This is a long critique of two new anti-New Atheism books that focuses mostly on socio-economic issues and "social justice" rather than on atheism itself. At least the rambling critique is honest enough to include some criticisms of the books. You could cherry pick what you want out of this lengthy critique, which has a rather unfocused conclusion, but beware of the Ad Hominem attacks of these books that distract from the actual atheist issues.
Another attack in the long line of ongoing attacks against atheism. Almost every day I come across another article or some book denouncing atheism, especially their new bogeyman "new atheism". I'm not even going to bother to comment in detail. I'm bored doing it. All I can say I say is, so-called new Atheism and its activists must be working, otherwise this ongoing assault from the Right and religious apologists, both over and covert, wouldn't continue. What really counts is the growth in non religious people in census data for western countries, and the ongoing secularisation of the west, despite religious attempts to thwart it. That's the real and big issue here -- these trends away from religion that scares the religious greatly -- and the "new atheist" bogeymen (intended to be gender neutral here) are the perfect recipients for their sublimated anger.
I completely disagree with the article, which is outdated and off the mark, in my opinion. The label ‘Islamophobia’ is a fabrication, designed to conflate racial or ethnic hatred with a legitimate scorn, if not loathing, of the concepts, doctrines, practices and dogmas of the Islamic faith. With every fiber in my being, I despise Islam, almost as much as I do Christianity.
And while the so-called Four Horsemen are the most well-known, if not infamous, atheists, I have read and listened to so many more, including Voltaire, David Hume, Thomas Paine, Robert Ingersoll, Bertrand Russell, Steven Weinberg, Richard Feynman, Carl Sagan, Susan Jacoby, Jerry Coyne, Sean Carroll, Alain de Botton, not to mention the comedic personalities of George Carlin, John Cleese, Steven Fry, Ricky Gervais, Bill Maher (i.e., the Islamobphobe) and Jim Jeffries. Attacking the so-called ‘New Atheists’ is a waste of energy, and the premise of atheism being akin to a religion is preposterous.
Atheism is not a religion, and definitionally cannot be. It is far too narrow to define an ideology, a worldview, a religion, or an organization. If something has "become" a religion then it has become something other than atheism -- assuming it was ever atheism to begin with.
The strenuous efforts to redefine what atheism means without any effort to consult the dictionary or to ask actual atheists what it means to them, just highlights the intellectual bankruptcy of people who try to turn it into something they are willing to "understand" rather than actually understanding what it actually is.
There are some people that take things to far, even Atheists. I read an article once of a group was trying to make an Atheist church.And others wanted to make an Atheist bible.
My only guess is that most of them were once believers and just miss that kind of community.