Why this page?

Recent developments in increasingly secularized Western societies, notably the emergence of Wokeism, seem to me to be extremely serious, and give the impression that the fears of Conservatives were well-founded. Conservatives claimed that the disappearance of religious belief would not lead to the emergence of a freer, more rational, fairer society, but on the contrary that the result would be an increase in irrationality, superstition, dogmatism and intolerance. Western societies are currently evolving in the direction predicted by Conservatives. Wokeism, a kind of generalized Marxism, is part of this trend.

Over the last few decades, unbelief has gradually increased in Western countries. But this is “prosperity unbelief”. I consider there to be three types of unbelief: prosperity unbelief, Leftist unbelief and research unbelief. Dan Barker is a research unbeliever. He was an Evangelical pastor and missionary for 19 years. But he gradually questioned his faith. Following a 6-year search, examining the Bible as well as the arguments of apologists and contradicts, he came to the conclusion that his belief was not “the truth”, contrary to its claims. This is a particularly difficult process, and for many reasons it is highly unlikely that an Abrahamic believer ever become an unbeliever in this way. I believe that humanity is currently incapable of doing so, and that research-based unbelief can only concern a small minority of the population. Prosperity unbelievers, on the other hand, have never questioned their past (un)belief, they’re simply not interested. When prosperity increases in a society, prosperity unbelief mechanically increases. Research unbelievers have no reason to rejoice in the increase of prosperity unbelief, on the contrary. As Dan Barker says, both people like him and Christian apologists and missionaries are looking for people to take an interest in the religious subject and fight indifference. Indifference is the worst. I still prefer people to be believers. But prosperity has bred prosperity unbelief in Western society. What’s the result?

In the materialistic model, the blind laws of nature have no purpose. “Cranes” can explain the presence of a certain type of order and, in some cases, an increase in complexity. One of these cranes, the evolution of species, has already been discovered. It explains how the blind laws of the Universe lead to an evolution of living things from the simple to the complicated (giving the false impression of intelligent design). But the blindness of nature’s laws remains central to our understanding of it. There is no reason, for example, why nature should conform to the politically correct considerations of our time. Nor is there any reason why our brains should be adapted to understand anything that falls outside the “average world” (as Richard Dawkins calls it), since this ability offered no Darwinian advantage. Knowing whether we’re being chased by a lion or whether a particular hiding place is a safe haven does offer a Darwinian advantage. Such questions belong to the “average world”. We are generally competent to find “the truth” on such matters. But our brains are not suited to understanding the infinitely small, the infinitely large or even metaphysical questions. The consequences of an erroneous religious belief, based on an initial lie, can be advantageous from a Darwinian point of view, and/or their abandonment can have a catastrophic effect on a society.

According to a certain political vision, every civilization is founded on a religion, which constitutes its root. A civilization can only survive if belief in the corresponding religion remains sufficiently widespread. Otherwise, it deteriorates, even disappears. The materialistic model does not exclude this political vision: the blind laws of the Universe may well have led to this rule. Throughout history, it seemed that in traditional Christian or Muslim regions, the highs of religion corresponded to lows of civilization, and conversely, that Christianity and Islam played more the role of “acid rain” than that of root of a civilization. But recently, Western society seems to be evolving just as Conservatives predicted.

History is writing that unbelief is responsible for this development, and in particular for Wokeism. Yet I often come across the views of research unbelievers who are horrified by what is happening with Wokeism. We need our voice to be heard, we need to defeat Wokeism. Can a society in which non-belief holds an important place, where religion has lost its dominant position, evolve positively, without falling into another (worse) form of religion, can it be viable in the long term? It’s up to us to show it.

Back to “Politics” page
Back to Anti-religion.net homepage