There seems to be some confusion among theists as to what constitutes and ideology such that they believe atheism is one. This is categorically incorrect by definition, although likewise the same could be said of theism. However in practice, theism in the wider social context is synonymous with religion and so when we refer to theism, what we are really referring to is ‘theistic religion’ which in practice is an ideology, a social control mechanism.  

Theism in definitive terms is a positive belief in the existence of gods. In practice the belief in a god manifests into the belief in acting out the wishes of the said god such that  the ensuing patterns of behaviour follow the social ideals of the particular group of theists who now form a religion i.e. Theism in context of its function or how it operates in the world, is a social ideology based on the perceived wishes and commands of the god concerned.

         Atheism in definitive terms (and in its basic form) is ‘not having a positive belief in the existence of gods’. Since there is no perceived god, nor replacement focal point, there are no perceived instructions to follow, so there is no ideology to be had. So in any meaningful sense, theism equates to theistic religion and is an ideology whereas atheism isn’t.

         Ideologies which do not include the working instructions of a god can be described as ‘atheistic’ but this merely informs the person that the former applies and does not suggest actions consistent with ‘not believing in gods’ form the basis of the ideology i.e The ideals are not based on atheism although they will be atheistic in as much as no god is included. They will have there own reasoning to support their ideology eg Communism with its own social structure and MO (nb: no mention of lack of gods here, they just aren’t included!).   

                    In the same way that Communism could be described as atheistic then so could Capitalism as its ideology does not revolve around a god. In fact theism in the western world is now so subservient and obedient to the ideals of capitalism that we often hear the complaint that ‘money is the new god’. Well, in any meaningful sense it is!

 Capitalism, Communism and Theism are in every sense, social control mechanisms. They even have their own subcategorized variant forms which follow the same basic MO as the header category e.g. Monetarism, Marxism and Islamism, respectively. They also have hierarchal structure and a central ideal to which the belief is attached and once you stop believing in the ideal, it all disappears into thin air.

Modus Operandi, (method/mode of operation)

rsmartin:-

Thanks!

I've been trying really hard to figure out where the Christians on these forums are coming from when they claim to know what we believe due to our "atheistic worldview."

1. It feels like they think they can control what an atheist thinks and believes about reality.
2. They seem to claim omniscience (the power of knowing what other people think).
3. They seem to hold a rigidly black and white view of the world; if we don't believe what they do they think we must of necessity believe the exact opposite--defined in their terms. 

The wiki article on presuppositionalist theology gave me some insight. It seems to be beneath their dignity to legitimize our point of view by granting as valid a view that does not include god. For some of these people (and I'm not sure that this is in the linked article) all morals are believed to originate from their god. In other words, any good deed done, or any decent word spoken, by an atheist is of necessity the outcome of their god because their god is the source and originator of goodness.

Thus:

All good things come from God.
Morals come from God.
Therefore God exists.

I'm sure I'm doing something wrong with this syllogism but it's circular thinking no matter how you set it up.

Morality proves the existence of God.
God is the originator and source of morals.

remainder of original post by harvey1:-

harvey1;-
There are many ideologies that can form as a result of this one basic belief system. They are usually anti-religious ideologies because religion is the view that the world has purpose, so we ought to guide our society in ways that conform to those perceived metphysical purposes. Since atheism has it that those are fictional purposes, and that the world is metaphysically open with regard to purpose (i.e., purposes are all subjective), atheist ideologies focus on subjective purposes existing in the world. Therefore, an atheist ideology may try to suppress religious freedoms because it sees religion as anti-subjective purpose, and hence an enemy of the state.

 It might see capitalism as anti-subjective purpose by endowing capital principles with purposive-talk (e.g., individual rights, etc.).

Pap:-

The objective purpose is to function well as a society as an aid to our survival as a species. It’s what all organisms do i.e. do what’s they can to survive. Subjective purpose pertains to the particular belief within an ideology so communism has subjective purpose (what it perceives as the goals to strive for) but so too does theism (context theist religion). Theism does not have true objective purpose, it has a subjective purpose which its followers perceive to be objective but it isn’t (because they’re only perceiving it, it’s subjective)

harvey1:-
So, I disagree, there are atheist ideologies. The North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il is currently one of the chief atheist idealogues in the world.

Pap:-

Yes there are eg Buddhism (general context) is also an atheist ideology. After much thought and reasoning they decided they had no need of gods and wrote them out of the script. They don’t commit atrocities. Environmentalism is an ideology as it has no gods, so it’s atheist in as much it doesn’t revolve around the perceived commands of a god.  

            Basically, to suit whatever purpose, theists are referring to the adjective instead of the noun or the ideology itself. Communism is your competing social ideology, not atheism.   

1. The opening paragraph, which is the overview, tells us that the purpose of this article is to "explore"; thus, definition is not its purpose.
2. The opening paragraph tells us that the purpose is the differences between atheism and agnosticism; thus a definition of atheism is not the aim of this article.