You Might Be an Uncle Tom Atheist If...
Tuesday November 18, 2008
Are you truly committed to equality, liberty, and liberation for all atheists or are you more of an "Uncle Tom" atheist? Would you turn your back on working for real equality in exchange for a few scraps from the tables of religious theists so you can pretend you're being treated as an equal? Would you support increased privileges for Christians in the hope that a few of those privileges might drip down to benefit you personally? You might, and without even realizing it.
Read Article: You Might Be an Uncle Tom Atheist If...
Comments
Austin said: (You Vote for Anti-Atheist Bigots as the Lesser of Two Evils)
I plead guilty. Is there another way to participate in the democratic process? Besides, I’m not sure the man I voted for is an anti atheist bigot.
(Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. - Seneca (ca. 4 BC –AD 65)
Sure, you can vote for someone else.
There are also ways of participating in democracy outside of voting every couple of years.
You can ask.
Ouch. Some of those were pretty close to the bone. I’m fairly sure I’ve been guilty of some of these things - I’ll think more carefully about what is coming out of my mouth.
Who is Uncle Tom? Is this a character from American literature?
That’s what I’m hoping people will do. The point is not to attack or accuse, but to shake people a little and get them to stop to think.
You may have heard of Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe. This novel had a significant effect on American attitudes towards slavery and may have helped lead America into the Civil War (or at lest lead America there a bit more quickly).
Uncle Tom is the title character and a Christian slave. Stowe intended him to be a hero for standing up for his beliefs rather than allow himself to be exploited. No one seems to know exactly why, but his popular reputation is almost exactly the opposite and “Uncle Tom” eventually became an epithet used by blacks to describe other blacks who behaved in an ingratiating, subservient manner towards powerful whites. It’s not simply a matter of acting that way to a white person’s face and then differently behind their back; instead, it’s more about behaving and acting in ways that positively enhance whites’ power over blacks even if only on an individual level.
Needless to say, calling a black person an “Uncle Tom” is a very, very serious accusation. It’s very racially charged and not something a white person should do lightly. The term can also be used in contexts outside race for someone who kowtows to people in power, possibly for their own personal benefit, and thereby not only enhances the power of one group but reinforces the oppression of their own. Even in non-racial contexts, though, it shouldn’t be used too lightly. I chose it in part because I wanted to shake readers up a little bit; for people familiar with the label, the possibility of being an “Uncle Tom” even on a metaphorical level should be disturbing.
Ah, now that you mention it, yes, I’ve heard of it. (I’m sure people must think I’m an illiterate, but that era of American history/literature is fairly foreign to me so I haven’t read much of it.)
I think you’ve done well in this article, Austin - it was well balanced and thought provoking without being accusatory. It’s important to be able to take a step back and look at your speech behavior. It can be frighteningly easy to compromise your own values.
So often we justify things for the sake of ‘keeping the peace’ or ‘respecting others’ (postmodernism has been a double edged sword)… and so on, as you’ve discussed in the article.
Great work, really worthwhile.
That’s OK, I don’t know much about it either — I’m more familiar with German literature. But, because of the book’s connection to the Civil War, I think at least a mention of it probably appears in just about every school text that discusses the war. So while people outside America won’t be as familiar with the name as Americans and may not remember title, there’s a fair chance they read about it once or twice, long ago.
There’s a lot of value in keeping the peace — we’d all be at each other’s throats if we didn’t work to observe social niceties. But, as you note, it’s easy to compromise other values. It’s important to step back to determine if more important values are being compromised simply for the sake of getting along, appeasing the powerful, not getting singled out for worse treatment, creating a pleasing image that attracts positive comments, etc. Decisions which seems reasonable in isolation may take on a more ominous color when put in a larger context.
I’m glad you found it thought-provoking. In the long run, I’d rather write articles that people disagree with but which make them think about the topic more (and differently) than articles which people agree with but then move past without a second thought. Of course, thought-provoking and agreement is good too, but I aim more for the first.
“You Vote for Anti-Atheist Bigots as the Lesser of Two Evils
Rather than actively fight oppression, an Uncle Tom Atheist actively supports oppression if it means being a little bit less oppressed themselves. One example of this is to pretend that it’s OK to vote for political candidates who are merely a little less bigoted against atheists than their rivals instead of fighting for candidates who somehow manage to not be bigots at all. No one can avoid voting for people they disagree with on some things, but when you vote for people you know are bigots or who support or tolerate bigotry, you are actively cooperating with evil in the hope that a little less evil will fall on your shoulders. Why not risk the wrath of worse bigots by fighting to end oppression completely? ”
The election of 1868 is a good counter example to this. Yes, you should fight for canidates that aren’t bigots, but between mild bigotry and bat **** insanity it is an obvious choice.
Of course, reforming the party is a better choice, but when push comes to shove, atheists don’t vote as a block and so don’t really have political pull.