Shane Croucher

I don’t know if Charlotte Allen is being deliberately patronising and dismissive in her Guardian column, but one thing’s for sure – she’s talking bollocks.

Atheists are attacked for feeling like they are getting a rough deal, as Allen scathed:

My problem with atheists is their tiresome – and way old – insistence that they are being oppressed and their fixation with the fine points of Christianity. What – did their Sunday school teachers flog their behinds with a Bible when they were kids?

Some of our behinds weren’t being flogged by religious preachers, some may have been used for something else.

Allen seems to blatantly ignore the intolerance shown towards atheists around the globe. In America, it’s incredibly hard for an atheist to become an elected representative. Actually, you have to promote your religious foundations in order to even be considered as a serious candidate. Pete Stark ‘came out’, so to speak, as the first openly atheist American congressman, in 2007.

The home of an atheist activist in America was attacked after his daughter challenged whether God Bless America was an appropriate song to be sung at school. The Boy Scouts of America don’t allow atheists or gays as members. In Iran, atheism isn’t recognised as an option. You must adopt some form of religious belief in order to gain legal rights. Egypt limits expression with one man being prosecuted for a novel he wrote that brought prophets into question. There are many more examples of atheists, or those who question religious fantasy, being discriminated against.

Allen claims that atheists are limited in their arguments against faith:

Read Dawkins, or Hitchens, or the works of fellow atheists Sam Harris (The End of Faith) and Daniel Dennett (Breaking the Spell), or visit an atheist website or blog (there are zillions of them, bearing such titles as God Is for Suckers, God Is Imaginary and God Is Pretend), and your eyes will glaze over as you peruse – again and again – the obsessively tiny range of topics around which atheists circle like water in a drain.

Let the theologians, of whom there are a minuscule amount in comparison to everyday subservients of god(s), argue out deep-thinking, and rather futile, debates on interpretation and the like. For me, the promotion of atheism is about trying to encourage day-to-day believers into liberating themselves from the burden of guilt, hellfire and shame. It’s not about “whining” as Allen puts it, it’s about helping victims of the mental persecution religion seeks to use. This is why many atheists are dedicated to debunking the most popular of religious belief.

Homosexuality, fornication etc are all embraced by atheism. There is nothing to be ashamed of. These are elements of human behaviour and existence. We aren’t governed by religion-set laws of who we can and can’t accept in society. We’re all human beings – that’s what counts.

Allen claims that atheists are ignoring that some religious accept evoltion:

Another topic that atheists beat like the hammer on the anvil in the old Anacin commercials is Darwinism versus creationism. Maybe Darwin-o-mania stems from the fact that this year marks the bicentennial of Charles Darwin’s birth in 1809, but haven’t atheists heard that many religious people (including the late Pope John Paul II) don’t have a problem with evolution but, rather, regard it as God’s way of letting his living creation unfold? Furthermore, even if human nature as we know it is a matter of lucky adaptations, how exactly does that disprove the existence of God?

I disagree. Atheists do accept that some sections of our religious counterparts embrace evolution. What we point out is that it’s easy to take on science and declare it as the work of an almighty deity. It’s convenient for religious expedience. Why try to argue against evolution when it’s near on impossible? All they need to do is work god in somehow and then they can sell it to their flock. Easy peasy. But this still does not counteract that it is more of a leap of faith to believe in a creative deity than a series of random events, free from an all-knowing, all powerful catalyst called god. Scientific discovery after scientific discovery lead us further toward the truth and further away from irrational belief systems.

One former Christian highlights his reasons for leaving the church brilliantly. Read it here.

In her last paragraph of down-talking, Allen sneers:

What atheists don’t seem to realise is that even for believers, faith is never easy in this world of injustice, pain and delusion. Even for believers, God exists just beyond the scrim of the senses. So, atheists, how about losing the tired sarcasm and boring self-pity and engaging believers seriously?

Why don’t believers give atheists a level playing field for a change? We have to fight for a voice as we are so under-represented in decision making bodies all over the world. How about giving us a platform to debate on, where it counts – a legislative. Because this is where the religious infection is at its most poisonous. If you really believe that your belief systems can stand up against an atheistic onslaught – let it happen.

For now, we will be left in books, blogs and comment sections of newspapers, desperately seeking the representation we deserve.

I’m surprised that I’ve never seen the above clip before. I’m equally surprised that it only has just under 9,000 views. This is the kind of evidence that needs to be spread far and wide. Nick Griffin openly declares that the BNP hide behind a soft lexis of propaganda in order to gain popularity. Perhaps more shockingly, he happily reveals his true agenda – a whites-only Britain.

In the video, Griffin imparts BNP spin-tactics. He says:

There’s a difference between selling out your ideas and selling your ideas. The British National Party isn’t about selling out its ideas – which are your ideas too – but we are determined now to sell them. That means to use saleable words

Basically, Griffin has told an audience consisting of David Duke supporters, i.e. racists, that the BNP holds the same views.  He categorically says that the BNP has not changed at its core. It’s still the same fascist National Front that it used to be. Yet the BNP is gaining popularity. Some people are starting believe that they aren’t racist, just realist. They’re falling for the softly-softly BNP spin and being lured in by the buzz-words. Griffin sheds light on their new propaganda tactic:

[selling our ideas] basically means using saleable words…freedom, security, identity, democracy. Nobody can criticise them. Nobody can come at you and attack you on those ideas. They are saleable.

Griffin clearly identifies areas that the BNP can manipulate and distort in order to gain support for the party. The idea that your freedom is at risk from foreign invaders, you should feel insecure because of the risk of terrorism, misrepresenting perceptions of political correctness as erosion of identity and heritage – I could go on. Hyperbole, fear-mongering and scapegoats are the BNP’s biggest weapons.

The man showed that he is intent on duping the public into thinking the BNP holds legitimate views when he said if the BNP is “subtle enough” then they may find themselves in control of the media, and subsequently in a position to brainwash the electorate into wanting the removal of all non-whites from Britain. This is abhorrent, scary and once again highlights that the BNP are not fit to be listed as a political party.

Griffin says:

“If you hold that [fascist policy] out as your sole aim to start with, you’re going to get nowhere.  So, instead of talking about racial purity we talk about identity.”

The evidence just comes through thick and fast. The BNP do not want non-whites in Britain, no matter what they say in the press or on their website. They will use the public’s desperation at our current ruling elite to gain popularity and pursue their hidden motives. The truth lies under the surface as has been proven time and time and time again.

Nick Griffin once said:

Without the white race nothing matters. [Other right-wing parties] believe that the answer to the race question is integration and a futile attempt to create “Black Britons”, while we affirm that non-Whites have no place here at all and will not rest until every last one has left our land.

There’s no room for the BNP in Britain.

When pursuing a story I often find myself in slightly uncomfortable dilemmas. I have the opportunity to ‘doorstep’ an individual for a spur of the moment interview, boosting both the credibility and readability of my story. However, shyness and nerves are tugging on my shirt, holding me back. What if they don’t want to speak to me? What If I ask something stupid? What if they go mental? What if I embarass myself? It’s a similar feeling with phoning someone for a quote. The tense atmosphere I immerse myself in is unbearable as I dial the number, about to catch an unsuspecting victim off-guard.

These situations require what I call the ‘fuck it’ factor.

You’re a journalist. You write stories. Stories need quotes. Quotes come from people. If you find yourself in the position to speak to an authority on the subject of your story – take it. Grab it with both hands around the neck, wringing it until the last pulse of life.  These people expect to be approached. The quality of your story will improve ten-fold if you have quotes from the people at the centre of the story, or indeed at the top of their game. If, by luck or foreseen circumstance, you find yourself in the presence of these people, don’t panic. Think ‘fuck it’. You’ll never get this opportunity again. Your story depends on it. If you let too many chances like that go then your work will suffer and you may well find that your job depends on it too.

Here’s a good example of someone making the most of an opportunity.

Don’t get bogged down with emotion. Be pragmatic, realistic and opportunistic. Your journalism will benefit from it.