A Dawkins No-No

[Immanuel Can]

...it would have been nice if he'd just told them to get f.....d"

That, perhaps in other, more polite words, is exactly what a good person would do.

Your beef would be his mentioning of the 'American right-wing bigots'

Ha. No, I care nothing for that. I think it's really silly, actually.

But I do think it's interesting that Dawkins is clearly kneeling to the Leftist narrative by mentioning that, because the illusory "right wing bigot" is the biggest bogeyman the Left uses to justify it's excesses. See how he's using that, begging to be "forgiven" and "let back into the party" by his Leftist critics. How he caters to them. How he protests, "I never meant to cross y'all...y'know I love ya...and hate your enemies."

And yet, he was making an important scientific point. And all he asked for was "discussion." His critics are clearly unprincipled, ideologically-possessed fools; but Dawkins is down on his knees, pleading that he meant no harm, when you and I know he should be saying, "I have every right to ask that we have reasoned discussion on this important topic. I've asked you a good question: now, man up and answer it." That's what he should be saying. But he's not. He's afraid. He's retracting. He's placating. He's even trying to flatter his oppressors' vanity, with his nonsense about "right wing bigots."

Such a supple spine...such obsequiousness...such flexible principles...such grovelling...such cowardice and servility. It really ought to be beneath a man. But apparently, it's not.

I just don't think he was grovelling. I sense sarcasm.

Sarcasm? Hardly. If sarcasm is well done, it raises the level of ire in the opponent. Dawkins was trying to pour water on the fire. I think you can see that pretty darn clearly. Either that, or he's the most inept person at sarcasm in the history of sarcasm.

I also think that a person who was strong on principle wouldn't resort to placating, or even to mere sarcasm: I think he would take his opposition on directly, and say, "No, that's not right, and what you're saying is not true." That's what I think he should have done, because his "discussion" point was completely legitimate, and nobody had any right to call him names on account of asking an honest and very relevant question.

In fact, I would suggest that the Left's refusal even to entertain Dawkins' tweet is a clear indication that they realize they are believing nonsense. If they were confident of the truth of their position, they would WANT to discuss it, and would BE GLAD to air their reasons and evidence, and be CERTAIN that good judgment, scientific facts and right reason was on their side. The only reason people close down discussion before it even happens is when they are terrified from the start that they're going to lose. That's the only motive for not wanting evidence, reasoning, logic, science and discussion to be directed at one's views.

Dawkins had them on the run. And he had a good question. He had pointed out a huge hypocrisy in the Left's PC views. And he was right.

He should have stuck to his guns. But obviously, he did not. He backed off, wimped out, and effectively withdrew his "discussion" point. The thing is, the Left doesn't let you off if you do that. It just kills you anyway, and says, "You see? Even he knew he was out of line." So I don't expect them to have any mercy on Mr. Dawkins. He won't be getting that award back, you can be sure. He'll be lucky to get out of there with his skin; because nobody likes a coward.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

That, perhaps in other, more polite words, is exactly what a good person would do.


Ha. No, I care nothing for that. I think it's really silly, actually.

But I do think it's interesting that Dawkins is clearly kneeling to the Leftist narrative by mentioning that, because the illusory "right wing bigot" is the biggest bogeyman the Left uses to justify it's excesses. See how he's using that, begging to be "forgiven" and "let back into the party" by his Leftist critics. How he caters to them. How he protests, "I never meant to cross y'all...y'know I love ya...and hate your enemies."

And yet, he was making an important scientific point. And all he asked for was "discussion." His critics are clearly unprincipled, ideologically-possessed fools; but Dawkins is down on his knees, pleading that he meant no harm, when you and I know he should be saying, "I have every right to ask that we have reasoned discussion on this important topic. I've asked you a good question: now, man up and answer it." That's what he should be saying. But he's not. He's afraid. He's retracting. He's placating. He's even trying to flatter his oppressors' vanity, with his nonsense about "right wing bigots."

Such a supple spine...such obsequiousness...such flexible principles...such grovelling...such cowardice and servility. It really ought to be beneath a man. But apparently, it's not.

I just don't think he was grovelling. I sense sarcasm.

Sarcasm? Hardly. If sarcasm is well done, it raises the level of ire in the opponent. Dawkins was trying to pour water on the fire. I think you can see that pretty darn clearly. Either that, or he's the most inept person at sarcasm in the history of sarcasm.

I also think that a person who was strong on principle wouldn't resort to placating, or even to mere sarcasm: I think he would take his opposition on directly, and say, "No, that's not right, and what you're saying is not true." That's what I think he should have done, because his "discussion" point was completely legitimate, and nobody had any right to call him names on account of asking an honest and very relevant question.

In fact, I would suggest that the Left's refusal even to entertain Dawkins' tweet is a clear indication that they realize they are believing nonsense. If they were confident of the truth of their position, they would WANT to discuss it, and would BE GLAD to air their reasons and evidence, and be CERTAIN that good judgment, scientific facts and right reason was on their side. The only reason people close down discussion before it even happens is when they are terrified from the start that they're going to lose. That's the only motive for not wanting evidence, reasoning, logic, science and discussion to be directed at one's views.

Dawkins had them on the run. And he had a good question. He had pointed out a huge hypocrisy in the Left's PC views. And he was right.

He should have stuck to his guns. But obviously, he did not. He backed off, wimped out, and effectively withdrew his "discussion" point. The thing is, the Left doesn't let you off if you do that. It just kills you anyway, and says, "You see? Even he knew he was out of line." So I don't expect them to have any mercy on Mr. Dawkins. He won't be getting that award back, you can be sure. He'll be lucky to get out of there with his skin; because nobody likes a coward.

I think Henry is more on the mark. First: a 'wimp out'. Second: an 'up you'.

Why does everyone have to be 'right' or 'left' in your little world? What do you call the huge number of people who are left leaning (i.e. human) but loathe the Politically Correct?

[Immanuel Can]

What do you call the huge number of people who are left leaning (i.e. human) but loathe the Politically Correct?

I call them "silent."

[vegetariantaxidermy]

What do you call the huge number of people who are left leaning (i.e. human) but loathe the Politically Correct?

I call them "silent."

They are silenceD and the moronic 'right' don't know left from right, so there's really not a lot of hope for anyone.

[Immanuel Can]

They are silenceD...

By whom? Not the right, for sure...they don't have any voice either. It can only be by the radical Left. They are the ones controlling the media at the moment. Dawkins found that out, for sure. It's pretty obvious he has no fear this Leftist bogeyman he conjures up, the "right wing bigots" will catch up with him. But he's terrified of those loons who classify even the word "discuss" as a "hate crime."

[henry quirk]

They are silenceD...

By whom? Not the right, for sure...they don't have any voice either. It can only be by the radical Left. They are the ones controlling the media at the moment. Dawkins found that out, for sure. It's pretty obvious he has no fear this Leftist bogeyman he conjures up, the "right wing bigots" will catch up with him. But he's terrified of those loons who classify even the word "discuss" as a "hate crime."

Truth is: when someone is cancelled, they themselves do the cancelling.

Trannies are confused, mentally ill people who ought to be pitied and offered treatment to get their heads clear. We ought not be catering to their disease of thinking, we ought not be pretending what they crave is healthy or sane.

Say it, stick by it, weather the storm.

Put some steel in your spine, don't back down.

The horde will have its conniptions.

They will boycott, and write letters to the papers, and organize protests.

They will sue and threaten and demand your head.

Push back.

I won't bake that cake; I won't retract; I won't go along to get along; I won't be bulldogged into promoting lies; I won't back down.

I will not move.

Of course it'll get violent...be just as violent.

Of course it will seem the whole world is against you.

Of course family, friends, associates, and strangers will array against you, cut you off.

You will be alone and afraid.

Bear it, stand up, push back.

Your dignity, your autonomy, your soul is on the line.

You will only be silenced if you shut up.

Don't shut up.

Don't cooperate in your own demise.

You will tire, wonder what good is comin' from not givin' in, not takin' a knee, not knucklin' under.

So easy to make it all go away...just give us what we want...recant...apologize...debase yourself...accept the lie.

Don't give them anything but the finger.

[Immanuel Can]

Truth is: when someone is cancelled, they themselves do the cancelling.

That's very true.

The other thing is this...and you'll find it's an infallible rule...if you kneel down to the Left, it's just so they can kick you in the face. Count on it.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Truth is: when someone is cancelled, they themselves do the cancelling.

That's very true.

The other thing is this...and you'll find it's an infallible rule...if you kneel down to the Left, it's just so they can kick you in the face. Count on it.

Ok then, if the entire 'left' is made up of woke fuckwits, then the entire 'right' are Nazis.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

They are silenceD...

By whom? Not the right, for sure...they don't have any voice either. It can only be by the radical Left. They are the ones controlling the media at the moment. Dawkins found that out, for sure. It's pretty obvious he has no fear this Leftist bogeyman he conjures up, the "right wing bigots" will catch up with him. But he's terrified of those loons who classify even the word "discuss" as a "hate crime."

Truth is: when someone is cancelled, they themselves do the cancelling.

Trannies are confused, mentally ill people who ought to be pitied and offered treatment to get their heads clear. We ought not be catering to their disease of thinking, we ought not be pretending what they crave is healthy or sane.

Say it, stick by it, weather the storm.

Put some steel in your spine, don't back down.

The horde will have its conniptions.

They will boycott, and write letters to the papers, and organize protests.

They will sue and threaten and demand your head.

Push back.

I won't bake that cake; I won't retract; I won't go along to get along; I won't be bulldogged into promoting lies; I won't back down.

I will not move.

Of course it'll get violent...be just as violent.

Of course it will seem the whole world is against you.

Of course family, friends, associates, and strangers will array against you, cut you off.

You will be alone and afraid.

Bear it, stand up, push back.

Your dignity, your autonomy, your soul is on the line.

You will only be silenced if you shut up.

Don't shut up.

Don't cooperate in your own demise.

You will tire, wonder what good is comin' from not givin' in, not takin' a knee, not knucklin' under.

So easy to make it all go away...just give us what we want...recant...apologize...debase yourself...accept the lie.

Don't give them anything but the finger.

It's mob rule. In case you hadn't noticed the world is being run via social media now. That's the way it is at the this time in social evolution. There wasn't much Trump could do when social media silenced him. The idiot mob gets most of its information from social media.

And it's relgious nuts like you and IC who might as well be singing the praises of the woke, because every time you open your stupid mouths you are playing RIGHT into their hands. That's what Dawkins was getting at. Would you seriously call him 'right wing'? He's a SCIENTIST. He goes with facts and evidence.

[Immanuel Can]

Ok then, if the entire 'left' is made up of woke fuckwits, then the entire 'right' are Nazis.

Neither was said, above, of course. So where you got that from, I don't know.

I'm sure there are people who mean well on the political left. They just don't seem to be the ones in charge of the media, the political parties and the social justice ideology. The "cancel culture club" is in charge there, as Dawkins now realizes, if he didn't before.

But the centrist left is not doing much to straighten out their own faction. They're surrendering to extremism right now, without raising much of a fuss. And in the war to take over the whole Left, the extremists are using the sort of polarization you represent above to impart a sense of urgency to their hatred and extremism. If the Nazi stormtroopers are at the door, then who has time to look at the condition of one's own house?

So it seems that the centre left has been distracted by the "shiny object" of a mostly-fictitious and practically powerless "dangerous extreme right," or "right wing bigots," to use Dawkins' rather obsequious term, and have become blind to the knives that are at their own backs.

That's another thing about the extreme Left. They always, always eat their own children. It's not just unsafe for anybody on the right to have them running the show -- as perhaps Dawkins demonstrates, it's not even safe for those who imagine they can sit on the centre left. Nothing but total commitment to the ideological package (such as trans-ism but not cross-race-ism) will keep the centrist from being the first to go in the new Left's "night of the long knives." (https://www.britannica.com/event/Night- ... ong-Knives)

Sad. But maybe the centrist left can wake up and fight off the extremists. I just haven't seen them do it yet -- or really, raise even a peep of objection to the extremists, for that matter.

So again, I would suggest the moderate left exists, but they are presently silent.

[Immanuel Can]

Would you seriously call him 'right wing'? He's a SCIENTIST. He goes with facts and evidence.

Heh. "Facts and evidence?" Maybe in his own field -- I can't say -- but certainly not in the many areas on which he makes most of his public pronouncements.

But now it seems even his allies are finding they have no use for him. He won't stay politically correct, and he won't stand up to them either. His future, it seems, is irrelevancy -- at least so far as the public discourse goes. He's just a relic of a more confident time, when Atheism thought it was going to win and everybody was going to believe in nothing. Now it's clear that all that's coming is a new extremism, one likely to turn out even more blindly fervent, and worse than the Socialist political debacles of the past. And they don't care for Dawkins anymore. He's not their man.

Too bad for him. For one moment there, he almost made sense. But when they chirped, he knuckled under. Why should they respect him now?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Ok then, if the entire 'left' is made up of woke fuckwits, then the entire 'right' are Nazis.

Neither was said, above, of course. So where you got that from, I don't know.

I'm sure there are people who mean well on the political left. They just don't seem to be the ones in charge of the media, the political parties and the social justice ideology. The "cancel culture club" is in charge there, as Dawkins now realizes, if he didn't before.

But the centrist left is not doing much to straighten out their own faction. They're surrendering to extremism right now, without raising much of a fuss. And in the war to take over the whole Left, the extremists are using the sort of polarization you represent above to impart a sense of urgency to their hatred and extremism. If the Nazi stormtroopers are at the door, then who has time to look at the condition of one's own house?

So it seems that the centre left has been distracted by the "shiny object" of a mostly-fictitious and practically powerless "dangerous extreme right," or "right wing bigots," to use Dawkins' rather obsequious term, and have become blind to the knives that are at their own backs.

That's another thing about the extreme Left. They always, always eat their own children. It's not just unsafe for anybody on the right to have them running the show -- as perhaps Dawkins demonstrates, it's not even safe for those who imagine they can sit on the centre left. Nothing but total commitment to the ideological package (such as trans-ism but not cross-race-ism) will keep the centrist from being the first to go in the new Left's "night of the long knives." (https://www.britannica.com/event/Night- ... ong-Knives)

Sad. But maybe the centrist left can wake up and fight off the extremists. I just haven't seen them do it yet -- or really, raise even a peep of objection to the extremists, for that matter.

So again, I would suggest the moderate left exists, but they are presently silent.

You are the one who calls the extremists 'the left' as a general, all-encompassing label. And why do you think the 'cancel culture' has come about? Specifically to silence anyone who disagrees with them! It's hard to be heard when you don't have a platform. It's hard to be heard when mainstream media ignores you. The world is being run via the internet. If the internet mob decides that someone is to be silenced then that is what happens.
People don't want to lose their livelihood. A cartoon like Henry might think they should go on a shooting spree, but these are mostly intelligent, reasonable people we are talking about, and they don't generally do things like that That wouldn't even be possible because they are dealing with a faceless, online mob.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Would you seriously call him 'right wing'? He's a SCIENTIST. He goes with facts and evidence.

Heh. "Facts and evidence?" Maybe in his own field -- I can't say -- but certainly not in the many areas on which he makes most of his public pronouncements.

But now it seems even his allies are finding they have no use for him. He won't stay politically correct, and he won't stand up to them either. His future, it seems, is irrelevancy -- at least so far as the public discourse goes. He's just a relic of a more confident time, when Atheism thought it was going to win and everybody was going to believe in nothing. Now it's clear that all that's coming is a new extremism, one likely to turn out even more blindly fervent, and worse than the Socialist political debacles of the past. And they don't care for Dawkins anymore. He's not their man.

Too bad for him. For one moment there, he almost made sense. But when they chirped, he knuckled under. Why should they respect him now?

And a lot of it is thanks to people like you who dismiss everything they don't agree with as 'the left'. 'Left' and 'right' is far too simplistic. Human society is a lot more complex than that. If the so-called 'right' says something that happens to be TRUE, then I will acknowledge that. If something is true then it's true. That's not subject to opinion or agenda. Unfortunately most people are incapable of understanding that.
What has Dawkins said that isn't true? And I'm not talking about something you don't happen to agree with. He doesn't take kindly to religous nuts, so I can certainly see why you wouldn't like him.

Perhaps humans passed their peak a couple of decades ago and the only path ahead is ever-increasing insanity. It certainly looks that way.

[Immanuel Can]

You are the one who calls the extremists 'the left' as a general, all-encompassing label.

Not a bit. Did you read my message? I spoke in it of the silent, centrist left.

And why do you think the 'cancel culture' has come about?

Because the Left has not kept its own house clean. It entertained the radicals, compromised with them, sold out on basic liberal values in order to cater to them, and now it's lost control of its own agenda.

[Immanuel Can]

What has Dawkins said that isn't true?

Read any of his books. You'll see plenty.

But I suppose you only mean "in this case." Well, in this case, he's dishonestly grovelled to cancel culture, and sold out his own right to free speech. He's abandoned his original commitment to the value of public discussion, bowed down, and let the Leftists wipe their boots on him.

Perhaps humans passed their peak a couple of decades ago and the only path ahead is ever-increasing insanity. It certainly looks that way.

About that, I have to agree with you.