Is Every Atheist A Statist? Is Every Statist An Atheist?

The term “statist” is one suggested by Mark R. Levin in his book, “Liberty and Tyranny”. This term is a more truthful substitute for the term, “Leftist”, and certainly for the false, inverted use of the term, “Liberal”. “Statist” much more accurately describes the underlying beliefs of those who want government control over positive human rights, and the reduction of the masses to co-equals in all things, especially in economic status and ethical status. I intend to use the term statist much more in reference to the objectives and worldviews of Atheists and Relativists.

The question of whether every Atheist is a statist resolves to how one views the source of human rights.

First off, there are only two choices, and they are very clear cut . Either human rights are “unalienable” or they are not. If they are unalienable, the force that makes them so must be beyond and outside the reach of human power to revoke them. Moreover, the rights are primary; removal of rights by other humans is a secondary function. So unalienable rights are “negative” human rights – the right to do anything not specifically prohibited.

Conversely, if human rights are not unalienable, then there is no power outside that of humans which prevents one human from denying the rights of another human. So the rights of humans are those which are allowed by the government: positive human rights. These are the rights favored by Obama, the rights bestowed by totalitarian government.

So the choice of negative, unalienable human rights requires a belief in a supernatural power capable of conferring such rights. This choice is not available to Atheists. The Atheist is stuck with revocable, human conferred and human eliminable positive rights.

For an Atheist to claim belief or support for negative, unalienable human rights is an exercise is pure deception – either self deception or intentional lying. An Atheist cannot be held to any standard other than Relativism, situational ethics and flip-flopping personal proclivities. So why should anyone believe an Atheist who makes any claim about his belief in certain types of human rights? (Or any claim on any subject for that matter). Especially when he logically can support only one type: positive human rights, which are revocable by whoever is in power, since there is no supernatural power to consider.

So Atheists cannot logically be anything other than de facto positive rights statists: in other words, elitist totalitarians. And claims to the contrary are pure dishonesty (but honesty is another one of those nasty absolutes that Atheists reject).

Now as for every statist being an Atheist, that is clearly not the case as is seen with Islam, which controls all aspects of human life under Sharia Law.

So Atheists are merely one subcategory of statist-totalitarian. But the commonality of that connection is why Atheists and statists revere the oppressive regimes du jour – Islam and its aggressors are the current vogue after Stalinism has died down. (Stalinism arose as the statist favorite after the lust for fascism died down). It is the common bent toward a forcible state subjugation and suppression of the hated masses and a resulting government of the elite, by the elite, for the elite which ties them together.

As for what Atheists say, just ignore them and they will soon be saying something different with just as much fervor; such is the style and variable mindset of the relativist.