Richard Dawkins and Charles Dickens; two who arguably changed the world in their own ways. One is alive and one is dead -- but which was the greater catalyst to societal bondage?
Dickens outlined the world as he saw it in a time when injustice prevailed for the poor and affluence stank on the breath of the rich. Now, since Dickens time, a lot has changed... but how much?
We're now in the 21st century -- enter Dawkins; humanist, atheist and 'bright'. But what of the bright movement and its founder, Dick Dawkins? We have an enlightened ("enlightened") group of people who sally forth and spread the world of nature, the universe and the great singularity. What could be more sublime than a regime based on freedom of thought, freedom of choice and freedom of movement? Oh wait, scratch the first two off the list.
Dawkins makes all things unscientific damnable... so what can we expect of these three support beams of the pub of righteousness? Well, lack of freedom to disagree, lack of freedom to choose anything which may be socially unpopular, albeit freedom to get the hell out of our respective atheist nations.
I myself am an atheist. I consider myself to be a social atheist rather than an analytical atheist. In short, I don't care what other people believe in, I just believe their wrong. Analytical atheism, however, posits that they know everyone else is wrong and makes light of the condemnation it imposes.
Surely the Catholic Church, for one, has done irreparable damage during its tenure... however, allowing them to screw up gives everyone else a chance to pick up the slack. The human body was made to be broken, and so is society. Wherein lies the challenge for advancement in a perfect world? Utopias are pipe dreams -- memes which never go anywhere -- and for all his Utopian ideas, Dawkins has no idea of longevity.
Dickens saw the injustice in the world and wanted to right it... Dawkins wants to take the injustice in the world and flip the coin on the other side so he's on the winning team. Humanism makes about as much sense as national socialism, to me. If you want peace you must prepare for war, and the idea that we can all live in harmony is as misguided as X-Factor contestants' lapping up their 15 minutes of fame.
