First, we must remember that Atheism is essentially a belief. The correct philosophical approach is Agnosticism. For the existence of God can neither be proved or disproved. If it could be proved, the concept of faith would be non-existent; if it could be disproved, religion would not exist.
But what I think is the main argument of BPS is that (as I have personally experienced) atheists are not only destroying religious belief, but all of the cultural aspects that come with that religion. Meanwhile, BPS states that atheism is a leftist ideology. But on the other hand, compares it to that ideology based on how they both behave.
During the French Revolution a big atheistic movement rose. and is undeniable that it behaved like any other barbaric zealot religion. Atheism, being a belief, can be institutionalized into a religion, as it did in France.
That is why sane Atheists prefer the American Revolution to the French one. So atheism is an ideology, like Christianity. Sane atheists should abhor what happened in France, just as Christians should be disgusted with the French Wars of Religion. Atheism and Christianity behave in the same ways.
You can argue that atheism is the rejection of religion, but because of its essential nature it can become what it rejects. Remember that definitions do not hold up to their practice always, like the definition of feminism.
Now, going back to culture. While BPS claim that religion makes up most cultural characteristics is wrong, he is right to say that it is a part of culture. Thus, to claim that atheists are destroying culture is not invalid.
It is true that advanced civilizations become less religious, and that the social vacuum is inconsequential in such a state of affairs. However, a vacuum is produced when a civilization is declining.
When the Romans became decadent, their culture became decadent, a vacuum was produced, and they culturally accepted Christianity as a religion. Only the well educated resisted the longest, but the masses did not.
Many western nations are not rising but are declining. Regardless of their previous height, their fall creates a cultural inertia, like the french “mal du siècle” or the malady of the century. A distinctive french romantic perspective, caused by the vacuum that napoleon left.
Culturally speaking, the hipster phenomenon, the rise of partisan atheism, the loss of spirituality and the rise of Islam, are signs of cultural decadence. And if not decadence at least stagnation. There is a general loss for the respect and the following of tradition. Just look at things like “White Guilt” or Multiculturalism, I see a culturally defeated people. Just like a mal du siècle.
The Japanese are incredibly advanced and incredibly atheistic. But their respect for culture and tradition is not undermined. Even if some say that they are at the brink of economic collapse, they’re culturally healthy. They have no mal du siècle.
It is only at the end that BPS makes a distinction between culture, belief, and religion. And why I think he is totally right in the video.