This is a marginally edited letter to a friend in response to a video link he had sent me.

Hey mate,

as I said, I watched the video ( ) and, as you suggest, opposition think tanks have proved an effective media strategy, not one however that I think will be useful to us. We have a plethora of our own, our problem is mainstream media access which is in effect beyond our control and I would argue slanted against us.
On Sunday I was thinking about the climate change, secularism and the plethora of other fronts on which we are contested. If we were to view climate change from the post-modern perspective (lol, just wondering what went through your head:) we can begin to de constructed it. Taking as a given, both the science and the scientific consensus, climate change may be viewed through a number of lenses.
Climate change;
  1. is about epistemology, about what is 'true' and how we know it,
  2. is about information and culture, their transmission,
  3. is about systems, complexity, technology and emergence, 
  4. is about the media and public perception,
  5. is about human behaviour and neuroscience and psychology,
  6. is about governance and democracy and it's limitations,
  7. is about nationalism and the nation state,
  8. is about globalism, globalisation and global entities,
  9. is about justice, about resource distribution, about taxes and charities,
  10. is about markets and enterprise and entrepreneurship,
  11. is about teaching, learning and education,
  12. is about community, collectivism and connectivity, media'
  13. the list could go on, but...
...that is not my point. In making a second list, about secularism, low and behold, it matches albeit not one for one. I dare say  the same would be true about each of the battles we fight, I use the words of war intentionally, though we didn't start it, we must win. There is no battle for 'truth', only for  understanding, for minds and hearts.
Our opposition, their strategy (not limited to catholics):
"“We specialize in public embarrassment of public figures who have earned our wrath and that is why we are able to win so many battles: no person or organization wants to be publicly embarrassed, and that is why we specialize in doing exactly that…”[260pp20] Elsewhere he writes, “The threat of a lawsuit is the only language that some people understand. The specter of public humiliation is another weapon that must be used. Petitions and boycotts are helpful. The use of the bully pulpit—via the airwaves—is a most effective strategy. Press conferences can be used to enlighten or, alternatively, to embarrass.”[260pp21] “Ads taken out in prominent national newspapers are quite effective.”[260pp22]
It is not for us to debate religion, although many atheists will stand that line, particularly for love of family. It is to us, sad as it is to admit, to go to war, we must identify and catalogue our enemies, using the tools and technologies delivered through the enlightenment, to route the enemies of the enlightenment, from every sphere of our public life.
Make no mistake, the strategy of our enemies is, and always has been, one of divide and conquer. Where trouble arises, nullify the source of dissent, 'castrate' the individual (metaphor)...a savage dog in the pack, cut it or kill it! A herd management practice that remains timeless. Our enemies, from father to son, from pyramid to church, have handed the practice of controlling people with fear and guilt, as learned at the alters and in the torture chambers of history, through time. The methods have been sanitised, a reflection of experience, but remain essentially the same.
We did not start this war ..., but we will finish it! We must. The time I think is here, time to stop pretending that the religious haven't been at war with us since the beginning of recorded history, it is time for the idiocy to end.
Our role as atheists, I think. is to take knowledge to the people; into schools and communities, not as 'leaders' 'instructing' the masses on how to be, but as guides navigating a path through the cognitive inhumanity of authority and it's cruelly inflicted dissonance. To achieve this we must work strategically, we must identify and maximise the value of resources we have to hand.
We must have a roadmap, a manifesto, founded on justice and equality (of person) not delivered on authority from above but derived from consensus and voluntary association. The battle for our future is not one of authority but of conscious, the collective heart and mind.
I take solace in the fact that every action in these matters, no matter how large or small, strengthens us, is of benefit to us all. It is time to shed the illusion of freedom; particularly we within the 'freethought' community. We cannot be 'herded' it is said, as we dutifully attend our education, get 'good' jobs, marry, mortgage and breed; reliably pay our taxes, defer to legislators and police, fight and die for our nation. Bah! It is time we recognise we are a part of a herd, it is large...and growing and needs it needs to be managed by us, in our best interest . Not by the Shepards of the church or the bureaucrats of government or the lords of industry, but by us.
We need to understand that our future rests not in modernity but in modernity 2.0, The 'modernity' of the enlightenment, of science, of art, of reason and human nature.
It is time, I think, not for reformation but reconstruction.
Long winded...sorry(lol :) I think, and there is an entire supporting arsenal out there for us, that there is something in this approach . I envisage an 8 or 10 week course to navigate from naturalism and governance through climate change and cognitive science to community development.
Look forward to talking soon

Views: 40


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service