To Systematically Attack Religion is to Honor and Empower It

Even in late 18th century, many self respecting people who valued knowledge would not be caught dead admitting belief in a very particular form of ghost worship. Anything short of deism/atheism was seen just as absurd as ghost worship of conquered Native Americans or fanciful epic fiction emerging from India. After Darwin, there was no excuse left for the elites of the world (who could read that is). The battle against superstition has long been decisively won on an intellectual level (among people who matter) so the recent growth of "New Atheism" in America warrants a few words.

Mutilation of a corpse after its already dead does not make the victor appear in a better light. It hints at victor's unhealthy resentment at the corpse and all the mistreatment that was done by the corpse when alive (mistreatment only made possible by it having been in a position of strength). Sometimes it can be explained away for the cathartic therapeutic value that overdoing it brings, especially if the corpse was a die hard hold out to the end (mass executions of medieval monks in Barcelona and the Soviet Union). However we've seen a constant pattern of the ghost worshiping structures relaxing their grip for decades, even where their less educated power bases reside (in the western world parts of southern Europe and US). They're declining and will continue to do so since support of elites is long lost. So why are atheist books now flying off the shelves? Why are people gleefully sharpening their knives against ghosts long after the question has been settled by men such as the ones who conceptualized a structure for this country?

The answer seems obvious in terms of history (more angry atheists in Italy and Alabama since they have to live with the miserable idiots) but not in terms of strategy. Using very advanced consistent systematic arguments against grown men who belief in ghosts is like a superpower making a big deal about a threat from small country and attacking it with all its might. Ironically the smartest thing George Bush said was "I'm not going to shoot a two million dollar missile at a ten dollar empty tent and hit a camel in the butt!" Indeed. We don't spend valuable life energies explaining that Harry Potter or scientology's Xenu are not real so why spend it on equally absurd monotheistic ghosts? One quote by Ghandi that was used throughout the Ron Paul campaign clarifies strategic aspect of it: "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win". Why does it go in that order? If the media talking heads/fellow candidates systematically attacked Ron Paul it'd mean he gained enough power to be honored with mass attack, that he was considered a threat or an equal. To go from ignoring and ridiculing (those unfortunate enough to believe blatant lies) to sharp philosophical attacks would be to honor, empower, and treat them as equals if not superiors that deserve such sophisticated attack. They don't. Ridicule, exclusion, and gentle pats on the head while calmly explaining that it's time to grow up are more proper. It works to suppress third parties and unpopular kids in grade school and it'll work on them.

Lets not be reactive but live our lives gloriously and in a healthy manner to convert others by example. Lets attack those things that are worth attacking, real threats and not crutches of unhealthy powerless people and their organizers. Secular society will come to United States quicker than we think. The battle is already won, even in the deepest south priests and pastors are seen as geeky lamers who one wouldn't want to chill with at the bar or have them tag along. Let's not give them a way to organize in defense. Like North Korea, these hold outs are already finished even if they don't know it yet. (recent politics should give a clue).