BA 77 has found another vid on the Slaughter of the Dissidents that reminds us of what the sort of evo mat promotion stunts we see going on in and around UD can all too often end up as:
A couple of stills can help us understand what Darwinist agit-prop enabling behaviour by spreading false accusations and willful misrepresentations, demanding a ‘right’ to defame as if that is a part of free speech and the like can all too easily end up as; through, creating a toxic and deeply polarised, destructive climate in our civilisation and especially in key institutions:
Something to ponder, for those who imagine there is a ‘right’ to directly participate in or enable falsely accusing design thinkers of lying, or that outing and publicly smearing people to the detriment of careers, or outing and threatening uninvolved family, or intimidating publishers into undue prior restraint on publication, or outright career busting (as Bergman focuses on) are acceptable behaviours.
Not to mention, willfully continued misrepresentation in the teeth of cogent correction, drumbeat repetition and trumpeting of such big lies, and turn-speech accusations designed to blame the victim. (And yes, we all know the specific history involved with such destructive propaganda tactics; if we refuse to learn from and heed it, we open the door to reliving its worst chapters.)
Of course, enablers of abuses will as a rule deny the implications of enabling behaviour right down to the end. They need to know that playing the manipulative
“good” [= bad] cop in a game of tacit or explicit collusion with the truly outright abusive bullying cop, is to be part of a process of so corroding the trust that is critical to a civilisation, that it ends up in utter polarisation and enmity. (Ever wondered why so many in the underclasses immediately suspect and fear ALL police? Too many rounds of good-cop bad-cop have forever tainted the whole institution. What is going on — the outright abuse and the go-along enabling — is tainting the academy, law courts, the media, education systems, legislatures and government. If this goes on much longer, our civilisation will be fatally polarised as more and more are going to understandably conclude, they have no stake in a fundamentally toxic and oppressive Babylon-system.)
All of this puts Plato’s 360 BC warning in The Laws Bk X on the inherent amorality of evolutionary materialism and how it can all too easily open the door to might and manipulation make ‘right’ nihilism on the table, again:
Ath. . . . [[The avant garde philosophers and poets, c. 360 BC] say that fire and water, and earth and air [[i.e the classical “material” elements of the cosmos], all exist by nature and chance, and none of them by art, and that as to the bodies which come next in order-earth, and sun, and moon, and stars-they have been created by means of these absolutely inanimate existences. The elements are severally moved by chance and some inherent force according to certain affinities among them-of hot with cold, or of dry with moist, or of soft with hard, and according to all the other accidental admixtures of opposites which have been formed by necessity. After this fashion and in this manner the whole heaven has been created, and all that is in the heaven, as well as animals and all plants, and all the seasons come from these elements, not by the action of mind, as they say, or of any God, or from art, but as I was saying, by nature and chance only. [[In short, evolutionary materialism premised on chance plus necessity acting without intelligent guidance on primordial matter is hardly a new or a primarily “scientific” view! Notice also, the trichotomy of causal factors: (a) chance/accident, (b) mechanical necessity of nature, (c) art or intelligent design and direction.] . . . . [[Thus, they hold that t]he Gods exist not by nature, but by art, and by the laws of states, which are different in different places, according to the agreement of those who make them; and that the honourable is one thing by nature and another thing by law, and that the principles of justice have no existence at all in nature, but that mankind are always disputing about them and altering them; and that the alterations which are made by art and by law have no basis in nature, but are of authority for the moment and at the time at which they are made.– [[Relativism, too, is not new; complete with its radical amorality rooted in a worldview that has no foundational IS that can ground OUGHT. (Cf. here for Locke’s views and sources on a very different base for grounding liberty as opposed to license and resulting anarchistic “every man does what is right in his own eyes” chaos leading to tyranny. )] These, my friends, are the sayings of wise men, poets and prose writers, which find a way into the minds of youth. They are told by them that the highest right is might [[ Evolutionary materialism leads to the promotion of amorality], and in this way the young fall into impieties, under the idea that the Gods are not such as the law bids them imagine; and hence arise factions [[Evolutionary materialism-motivated amorality “naturally” leads to continual contentions and power struggles; cf. dramatisation here], these philosophers inviting them to lead a true life according to nature, that is, to live in real dominion over others [[such amoral factions, if they gain power, “naturally” tend towards ruthless tyranny], and not in legal subjection to them.
Of course, onlookers, I have little or no expectation that those who hope to profit from or are willing to enable the toxic agit-prop games that are going on in and around UD as we speak, will heed such a warning. But, there is a need to speak for record.
Since there are threads aplenty where such can be discussed, this again is FYI-FTR. END