Why I am not a New Atheist

I'm much more of an 'old' atheist, committed to social justice and to thinking about religion dialectically (as an institution that can at different times reinforce or challenge the inequalities of social relations). I've often complained that the  new atheists lack both of these commitments, broadly aligning themselves with Western imperialism, neoliberalism, and a patronizing dismissal of religion that reaches a fever pitch when it comes to discussing Islam. 

Concerning Richard Dawkins, Lenin's Tomb has (screen) captured how the latter position opens a number of problems that they can't resolve--but about which feel compelled to 'raise' questions:

Sunday on Thanksgiving Weekend

This week was a bit slower here at the Notes Taken. I dug up a review of Guy Debord's Panegyric, we talked Nobel Prizes, and went book shopping. Next week, I will have a new reading list, and hopefully a few new contributions from a few new writers.

If you can only read one piece today (it is, up north, Canadian Thanksgiving), read James Bamford's piece on the National Security Agency. You might want to know just why:

Based on the NSA's history of often being on the wrong end of a surprise and a tendency to mistakenly get the country into, rather than out of, wars, it seems to have a rather disastrous cost-benefit ratio.

If you liked my piece on brains, belief and religion, you might want to read Nicholas Wade's review of Richard Dawkins' The Greatest Show on Earth. However, I must admit that the NYT reviews have been leaving me indifferent lately. Wade does a bit of quarreling with Dawkins' about the meaning of theory, and concludes that Dawkins is dogmatic in tone if not substance, but I can't exactly say that's news.

Finally, and I'm testing who is reading these days, we are one step closer to one of my friend's desire to see a Dodgers/Angels World Series. I almost thought I would see some more recent schadenfreude-posts, but I guess things are professional over there.