Why Atheism is incompatible with Leftism

Why Atheism is incompatible with Leftism:

First of all let us define these two contested and important terms, regardless of whether one must always adhere to one or the other.

The terms "left and "right" find their beginning during the French revolution. We know the story, and those who don't should know it.
The ones who supported the Ancien Régime, which was unequivocally identified with "altar and throne" (or church and king) were seated on the Right side of the French parliament, all of its opponents were seated on the Left.
So originally, atheists, deists, non-denominational Christians or -believers, classical liberals, humanists, were all regarded as "Left" even though they may have been not socialists.
Later on there became more emphasis on leftism as a strictly egalitarian and socialist movement.

We find some classical liberals like Bastiat and Molinari (forgotten by most of Europe at their own peril!) arguing against both the conservative monarchism of Maistre, as well as against the anticlerical socialism of Rousseau; often we even find Bastiat criticizing certain churchmen as "socialist".
Molinari explicitly mentions how conservatism's monarchism and rousseau's socialism both rest upon the monopoly of government, concluding that both are enemies of liberty.

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, spends a large part in his books explaining how fascism and nazism, even as per their own admission, is more indebted to the ideology of Rousseau and the French Revolution (which gave us Napoleon, not Louis XIV) than to the conservatist papism of Maistre.

For our concerns here, this is not the most important, we offer it merely as orientation.

Nowadays we've allowed to let the mainstream and public opinion to convince us that Nazism & Fascism = Right-wing, and even classical libertarianism = Right-wing. This is typical Stalinist views, in which capitalism and fascism are wrongfully equated.
Yet fascism and nationalism are non-marxist socialism.
The roots of fascism lie economic-wise in the national-syndicalism of Proudhon's heirs Sorel and Maurras.
Nationalism will always be an enemy of free trade-capitalism, it will always accuse free trade of both "egoism" and "cosmopolitanism".
It is often forgotten how the ancient monarchies too were often hated by nationalists for being "progressive", "multiracial" and "cosmopolitan".

Whatever fascism & nationalism are, they are not inherently monarchist or conservative.
What's very rarely known, is that Hitler's NSDAP was modelled after the Czech National Socialist Party, which saw its ideological forerunners in Hus and Taboritism.
Those movements were anti-papist and we could call them proto-communist Christian hereticism.
Anti-Pope, but pro-god; anti-private property, but pro-communism.
It echoes the ancient Circumcellions and other heretics, Mazdakism as well.
The roots of communism certainly are not atheism, we would have to forget Saint Simon, Fiore, Wycliffe and many others.
To equate atheism with communism has been a triumph of Marx, who got his religious criticism from Feuerbach and Bauer, we certainly couldn't call these guys "communists".
Marx and Engels themselves additionally were certainly nor racial egalitarians.
The support of the Left for Sex Work, homosexuality and rock music, is something we find only since the New Left, in old school marxist-leninism, maoism and stalinism, the aforementioned phenomena were regarded as "western, capitalist, Imperialist" and consequently forbidden and punished by concentration camp vacations.

Chavez' socialism is a nice reminder on the brutality of the old school Left, and it's National-Socialist character it quickly adopts.
But since we found a brown guy at the forefront, we wouldn't dare call it "national socialist" of course.

Now After this historical and economical introduction i would like to return to our topics:

Why Leftism is incompatible with Atheism.

After we saw Leftism banned the humanists, non-political atheists from its ranks we end up with a familiar and better definition of leftism: egalitarian socialism.

As an aside: whereas it now is "rightism" that is a confused term, ranging from catholic monarchists who were anti-nationalism (such as Metternich) to national-socialist republicans like Hitler and Mussolini, to libertarian-anarchists like Hoppe. Clearly "right wing" is not really a good term, and it's basically everything a far leftist declares to be insufficiently leftist.
Remember leftists even regard social democracy as "fascism" and therefore basically "far right".

So what is Leftism? Leftism is basically socialism + egalitarianism.
Egalitarianism in the sense that a) equality is a desirable goal for the human future and b) egalitarianism is true as well qua genetics: equality is Roussellian-wise declared to be the natural order of humanity and it's declared that only due to erroneous and malignant human activity did inequality come about.
Gender & Race are social constructs and economic exploitation explains why some are rich and others are poor.

The aforementioned definition of leftism as socialism + egalitarinaism allows us to economic-wise diagnose all forms of statism including "conservative "and "rightwing" nationalist phenomena as economic socialism but, in addition with either conservative morality that would be the guideline for the interventionism, or with racial philosophy. nationalism is ethnic socialism, conservatism is religious socialism.

Now then, why would atheism be incompatible with leftism?

Atheism is nothing more than the consistent rejection of the concept of "God" of all religions.
One may conclude because of various theories or scientific criticisms that a certain god isn't real.
His prayers are unanswered or he violates the laws of logic and so on.
People like Dawkins have said religious people are atheist about other religions, but an atheist is one who's equally atheist about all.

Not a bad definition.
One inherently rejects the concept of godhead for example like in Objectivism is the case, because it violates propositions such as the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction and so on.

But what is "God" for religious people?
For Religious people, God is the totem.
The totem that stands for the activating force behind all universal life, including mankind.
To sin against God then, is logically to Sin against the lawgiver of life.
No bigger error than this can exist.
For the religious people, God, being the lawgiver of the world, is of course also the source of justice, and also the sole instrument of it.
Sin against God, is injustice, and it will only beget more injustice.
Following God's law, then brings justice and only this, and God is also the source of justice in post-Zoroastrian (Abrahamic) frame, that will bring final justice on the world, to be followed by a paradisical equilibrium.

Whereas for religious people God, is the necessary component of all earthly justice, socialist atheists do away with this god, but instead turn to Government for their Tikkun Ollam.
Government will not only cure poverty, Government programs will end sexism and racism.
Government programs can even educate "the Socialist New Man".

The socialist atheist then, is not an atheist, but his "omnipotent god" finds its earthly incarnation in government.

As such, everyone who is not anarchist, is basically assigning magical and godly, superhuman, powers to the government they believe is necessary for humanity to flourish.

Because "a free market" is chaos, but Government is order.
"A free market" is exploitation, Government is the impartial referee.
"A free market" is poverty, Government will fix the ills.

Government is hoped to be impartial, perfect and all-wise, because it is individual humanity that is cursed, in religion it was "sin", for the socialist, the sin is "greed", and some don't shy away from claiming individualism itself is detrimental to "society", the justification for the brutal monopoly assigned to Government's monopoly on law, power and violence.

Non-believers are cursed and often sentenced to burn, or in concreto: jail or death.

Government is religious in nature. Not adhered to because of the facts, but because of the expectation.
It is defended not because of past experiences, but because of a utopian and positive expectation. If this support then is not based upon facts, it's based upon hopes and mysticism.
To defend socialism and statism is therefore not scientific and skeptic-based reason, but engaging in mysticism or religious-magical thinking.

As such, an atheist adhering to socialism merely replaced the mysticism of religion with the mysticism of secular "social justice", brought about by omnipotent, corruption-free government.

If it is then demonstrated atheism is incompatible with adhering to statism we turn to the second part of our initial point of criticism of leftist atheism:

Leftism is incompatible with Atheism, because of facts qua genetics and biology.

Where it concerns genetics and biology, we find ourselves deeply dissatisfied with the Left again.
Whereas the Modern left in certain areas is better than the Right, especially in America (on biology), their enthusiasm for science and the evolutionary theory of Darwin, dwindles once it concerns human genetics.

The left, true to its Zoroastrian-Christian roots, has a belief in equality as desirable, natural or both.
As we said earlier:
"Egalitarianism in the sense that a) equality is a desirable goal for the human future and b) egalitarianism as well qua genetics: equality is Roussellian-wise declared to be the natural order of humanity and only due to human activity did inequality come about.
Gender & Race are social constructs and economic exploitation explains why some are rich and others are poor.

Here it suffices to look at the work of guys like Steven Pinker, watch Harald Eia's Brainwash series.
Their work, is among that of others, showing the genetic basis for human behaviour, and a genetic explanation for group differences among men, women, races and economic performance.

The left suddenly concludes that egalitarianism in humans is innate, all different outcomes must be due to "privileged" groups wilfully sabotaging the "disadvantaged". The explanation that different human stock might be genetically different, leading to different cultural and economic outcomes, is one of the biggest heresies one can make to the left.
Remember that nazism was basicaly white-communism.
It was much mroe egalitarian than the old Imperial army, and it had a large emphasis on its working-class socialism, but it had a racial character than in Leftism mainstream became taboo, even though Marx and Engels certainly didn't adhere to it.

Many so called right-wingers and libertarians likewise adhere to this blank slate view, which we even find among many Muslims, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians.
Egalitarianism and Universalism go quite well together, logically so.
To posit inegalitarianism as genetic and natural, is quite an obstacle for any utopian creed, of course.

Paganism knew no egalitarianism, for in Germanic, Roman, Hindu, Greek society to advocate egalitarianism between the slaves and plebs, merchants and the priests and warriors would be laughed at as an insane idea!
Once again our pagan ancestors were proven much more scientific than their Abrahamic-Zoroastrian and Communist follow-ups.

Yet biological research doesn't lie, and biological power just doesn't let itself be washed away by a few decades of bureaucracy, welfarism, democracy and dysgenic breeding.
In fact, the power of genes as it were punishes us for disregarding it.

Here we find a natural law unconcerned with human's utopian and religious dreams.

If then, it is concluded that egalitarianism is non-scientific and resting upon a mysticism with a complete disregard for evolutionary theory and scientific research, the position can be concluded as being nothing else but religious, utopian and non-realistic in nature.

Leftism finds its roots not in individualism, Enlightenment or Humanism, but as Stephen Hicks demonstrated: in the post-enlightenment Romanticist rejection of it.
Rousseau hated civilization, and this would be the source of Nazism's hatred of Jews for creating science and civilization. Nazism worshipped Nature more than it worshipped technology.
Nazism was sjw-ism complaining about Jew privilege.

Ernst Nolte wrote of Nazism as hating Jews for creating Modernism.
We could even argue that the original Christian-Nazist-Muslim criticism of Jews as "greedy, materialist and capitalist", would become the New-Left, Third-Worldist criticism of The West: The Western World was successful yes, but it was "greedy, materialist and capitalist".
Thanks to the rise of the ecological movement due to Lovelock's Gaia-Hypothesis and Carlson's "Silent Spring" there was an additional impetus to Modern Leftism.
Luckily for them, when the Soviet Union became undeniably synonymous to poverty and tyranny, it was not only claimed that it perverted Marxism, but also that even if capitalism was undeniably more successful and prosperous, it came at a price: it was racist and exploited The Earth!
Never-mind the disasters like Ural Sea-dry up and Tchernobyl happened under Socialism, somehow it's still capitalism's fault.

Nowadays we even find leftists opposing irrationally Nuclear Power, Gmo-Tech and animal research.
Had they truly favoured better foods for "the proletariat" they wouldn't have abandoned the old activism of "steak and car for the working man", now those have been delivered by capitalism and are declared to be "corrupting".
As Bosma said in his book, the left became disillusioned in the white working class, they were too nationalistic and didn't care about a communist revolution after both world wars were fought, they were happy with cars, TV's and burgers.
So now those became declared hedonistic and spiritually dead.
But the Left found its new proletariat: animals and brown people.
The first one can't talk back and the second one happily will listen to anyone who talks with hatred about the West and promises to spoil the war booty to them.

Finally a good friend for the Muslim Ummah that had for centuries laid eye on the West's treasures.
Third Worldism is nothing but renewed anticolonialism and antiWhite-racism.

Once the Jews were hated for being successful by Nazis Christians and Muslims; now this criticism by the New Left is applied to the entire Western World.
As such, any Third-Worldist, environmentalist aspect found in so called "right wing" movements is to be regarded as influence of egalitarian, anti-civilizational, Malthusian-Ludditism.

Since our biological studies then declare that genetics do influence human behaviour, since our economic studies since Bastiat and Moses, and even earlier already since Oresme on, have decided and declared that socialism does not create a better living standard for humanity, and is so much a failure it even ruins the environment more than the capitalism it accuses doing this of, any atheist worth his salt as someone who would be pro civilizational progress must clearly reject the mysticism of both the anti-biological egalitarianism as well as the anti-economical socialism.
Rejection and failure to do so, would prove our "atheist" is an "atheist" in the same sense other theists are "atheist"; other religions they ridiculize and apply logic and science to, but for their own religion, they neglect the mystical contradictions and adhere to its irrationality.

The same applies to leftist atheists:

Atheism is incompatible with egalitarianism and socialism:

The consistent Atheist must accept the biological realities of race and gender and even class being largely dictated by genetic make-up. Inferior people, toil in poverty, Superior people lift up society.
As well as the economic nature of capitalism, this is what lifts up people because it allows economic calculation and individual self interest. Socialism by contrast, prohibits any economic calculation based on human self interest. Because of this inherent bias against individual action, it can only lead to what collectivism always leads to: lethargy, poverty and tyranny.

A collective brain doesn't exist, collective wealth doesn't exist, collective justice doesn't exist.

To pursue egalitarianism and socialism, in defiance of factual reality is to be a collectivist, a mysticist and irrationalist but certainly not an Atheist.