Search Results
6/21/2025, 4:49:28 PM
>>508197234
Loud atheists are invariably bad faith actors. It's a religion oriented around destruction, Jewish at heart. At worst, assuming that modern atheists are somehow correct in their assessment that Christianity is a "Jewish slave religion" (an idea first proliferated in the modern intellectual space by Rothschild biographer Marcus Eli Ravage in his scathing "Commissary to the Gentiles"), then modern atheism is simply the updated offshoot of its Christian roots, a "Jewish slave religion 2.0".
I've met good atheists, and my best friend is one. Brilliant, creative, and most importantly, open-minded. They're unconvinced by the arguments made by Christianity, and they retain a kind of critical perspective that is oriented towards pragmatism more than it is deconstruction. The friend of mine admits that religions form the foundational coherence of civics, and so are integrable for functional societies. For this reason, they are culturally ubiquitous. That these individuals abstain from making positive statements on spiritual matters is due to personal conviction to their logical faculties even if it comes at the expense of their own happiness.
Internet atheists aren't like this, it's a movement... kind of like a religion. On /pol/ we see a (heterodox) splinter of this general movement, where proper identification involving rituals, ethical underpinnings, marks of personal identification, expected behaviors, stated adherence to convictions, and perhaps more importantly, mutual exclusivity (one cannot be an atheist who values Christianity, for example). For this reason, I think it's fair to refer to internet atheism as Atheism, formalizing its introduction as a new religion. Atheism+ can be remembered as an attempt at unifying and formalizing the aesthetics of internet atheism, the first forward steps to the construction of Atheism in recent history.
Loud atheists are invariably bad faith actors. It's a religion oriented around destruction, Jewish at heart. At worst, assuming that modern atheists are somehow correct in their assessment that Christianity is a "Jewish slave religion" (an idea first proliferated in the modern intellectual space by Rothschild biographer Marcus Eli Ravage in his scathing "Commissary to the Gentiles"), then modern atheism is simply the updated offshoot of its Christian roots, a "Jewish slave religion 2.0".
I've met good atheists, and my best friend is one. Brilliant, creative, and most importantly, open-minded. They're unconvinced by the arguments made by Christianity, and they retain a kind of critical perspective that is oriented towards pragmatism more than it is deconstruction. The friend of mine admits that religions form the foundational coherence of civics, and so are integrable for functional societies. For this reason, they are culturally ubiquitous. That these individuals abstain from making positive statements on spiritual matters is due to personal conviction to their logical faculties even if it comes at the expense of their own happiness.
Internet atheists aren't like this, it's a movement... kind of like a religion. On /pol/ we see a (heterodox) splinter of this general movement, where proper identification involving rituals, ethical underpinnings, marks of personal identification, expected behaviors, stated adherence to convictions, and perhaps more importantly, mutual exclusivity (one cannot be an atheist who values Christianity, for example). For this reason, I think it's fair to refer to internet atheism as Atheism, formalizing its introduction as a new religion. Atheism+ can be remembered as an attempt at unifying and formalizing the aesthetics of internet atheism, the first forward steps to the construction of Atheism in recent history.
Page 1