Making Peter Hitchens Look Really Good

At a pseudonymous blog, called "Through A Blog Darkly", I encountered one of the most bizarre columns ever. This one purported to analyzed Peter Hitchens; what it actually did was present a poster case for the absolute irrationality and twisted commentary produced by an Atheist this side of the New Atheists. I'll start down into it a way, where the author, whoever, is excusing the Atheist Marxist Communists for their genocides and cultural eradications:

“Atheism was not the "theoretical basis" for their actions; it was the means to destroy an ideological and political enemy.

If atheism possessed a positive element then we should expect all self-identified atheists to hold this positive element. We should expect the representative Western atheist to support "violence, murder, destruction, censorship, persecution and theft." But they do not. Rather they support 'bourgeois liberalism' - political freedom, social contracts, human rights, freedom of religion and constitutional democracy. “

Let’s dissect this incredible position.

First, Marxist Materialism is Atheist; and that is the theoretical basis, as he admitted just sentences earlier. Even if it were not, the second half of the sentence is astounding in its implications: Atheism is merely a tool to eradicate human cultures, for ideological and political purposes. That is an incredible admission, made rather witlessly as he tries to defend Atheism from its obvious association with massive genocides, unthinkable tortures and eradication of entire cultures.

Next he claims that Atheists do not support “violence, murder, destruction, censorship, persecution and theft”. Abjectly false! The Atheist Left has always condoned those things, if and only if they were sourced from the Left. From abortions shredding preborn innocents, and Muslim murderers, to MSM nonreporting and false reporting; from using the IRS, NSA, EPA, DOJ, etc. to specifically target and persecute the moral and political Other, to the Leftist governmental theft of GM and making it a gift to the union at the expense of common stakeholders, and the use of tax dollars to woo bankers and corporate support – not to mention to create and maintain the Leftist plantation ghettos, the AtheoLeft has always and will always support exactly those things.

But then comes the topper: he claims they, Atheists, support “political freedom, social contracts, human rights, freedom of religion and constitutional democracy”, when in fact the AtheoLeft uses those terms to mean the exact opposite of what they actually, in real life, do support. They support political freedom only for themselves, while attacking – with government agencies – political opposition; they support social contracts for stealing wealth for transfer to their cronies and plantation ghetto voters; they support human rights for their designated Victim Categories, themselves and no one else; they support freedom of the religion of Atheism to be installed as the official governmental religion and no other; they support none of the US Constitution unless it is specifically advantageous to themselves.

By making this claim the author demonstrates conclusively that he is a partisan hack with absolutely no ability to self-analyze, or to discern how rational people will view his partisan faux facts.

This has to be one of the most obtuse Atheist claims I have seen in quite a while.

” Peters [sic] Hitchens own explanations are unconvincing. It's impossible to take seriously claims of Bolshevik atheism as "a denial of God" which "viewed God as a rival" and who "set themselves up as their own source of good, and cannot tolerate any rival to their own beliefs."

Impossible? It is intuitively obvious, on the one hand, and empirically provable on the other hand. It is still the main thrust on Atheism today. Only willful blindness could allow such a statement.

” In the polarized imagination of Hitchens, atheism is anthropomorphized into an aggressive monster driven by prideful, disillusional fury to destroy civilized restrains[sic] imposed by God:

The exasperating and yet comically unshakeable conviction (held by Mr ‘Bunker’) that the assertion of atheism is not a positive statement, that it is a mere passive absence, is directly contradicted by the death-dealing, violently destructive, larcenous and aggressively propagandist application of their own passionate and positive atheism by the Soviet authorities, as soon as they had the power to put their beliefs into action. If atheism is merely an absence, why on earth should it need to do these things to those who did not share its allegedly passive, non-invasive beliefs? (emphasis mine)

The monster has a name; it is known as Bolshevism. Appending these ideological convictions onto atheism merges the essences of both and shatters the law of identity. “

That is not the case. Bolshevism and Atheism were, in fact, exact identities and perfectly identical during that time, even amongst western philosphers and journalists who preached the "virtues" of it at home. As Neitzsche predicted, Atheism taken to the brink produces exactly what was seen in the 20th century, and what still exists in huge portions of the world.

Denialism requires the suspension of rational assessment. When it is in pursuit of an ideology, especially one with massive evil in its history, suspension of rationality becomes evil itself. Yet in the ideology of Atheism, there is no evil, unless it is to admit that there is evil and they are involved in it.