Dan Arel, trying to show that New Atheists are white supremacists, lies about New Atheists

A while back, Dan Arel, who labels himself an “author, journalist, and activist” was a rational man—and an atheist. Then somehow he jumped the rails, following C. J. W*rl*m*n in his misguided and vicious misrepresentation of New Atheism.  Now Arel’s lost not just his cool, but his rationality, flailing about at his enemies like a bull pricked by a picador. Arel’s new schtick is that New Atheists are all a bunch of bigots, Islamophobes and white supremacists—morally and tactically in the same league as Nazis and right-wing Trumpites.

The Dissolution of Arel is on view in at (appropriately), The New Arab, in a smear piece called “New atheism’s move from Islamophobia to white racism” (I hate linking to this, but feel obligated to). Read it for yourself: he paints not only Sam Harris and Dave Rubin as “white supremacists,” but can’t resist putting me in that camp:

Rubin, like Harris, doesn’t bring these guests on to challenge their views, but instead to give credibility to their previously held biases. Both hosts claim to defend the “free market of ideas”, yet only support one side of those ideas – and that side is chalk [sic] full of white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and the like.

The rest of the movement is full of defenders of this practice – such as retired biology professor Jerry Coyne, who recently attacked Mother Jones for calling Rubin part of the “right’s independent media personalities”.

Yeah, I’m a huge defender of white supremacists and neo-Nazis. (I note that Rubin, Harris, and I are all secular Jews, which doesn’t give us a lot of cred for being white supremacists!) But put that aside, for I want to note that Arel, in this nasty hit piece, has repeated the recent and widespread slander about Sam Harris, misrepresenting words Sam said on his podcast with Maajid Nawaz.

Arel:

Harris even more recently went as far as to ask: “What is the [expletive] point of having more Muslims in your society? It seems perfectly rational to say, we don’t want any more. We have enough. And certainly increasing the percentage is not a help to anyone who loves freedom of speech and anything else, any of the other liberal values.”

This came during a discussion on his podcast with Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz. During the show Harris argued that US immigration policy would need to figure “out some way to keep the number of Muslims down in any society, whether we’re honest about this or whether we do this covertly. Clearly it’s rational to want to do this.”

While this still reeks of Harris’ previous anti-Muslim rhetoric, it is also a prominent white nationalist talking point. He even went on to say he knows someone like neo-Nazi Richard Spencer would agree.

Arel’s link is to an Alternet piece, but if you went to Harris’s podcast itself, and listened to the discussion starting at 1:10:50, you’ll see that Harris is posing a hypothetical question to Nawaz, espousing sentiments that Harris doesn’t believe. He’s trying to see how Nawaz would react to the hypothetical. This quote by Sam has been used all over the Internet as evidence of Harris’s Islamophobia and bigotry, but it’s taken completely out of context by many, including Reza Aslan and now Arel.  I posted on this egregious cherry-picking not long ago.

Arel fancies himself a journalist, but he’s guilty of either not doing his homework, or (my guess) deliberate distortion. And really, “New Atheism” is full of white nationalists? What a crock!

I’ve responded at that site to Arel’s lies:

And another commenter reminds us of what Arel said less than eight months ago:

I found this one, too:

Sounds like extremist New Atheism! And Islamophobia! Even I wouldn’t say “Fuck Islam”!

Poor Dan.

For more on the pervasive misrepresentation of Sam Harris, see the Areo Magazine article by Malhar Mali, “The Sam Harris Outrage Industry“. One quote:

Until very recently, it was utterly perplexing to witness supposedly rational people reveling in the fanatical joys of degrading someone who has defied any accepted norms of thought or speech regarding the issue of Islamism, but now it’s commonplace enough to be something nearer to sadly boring. Harris’ mistreatment is but one good example of the fate awaiting those who wish even to approach the periphery of this debate. I have watched with growing trepidation: Douglas Murray called a “hate preacher” by Massoud Shadjareh on the BBC; Maajid Nawaz (astoundingly) labelled a “Porch Monkey” by Murtaza Hussain; the late Christopher Hitchens considered a bigot for his strong stance against Islam and the ludicrous notion of “Islamophobia.” These are only the most well known instances. Ex-Muslims and liberal Muslims are constantly defamed for questioning Islam or seeking to implement some type of change.

(By the way, they’re doing a Patreon to support Areo, so check out Areo, and if you like it, you might consider kicking in a few bucks.)