dry and then they refill, the darkness falls only for light to replace it. Shit moves in circles.
Religions did not invent destruction nor they are pushing it. From market analysts, traders, people in relationships, workers in companies, every single person holds at least some 'Armageddonian belief' in regards to something. We do this because of our understanding about how the world operates in this circular manner. We want shit to hit the fan so we can have a second chance. Traders would say that they are waiting to buy the dip. Same thinking process applies here. Here is a great scientific article about this phenomenon.
Thing is, most neo-atheists (or christians) do not know about basic anthropology nor they are able to process things critically. They get caught up in philosophical bullshit about why humans do what they do, taking religion as a-priori phenomenon, forgetting that there are much larger forces in play about human nature. Most do this because their ideologies are politically affiliated towards some kind of ultimate purpose about the human existence.
Are religions really longing for world destruction or is world destruction a natural occurrence of the experience of being human and just happens to manifest in religion as much as it does in financial markets? Any person with an I.Q above potato peel can realize that the latter is the case. Hitchen’s argument is just a half-assed post-hoc fallacy dressed up in gold tier English literature and references. Classic political rhetorics.
I could debunk Hitchens bullshit rant as much as any apologetic's christian for the very reason that they are not being honest with themselves. These people talk they way they talk because of a different underlying motive that has nothing to do with what they are saying but rather aiming to win a debate. Sure it might work to win a debate with a flower pot but that doesn't mean that what they are saying is true or that they cannot be easily refuted.
And this brings us to the final, basic truth about how one can catch any bullshiter in the act — whether they are self-help promoters, neo-atheists playing it defenders of humanity or religious people trying to push their dogma. The magic word. Profit.
The vast majority on this planet has never owned a business. The vast majority does not comprehend that most businesses are built on deception. Any kind of selling, especially today, is designed to take advantage of human weaknesses such as fallibility. Neo-atheist preachers tapped into this market by converting skeptical religious people into neo-atheist political activists that don’t stop busting our balls about the superior beliefs. I am an atheist as well but I don’t wave my duck around with pedantic arguments or for political reasons.
Religion can be debunked quite easily. Thing is, the profit is made when the narrative is pushed beyond this simple realisation. Atheism needs to turn into neo-atheism in order to start becoming a social justice warrior enterprise that creates an ongoing market. All these 4 apologetic neo-atheist bullshiters became multi-millionaires because of their books while the “Fedora intellectual” stands with the dick in his hands reposting neo-atheist preaching much like a religious person re-posts toast-Jesus for evidence. Both are equally laughable.
Here is my advice if you happened to falls for any of this crap. The most important lesson one can take, one that cuts through the bullshit like a hot knife through butter, is entrepreneurship. It sharpens real life critical thinking skills. Forum and facebook debates are level 1 compared to what goes on in real life. Coffee shop debates are level 2. Having a business and shilling your product through rhetorics, that's level 10. Most people never get to go through level 1 or 2 in their entire life. A business entrepreneur can see through the bullshit rhetorics or an atheist or christian because they know the angles being used. The only difference is the story.
The world for a normie is rather simple. They get the money from wage cucking and go home reposting arguments from other people that make bank of their ignorance. They don’t have time to do much broad thinking themselves because others are doing it for them. And this is my friends how you end up believing that motherfucking Hitchens is so motherfucking awesome. Like a saying goes, "most people are other people".
ps: If you fancy ANY video clip/argument from those two and you believe is irrefutable please do post it in the comments. Let's test it's rational caliber.
