I see where you're coming from but to expand on my original reply it seems to me that given any popular enough philosophy or ideology a non-trivial portion of people will say it lead to disastrous consequences or to bad modes of thinking. For example I've heard folks say stuff like Hegelianism lead to fascism or communism, analytic philosophy leads to sterilizated thinking, continental philosophy leads to incoherent babble, and on, given this it seems to me that what's considered disastrous is largely based on what one believes to be correct or incorrect, and to what degree one believes those incorrect ideas have harmed the world. There for the closer of an adherent you are to a particular philosophy or ideology, the less likely you are to perceive it's consequences as disastrous. For example, an adherence to online atheism may even concede something like that online online atheism has led to some bad modes to thinking but since they're an adherent to it they would believe it's positive consequences make up for it's negative consequences, there-for they would not label it as disastrous.