Can one be a conservative and at the same time an atheist? The most definitive answer to this question came from William F. Buckley, in his 1964 “What Is Conservatism?” article, where he said “no.” At the very least, conservatism’s function as guardian of customs and traditions has to take into account the pre-existing piety of the masses, and conservatism’s emphasis on the permanent things – the universal verities which humanity sometimes despises but always ends up returning to – means that an atheist conservative is going to be very close to a believer anyway...after going through a lot of argumentational contortions to reach conclusions that a theist could have reached more simply and easily.

Hence liberalism’s connection with atheism. The atheist values freethinking, and the liberal values “change.” Since “change” of the liberals’ sort usually accompanies smashing old customs, much as the Jesuit smashes the divine contraption that holds the faith of a primitive tribe together, the atheist has a welcome and accepted role in liberalism’s ranks.

This suggests that conservatives might as well treat atheism and liberalism as synonymous, and see atheist apologetics as the deep-thinking equivalent of NEA propaganda. Right?

Unfortunately, no. As long as conservatism has a laissez-faire element in it, the atheist will always be with us. It’s common knowledge that Objectivism’s defense of minimal government has atheism as one of its underpinnings, and libertarianism is shot through with freethinkers of various varieties, including secular humanist types. Looks like political goals have once again muddied the clear waters of political philosophy.

To be less flowery, we need them. Libertarians have had a real knack of pushing our anti- totalitarian case in ways that traditionalist conservatism basically can’t. So, as long as that alliance is in place, and as long as libertarianism is shot through with atheism, we cannot be truly anti-atheist. Hence conservatism’s opposition to what is known as “secular humanism,” which is basically nice- ified Nietzscheanism.

As this posted article indicates, the typical atheist tends to size up the believer as a potential church hypocrite. Those that are not tend to be thought of as dumb.

It could be argued that this stereotyping is in response to the believer’s own stereotyping of the atheist as selfish and somewhat Machiavellian. The above-cited article shows that the atheist does tend to be less charitable than the believer, and more prone to self-abusive behavior, but it also shows that the level of secular immorality among atheists is not much higher than that of believers. So the two stereotypings – “dumb” vs. “selfish”, with hidden agendas in both – could be seen as a tool for keeping the two groups apart, not as an indication of one side’s truth and another side’s myth.

There’s no point in arguing with an atheist, it seems; the categorization of atheists as “brights,” and theists as dumb, seems to have as its use the forcing of a theist to debate the issue on the atheist’s terms. So, if you’re going over to meet them as part of a conversion spree, you’ll just bump into the same old line: “No-one has shown experimental proof that God exists. Sorry.” And it’s out the door, and back to commiserate with your friends.

If you see any such conversion attempts as good practice for your thinking (or your skill in preaching) you can have a good time while you’re ‘losing’; that I can grant. The typical atheist does tend to have a favorite philosophical argument backing up their atheism...so, if you like discussing philosophical issues, and whatever groups of atheists you find yourself with are polite as advertised, you can actually have a good time. If you bump into a Percy Shelley type, who is convinced that God does not exist because sensory evidence does not back such a belief up, then you’ve bumped into a Humean, and can have a nice chat about David Hume’s other work, like his economics.

Such seems to be the way to get along with the atheist when pinch comes to crunch: they’re all jack-leg philosophers. If you enjoy philosophical debate, or enjoy listening to philosophical arguments when faced with someone that likes to say or write them, then you’ll get along with the atheist element fine. The connection between atheism and philosophy is most obvious in the case of Objectivists, but is not confined to them.

Of course, there’s a price to be paid for this. Like all of our fellow humans, atheists tend to confute “smart” with “this fellow agrees with me!” This semi-logically implies that the object of the perhaps insistent conversion process might very well be you.