One of the ongoing debates about the atheist movement of the 2000s and early 2010s is whether it “collapsed” because it became too politically progressive or “too woke.”
I don’t think that explanation holds up.
In my view, the real problem with the movement was something else entirely: it contained a significant number of reactionary voices, particularly white male commentators, who eventually stopped hiding their hostility toward women, marginalized communities, and racial minorities.
For a while, those tensions remained mostly beneath the surface. But when controversies like Elevatorgate, Gamergate, and similar disputes erupted, they exposed cultural problems that had been developing inside the movement for years.
Regardless of where one stood on the details of those specific incidents, they represented opportunities for reflection and self-examination.
Unfortunately, many of us (including myself) responded defensively rather than thoughtfully.
Instead of listening to people who felt alienated or marginalized within atheist spaces, the dominant reaction in many circles was to dismiss their concerns, mock them, or accuse them of trying to impose political correctness on what was supposed to be a rationalist community.
In hindsight, that response made things worse.
Atheism itself is simply a position on one question: whether gods exist. But movements built around atheism inevitably become social communities, and communities bring their own cultural dynamics.
When those dynamics include arrogance, hostility, or a lack of empathy, people eventually notice.
The uncomfortable truth is that many of us behaved like self-important gatekeepers who were quick to criticize religion but much slower to examine our own toxic attitudes and behavior.
The movement’s credibility suffered as a result.
Looking back, it’s clear that moments of conflict within the atheist community could have been growth opportunities. They could have encouraged more thoughtful conversations about inclusion, respect, and how a community built around skepticism should treat the people within it.
Instead, too often, those conversations devolved into hostility and factionalism.
If there is a lesson to take from that period, it is a simple one: skepticism should not only apply to religious beliefs.
It should also apply to our own behavior.