The convention is only weeks away and I for one am hoping that something important will come out of it. The AFA (Atheist Foundation of Australia) have managed to do what many of the detractors thought impossible “herd 2500 cats” to one of the largest Atheist gatherings in the world.
When talking to my Atheist friends there is a little bit of discussion on whether or not this will boost the Atheist movement with some even debating the notion that there is a movement. I have heard that AFA membership is growing steadily and from my own observations there seems to have been an increase in the growth and proliferation of other grassroots Atheist groups.
So my sincere wish is that there is some change that comes out of this. There is of course no movement if there is no action, we have to get out from behind the computer screen and actually do something if we want things to change (says he, typing furiously).
I think we have reached the First stage, that of growing awareness and education. I think what needs to follow is a coordination of atheist groups to target specific issues, from the big boys like the AFA down to the Atheist meet up groups, lending support and expertise and numbers to change those things that will be of benefit not just to atheists but to all Australian’s.
I have recently had discussions with a number of online Australian Atheists about setting up a coordination group for this purpose, paralleling the sort of changes we see happening in the skeptic sphere. I must say I am seriously considering it as I see it as a benefit to the diverse groups already in operation in Australia.
Think I am being a little over the top?
Well the ACL(Australian Christian Lobby), hardly a monolithic entity, is hard at it doing grassroots activism holding prayer meetings at local government events/or in conjunction with government.
So I think, as always we seem to be behind the eight ball, or playing catch-up with those religious who are not content to let the rest of us dialogue on a secular playing field.
Going to the convention?
I hope to meet you there and if you are thinking along similar lines we can have a chat.
Related posts:
- Global Atheist Convention – Sold Out It’s roughly six weeks out from the convention and the...
- Not bigoted, just cheap? Following on from today’s earlier post – A Victorian...
- Sir Humphrey would be proud…Victorian decision not to fund Atheists reads like the script of Yes Minister The events surrounding the decision not to fund the Global...
Loading ...
Fully Agreed Sean. The convention will give our ministers the first glimmer that the non-religious might have some weight as a voting "block". We need to follow that up quickly with both voice and action before that idea dissipates. I know that the Adelaide Meetup group would be eager to collaborate and would hope (expect!) that the AFA would also.
If some actions that have been tried before and failed due to lack of participation, that is unlikely to be the case now…i.e. thats no excuse!
THE big questions for the convention should be: "WHAT SHOULD WE DO?" and "HOW SHOULD WE DO IT?"
What I am hinting at here is better co-ordination so that small scale actions don't fail. Not all atheists will agree on things to be done but those that do find similar issues could benefit from a resource pool.
The AFA has the power to do the big stuff like conventions, and bus ads. Coordinated actions like the Ten23 campaign can be done by various smaller groups running off a co-ordinated hub.
I agree with Sean. We have so much untapped talent in the atheist community. There is no need for any of the various groups to give up their independence in order to work together for common cause. In fact, if some kind of networking body can be organized, I would see it as serving to build up and resource the other organizations, rather than them 'serving' it.
Chatting online amongst ourselves in no longer enough. We have the numbers, now we have to use them. We need to unite and use those numbers to lobby for meaningful change. I advocate a project based approach with clearly defined goals. A resource pool is an excellent method of calling in the talents and resources of atheist individuals and organizations Australia wide – whether those contributions be large or as small as joining in a letter writing campaign.
Of course, there will always be those who don't want to get involved in a movement, but enjoy the camaraderie of forums and the support offered by an established organization. There is merit in that. But, for many of us, we now feel the need to do more and that requires a co-ordinated, co-operative, collegiate approach in which we stop looking at each other as competition and start seeing each other as allies who can work for the mutual benefit of everyone.
I don't know if we have the numbers
. But there are certainly more open atheists now than there were say, 3 years ago.
That and there are many talented speakers ( some appearing at the convention ) from Australia. We don't really need to import Dawkins or PZ Myers, though I am glad that they are coming:).
I am also concerned that it may be cast as an overseas movement /fad as there is a lack of popular knowledge surrounding secular/freethought history in Australia. Case in point – Monty Miller
re: "Case in point – Monty Miller " I forgot to comment on that twice now
Indeed I do know a lot about Monty, specifically in the involvement of the IWW (wobblies) of which quite a number of friends of mine are members, he then later became a Marxist (sigh). I myself are a member of the ASF-IWA (Australian section of the International Workers Association)
It's interesting that Monty has been picked up in respects free thought and good that he is remembered. His labour activism was an important aspect that should not be forgotten nor lost in other aspects of his thoughts, in fact his socialism was a defining aspect of his life.
I have posted this elsewhere in reply to your valid opinion (however it has not passed moderation yet?), I think it is really important however we do not yet restrict ourselves to the term, however accurate it may be (as in social movement compared to political, which the latter is what the media and religion will make it) My partner does sociology and psychology and I am an anarcho-syndicalist that has worked since the late 80's within social and labour activist circles, have been actively involved in environmental and animal rights 'movements' in the 90's, labour movements and is currently involved in a workers collective that supports hundreds of social activist websites both in the Oceanic region and internationally. I am saying this as I have seen concepts boxed and packaged before. We have discussed this topic at length and currently writing up a more detailed document regarding this. Obviously much regarding figures etc I won't touch on as it can be detrimental, but in summary :
- regardless of whether atheists are part of a movement, by calling atheism a movement, we are defining it by the people that are vocal, it will strip the power out of the fact atheism is a philosophical position that 1 in 5 people in Australia hold whether they like it or not and have religious and government bodies both identify it as such, rather than a representation of a philosophical postion.
- the movement we are seeing that is occuring, is a wider movement of reason, that is based around that. What we are seeing occuring is many atheists becoming more vocal just as many others in many other areas are. It is a movement of reason across the board, that is a direct result of increasing education and access to wider concepts, particularly on the internet.
- By defining atheism as a movement, we strip out those that are not active, but philosophically atheist. There is already division with those that disagree on actively opposing religion, and we define atheism by action rather than disbelief. We limit what atheism is and the strengths that have placed it in the position it is today, on the rise.
- Marginalisation is the only outcome. We have seen this happen with animal rights 'movement' and with the environmental and labour 'movements'. Thus we have 'greenies' and other terms whereby those that are active are clearly distinquished from those that are inactive. This builds solid social barriers that are difficult to overcome if ever, and set back the advancement of actively clear positions, the damage to a philosophical position can be worse. When a clear hurdle is placed that can confront a persons lifestyle or other beliefs before someone can identify by it. Indeed at the moment our power is in the fact we do not have to identify by atheism, to be atheist.
Atheism = not having a belief in a god or gods.
Let's leave it that way, leave it as strong as it is, and promote a movement of reason that crosses all boundaries, not defined by them.
What is the actual positive benefits derived from defining outspoken free thinking as a 'movement'? The latest discussions on this are not only a waste of time, but detrimental to atheism.
Davo, just checked, nothing in moderation atm.
I actually don't have a problem with anything you have outlined here. But I never find discussions a waste of time and I can't for the life of me think how discussing the issue is detrimental to Atheism.
Whether its called a movement, whether we want to try and generate change though issues, whether we brand it as a "Reason movement" is what is up for discussion as well as what areas we can focus on for change that is beneficial for the wider community.
I also note that while we may have our greenies and ferals, labelled as extremist groups, their actions did and do effect the political and social landscape in line with their aims and objectives.
I don't think the public discussion to date has been constructive because of the way it is being 'discussed', it is not approaching those the statements are about, but making statements about people making them. example twitter I do not think is a great discussion medium. It's great if people want to make a statement about someone without reply. I don't see that as constructive discussion tho. All it does is create division.
The other thing, and where I am saying it can be destructive, is some of the points in discussing this would lead directly to religious groups etc using those topics against atheism. It leaves one in the position that you can't properly respond to public statements, and that's if you can find them posted around the net in the first place. Simple fact is there is 'the opposition' and they will use dirty tactics to maintain their position.
And most of it comes simply a matter of point over definition that has little benefit if any, but the media and theists will define for us if we accept it. Indeed they make leading questions to push into that area. Then you have others active in anti-theism holding other atheists to task over publicly. I can actually point to quite a number I have come across, and I can only see them as creating a split where there isn't one.
With regard the 'greenies' and 'ferals' not to mention radical labour movements, most all the groups I am involved with in this regard are constantly working on breaking that particular social barrier down. It's hard to go back and do that.
Anyway, this is a short post reply, I was going to send you something more in depth via email, not sure if it is worth it, this may cover it.
I am not against doing more, but I think and know that terminology can be used against people and that inclusive rather than exclusive organisations are more effective. We already have strong groups that are secular, we should be making massive pushes with funneling people to them, rather than trying to build our own with clear 'lifestyle' walls that can be attacked as an agenda, we should be striving for equality and a just society based on reason with groups that are open to all without stigma.
my 2 cents in a quick blurt before work
Some may be interested in this?
http://ausfreethought.org/2010/03/freethought-uni...
"The Freethought University Alliance, a coalition of atheist, humanist, secular and skeptic campus groups from universities across Australia, will be launched at The Rise of Atheism, 2010 Global Atheist Convention."
Sounds very promising
Davo,
Send me the long email when you have a spare minute
. I suppose what I am looking for, was hoping for out of the convention was a discussion of the kind you would prefer to see above and some action/direction that we might take as an alliance of various atheist/freethought groups.
Yea for sure, many are super keen, we should really work out exactly how we are going to head and the pros and cons as a basis. I see face to face talk at the convention really contributing to this grounding!
Absolutely brilliant, Davo! Although I had to read it twice to make sure I understood
It does seem odd, don't you think, with all this atheistic fervour, that the political 'umbrella' organisation, the Secular Party, can only get about 525 members, and some of those, when telephoned by the Electoral commission to check they really are members, prevaricated and refused to commit themselves, so it is possible the Party wont even be able to take part inthe next general election.
Yea I think this is a shame really. But then again, I am not one to put much faith in political parties for making that much of a change for the better
I do think social awareness and education make a huge difference, and that this expands out into other areas .. with regard the secular party, I suppose from those that actually vote it would be a good thing to support and promote, especially with current strengths of advertising over atheism.
I don't think anythings as simple as it first appears, sometimes we have to stand back and look at the social implications. We get very used to dealing with things flat out on the web, but when talking about social change, barriers are a lot harder to break down and rise so much more quickly. It's a comlicated thing and if we are to get more active specifically on issues that relate to non-believers, holistically looking at our long term and short term strategies is important. What we want to achieve, and how we approach doing it. Pros and cons and we hold nothing back from ourselves in doing so.
Unfortunately tho, there is the very real threat of undermining that happens. I know of examples of private investigators deliberately set up to infiltrate groups and push them in certain ways. Many people are not aware this stuff goes on.
Some do and get too paranoid about it.
Really if the ideas are thought through this type of stuff is made harder to do. When you don't plan around stuff, it can happen right under your nose.
http://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=1420
http://www.theage.com.au/national/investigations/...
I may seem paranoid to some, but this stuff is easy to do, especially for well funded groups, and there is a good history of it occuring here in Australia.
I seem to recall a doco on the infiltration of certain grass roots environmental groups by big money interests for the purpose of gathering intelligence.
Indeed I think the Rationalists have a trust fund set up to guard their finances against malicious takeovers as well.
Yes its a shame but then you have to look at reasons why people might not think that a narrowly defined party is the right way to go.
Even though I am a member I think the better way to go would be lobbying.
This is good to see, whilst religions have their hierarchy, the atheist movement does not, it is merely a bunch of individuals who have now been herded to moving in the same direction. Kevin Rudd especially, needs to get the message that his spending of tax dollars to secure his place in heaven, by funding the popes visit, is not for the good of the country.
Funny how some leaders call in religious leaders for consultation on government matters, as if they know anything about running a country, or leading a moral life.
What has come out of the organised events, such as the atheist bus campaign, is more people coming out of the closet, many of whom were afraid to because they thought they were alone in their disbelief, especially those who live in bible belt areas.
Good luck guys!
Sounds good to me. Where do I sign up?
See you at the Conference.
Well at the moment its just talk : ) but there are a number of options that have been proposed. I'd like to have some face to face discussions with people with differing ideas.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by SeandBlogonaut: New blog post: http://tinyurl.com/yacwmr5 – No Action = No Movement = No Change…
'I think what needs to follow is a coordination of atheist groups'
I think the problem is the fact that the South Australian AFA claim to speak for us nationally without affiliating with local groups or establishing their own local chapters.
The AFA has done great work with AtheistCon, but the impression I get is that they are trying to monopolise the 'atheist voice' prematurely.
Perhaps a better solution would be a new, open federation separate from the AFA, so that the rest of us can have a voice.
To expand on my comment above, Sean says:
'Well the ACL(Australian Christian Lobby), hardly a monolithic entity, is hard at it doing grassroots activism'
The AFA is doing the opposite. It's ignoring its (potential) grassroots and alienating people by going it alone, rebuffing those outside its clique. And this is happening within the community of declared, motivated atheists. What hope do we have to encourage other atheists to consider the benefits of acting together, when we are, in fact, not acting together?
Are there any plans for a get-together during the conference to engage in concerted planning and action? I've heard that there's been no time put aside for meetings. Any suggestions for where and when a "political action" meeting can take place?
Being worked on at the moment
I might be wrong here but I get the feeling that the convention weekend is going to be jam packed especially for people from interstate. Maybe a debriefing session might be best held after we've heard what the experts have to say. I'm hoping to hear some suggestions there on how to change from being passive to being active which also might apply to the larger collective at the convention.
Perhaps dinner on Sunday 14/3 after the Convention winds up?
I think that would be a good option Chrys. Some people might have more time after the convention especially those that are not jumping on a plane immediately after.
Anyone interested in dinner on Sunday 14/3 after the Convention, can contact me through my Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/KristyVensson or on Twitter: http://twitter.com/ChrysStevenson
The local Archbishop thinks up an idea, pops down to the local newspaper office and scores a headline story with not a dissenting voice to be heard.
An atheist's story is not so easily told – and even if it is published, you can be sure the local Archbishop will automatically receive the right of reply.
Hopefully that will change hey?