They carry a different brand of emotional baggage?
If we were having this conversation say…50 years back, I could easily define atheism as a thought pattern that simply denied the belief in the existence of a deity or deities.
And that would be that.
The social usage of the word, not the dictionary definition mind you, has altered itself immensely since the whole Creationism/Evolutionism debate in the mid-90s when certain scientists felt a fierce need to respond to the encroachment of a religious viewpoint onto their field of study.
Looking back at those …exchanges, much of it was focused on arguments regarding the interpretation of data and processes…and calling the other person an idiot when they disagreed with you.
But you really couldn’t call atheism a “social movement” just quite yet.
It wasn’t until 9/11 coupled with Richard Dawkins rather fiery diatribe which pushed the “New Atheist” ball rolling down the hill.
Prior to both - the sentiment that circulated amongst Western humanist/secularist organizations tended to look at religion as well… a minor issue. You can date this all the back to the 50s to political philosophies on the Left and the Right such as the Stalinist version of Communism or Ayn Rand’s “Objectivism.” Religion was treated as something the Masses needed to comfort themselves with at night. It was also believed that it would be something that mankind would eventual grow out of…
In other words - it wasn’t really taken that seriously.
9/11 changed the dynamic (and the conversation) - because the image presented by Al-Qaeda and the wider phenomenon of Islamic Terrorism in general changed the internal picture of religion instead of being as a fancy or a tale held onto by those who neeeded the security of it…to…well… a literal barbarian at the gates.
Dawkins’ little book (which didn’t really advance any new sort of argument and considered, at least within in the boundaries of academia, to be little better than a diatribe) also gave an undercurrent of atheists in the Western world a kind of voice.
A very…angry…voice.
Its understandable in the sense that many who flocked to the New Atheist banner tended to be people who, whether figuratively or literally, felt oppressed by the environment they lived in regarding the expression of their belief.
Ie: Being an atheist in New York or Los Angeles wouldn’t get you much of a reaction. There’s no disincentive to “come out” as it were.
Being an atheist in a rural town in the Bible Belt, or in a homogenous ethnic community were a particular sort of religion happens to overlap strongly with ethnic identity… well there are rather massive disincentives.
Atheism married to a narrative of Oppression = A Strong Undercurrent of Anti-Theism + Assertive Excalamation of the superiority of Enlightenment values (a particular brand of Liberalism…)
The…strident tone of the New Atheism has continued to ramp up as time has gone on…althought their target has changed. Refuting Islam has become more of a priority for them than any other religion at this point.
We also have started to see people essentially “exiting” the movement which they were once enthusiastic participants of - case in point with Neil deGrasse-Tyson
youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos
So how does atheism in South and East Asia play out differently?
Its a matter of focus.
For the most popularized version of Atheism in the West - religion has become an existential threat. What did the late commentator Christopher Hitchens once say - “I’m a single issue voter” in his defense of going along with the Bush policy for Iraq.
Most of the atheists i’ve met in Japan, India, et al. are much more focused on a traditional liberal agenda which holds a much greater focus on Economics and distribution of wealth as being a source of societal disruption rather than the metaphysical ideas in your head.
We lack the “Christian bogeyman” so to speak - because the social ramifications are much lower for exiting Hinduism, or Jainism, or Daoism. To a certian degree… it just doesn’t matter. The stigma that the New Atheists complain about just doesn’t exist.
While we lack a “Christian bogeyman” to rebel against, we do have an Islamic one…precisely because there ARE heavy ramificaitons in places like Pakistan, Bangledesh, Indonesia, and sadly even part of India when one attempts to publicly assert their non-believing identity.
Unlike Jews, Atheists don’t see anything wrong with mixing meat and dairy, but it’s not a deciding factor in determining if there is or isn’t a higher being.
