Vox Popoli

Richard Dawkins is such an incorrigible ass. He complains that critical books that have either covers or titles which are similar to the books they are criticizing are somehow committing “plagiarism”. This is absurd, since it is impossible to copyright either book titles or cover layouts, one could publish a book entitled The God Delusion and it would still not be plagiarism so long as one did not copy the actual text from Dawkins’s book. And so again we witness Dawkins demonstrate his total incompetence outside of his particular field of science propagandaevolutionary biology.

The thing I find amusing about the whole flea thing isn’t that Dawkins and company could be described as God’s fleas, but rather that The End of Faith is clearly a take-off on Fukuyama’s post-Marxian 1989 essay The End of History. It’s not even the first such take-off, as John Horgan published The End of Science in 1998.

I didn’t consider calling TIA The End of Atheism for a second, because such books are not meant to be taken in a literal manner. In his essay, which was expanded into a book in 1992, Fukuyama was not referring to history per se, but rather the end of a Marxist ideological concept, specifically, the idea of inevitable progress towards a Communist workers’ paradise. In like manner, The End of Science doesn’t refer to a literal end of science, but rather addresses the possibility that there are no big fundamental concepts left for science to discover. That’s why it’s so funny that Harris blithely titled his book in a manner that suggests a failure to understand the books whose titles he is “plagiarizing”, given that he is advocating a literal end to faith in The End of Faith.

To the empirical idiocy of gun control, anyhow:

Despite the recent spate of shootings on our streets, we pride ourselves on our strict gun laws. Every time an American gunman goes on a killing spree, we shake our heads in righteous disbelief at our poor benighted colonial cousins. Why is it, even after the Virginia Tech massacre, that Americans still resist calls for more gun controls?

The short answer is that “gun controls” do not work: they are indeed generally perverse in their effects….

Virginia Tech reinforced the lesson that gun controls are obeyed only by the law-abiding. New York has “banned” pistols since 1911, and its fellow murder capitals, Washington DC and Chicago, have similar bans. One can draw a map of the US, showing the inverse relationship of the strictness of its gun laws, and levels of violence: all the way down to Vermont, with no gun laws at all, and the lowest level of armed violence (one thirteenth that of Britain).

A mandatory firearms ownership laws combined with a ban on police firearms is the ideal situation, reducing the likelihood of crime as well as government-inflicted violence.

Richard Dawkins notices that the so-called fleas are multiplying. This is true and will continue, but what Dawkins doesn’t realize is that they are also evolving; the assumptions expressed in the comment thread notwithstanding, there is likely very little in common between Alistair McGrath’s arguments and mine. I rather doubt his publisher ever had a conversation with him that began with “You really can’t start a chapter title with the word ‘Bitches’.”

I’ve made some ‘orbit’ images of the fleas to highlight some of the name and cover plagiarism.

I argued against the cover parody myself, (how typical that a whiner like Dawkins would call it “plagiarism”), but publishers will be publishers, and I have to admit, while my idea of a cartoon of fish-squirrels gang-sodomizing a shrieking Dr. Dawkins was hilarious, I suppose it might have been considered a bit vulgar for what is supposed to be an intellectual rebuttal. (Needless to say, my arguments are probably just a little less theologically inclined than everyone else’s.) I say that a bitch-slapping isn’t any less of a bitch-slapping because you’re wearing white gloves, but obviously the publisher disagrees.

Of course, I anticipated Dawkins’s flea theme in TIA. The guy isn’t stupid, but he’s far from brilliant and is almost boringly predictable; most of his arguments were made previously by Meslier and Russell except, of course, for that burning logical train wreck he insists on calling the Ultimate 747. Unfortunately, my publisher also insisted on repressing some of my poetical inspirations, which is why A Dog Named Flea does not appear in the book.

But fans of scientific poetry will be glad to know that at least one poem inspired by the Archbishop of Oxford did make it into the final text, albeit in slightly edited form.

UPDATE – I will be very surprised if this guy means what he says:

I’m still wating for a ‘flea’ to tackle any one of Dawkins’ clear and straightforward arguments head on – I mean with real intellectual honesty and logical rigour. It just never happens.

In the one chapter dedicated to dissecting Dawkins – which is almost as easy as demonstrating the multiple factual and logical errors made by Sam Harris with tedious regularity – I go step-by-step through what Dawkins himself describes as the central argument of The God Delusion. What’s amusing isn’t so much the four factual and logical errors he makes in the first five steps, although they are pretty bad, but rather, the fact that what ends up passing for the conclusion of this “irrefutable” argument is, by his own admission, in no way based on the steps leading up to it.

To describe Dawkins’s arguments as clear and straightforward – or even coherent – is proof of one’s own intellectual incompetence. Dawkins is dependent upon his critics arguing theology, because any highly intelligent individual with a working knowledge of logic and history can demolish his arguments without breaking a sweat.

Not only have I done so in TIA, but I am certain that every other non-theologically focused Dawkins critic will as well because the great atheist icon’s factual and logical errors are so glaringly apparent.

I’m not expecting signs and wonders out of Tavaris this season, but I’m certainly not as down on the Vikes as this poor Football Outsider is on the Giants:

Bill Barnwell: New York Giants. When I think about this upcoming Giants season, my heart hurts in the way it does when you think of ex-girlfriends sleeping with new people. Many new people. At the same time. While she reassures them all how much better they are in bed than you. Oh, and she does this all in the next room over from you while you’re trying to sleep. And then makes the whole group breakfast afterwards, your favorite breakfast, too, and throws out the last helping as you go to grab some. It’s like that, except it’s going to happen for about 17 consecutive weekends. It astounds me that some people still think this team has a chance of being competitive in 2007.

This is particularly funny due to the way in which most residents of Media Central are inclined to have such an overrated view of their sports teams.

The Dark is Rising apparently is not famous enough to be spared the full Hollywood treatment:

A joke among the journalists covering The Dark Is Rising set visit in Bucharest over the last couple of days was that the movie has only changed three things from the Newberry-winning novel on which it’s based: they’ve changed the lead kid’s nationality from English to American, they’ve changed the lead kid’s age from 11 to 14, and they’ve changed everything that happens in the story.

In case you haven’t figured out why I have turned down every request to option the EW novels for film – and there have been several – this sort of nonsense is why I’m just not interested. Now, I have been sketching a thriller called Second Revelations, which is the action-packed sort of thing that can’t be ruined because there’s nothing particularly unique there to ruin.

I’ve always wondered why Satan’s servants would bother to fight for him, unless they believe he can win. And if they believe that, then they would have to have their own set of prophecies and so forth, as well as their own spin on the events of the New Testament. Hence, The Revelation of St. Iscariot the Damned. It starts off with a bang; a Vatican strike force wiping out an Alpine nunnery with only one nun saved by an agent of a secret order of rogue Benedictines.

Everything you could possibly want to know about Vox Day and more. Part 12: In which Our Hero finally relents and stops tormenting a certain percent of his readers:

Vox Day and Me (Part 12).

Vox Day and Me (Part 11).

Vox Day and Me (Part 10).

Vox Day and Me (Part 9), (Part 9.1), and (Part 9.2)

Vox Day and Me (Part 8)

Vox Day and Me (Part 7)

Vox Day and Me (Part 6)

Vox Day and Me (Part 5)

Vox Day and Me (Part 4)

Vox Day and Me (Part 3)

Vox Day and Me (Part 2)

Vox Day and Me (Part 1)

Italy is in mourning today for one of its favorite sons, who was famous throughout the world but never forgot that he was an Italian.

“Spero di essere ricordato come cantante d’opera, ovvero come rappresentante di una forma d’arte che ha trovato la sua massima espressione nel mio Paesera.”

“I wish to be remembered as a singer of the opera, as a representative of the art form that has found its ultimate expression in my country.”

That’s enough. Kick them out. All of them. If Americans wanted to live in Mexico, they’d move there.

“Mexico does not end at its borders. … Where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico.”

That astonishing claim by Mexican President Felipe Calderon, in his state of the nation address at the National Palace Sunday, brought his audience wildly cheering to its feet…

In 1995, President Ernesto Zedillo told a Dallas audience of U.S. citizens of Mexican descent, “You are Mexicans, Mexicans who live north of the border” – i.e., you owe loyalty to Mexico, not Uncle Sam.

In 1997, Zedillo brought a Chicago gathering of La Raza to its feet by exclaiming, “I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders.”

In 1998, Mexico changed its constitution to restore citizenship to Mexican-Americans who have taken an oath of allegiance to the United States and renounced loyalty to any other country.

Purpose: loosen their ties of loyalty to the United States, re-knit their ties of loyalty to Mexico, and persuade Mexican-Americans to vote Mexico’s interests in the USA. Put Mexico first, even if you have taken an oath of allegiance to the United States.

In June 2004, President Vicente Fox took the Zedillo road to the Mexican-American community in Chicago. There, he, too, declared: “We are Mexicans that live in our territories, and we are Mexicans that live in other territories. In reality, there are 120 million that live together and are working together to construct a nation.”

President Fox was saying that the construction of his nation is taking place – inside our nation. Is that not sedition?

In 2005, the head of the Institute of Mexicans Abroad, Carlos Gutierrez, asserted, “The Mexican nation goes beyond the borders that contain Mexico.”

What these Mexicans politicians are saying is that Mexico extends into the United States, and the first loyalty of all men and women of Mexican ancestry is, no matter where they live, to Mexico.

Mr. Regression to the Mean is an excellent compass, you just have to remember he points due south:

“Any Issues in My Private Life Do Not Affect My Public Performance”

Rudy just had his best debate moment since his tussle with Ron Paul several months ago — going head-on at his greatest potential weakness, his messy family situation, and essentially asking voters to note that he did his job well regardless of personal difficulties. It’s the only answer he can give, really, and it was very nearly perfect. Whether it will work we won’t know until this is all decided.

As long as people can remember Bill Clinton, it’s not going to work. Even if they couldn’t remember Bill Clinton, who doesn’t have personal experience of their private lives affecting their work?

I mean, when someone’s dog dies, you take it easy on them for the next day or two, right? Because everyone’s private life absolutely affects their public performance. Giuliani is doing nothing more than demonstrating that he is a shameless liar. Again.

After eight years of George Bush betraying the United States, we can look forward to eight years of the Lizard Queen doing the same thing:

Cronkite said, “Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. To deal with world problems, we need a system of enforceable world law, a democratic federal world government.” Clinton, then first lady, congratulated Cronkite, saying, “For decades you told us ‘the way it is,’ but tonight we honor you for fighting for the way it could be.”

What could be more American than a democratic federal world government? After all, we’ll have almost nearly 4.75 percent of the vote; who wouldn’t want to live how the Chinese, Indians and Indonesians decide we should all live. I’m sure it will be for the best.