Richard Dawkins

Doyle Saylor djsaylor at SPAMprimenet.com
Tue Nov 30 23:53:52 MST 1999


Title: Re: Richard Dawkins
Greetings Comrades,
    Phillip Ferguson tries to clear up my statement about Richard Dawkins.  First
off thanks for the clarification about Richard Dawkins liberal views.  When you
write:
Phillip
Of course, since I regard left-liberals as generally being part of the
enemy camp of the working class, I would agree that, in that sense, he
is an opponent of the working class.  But I don't know if that is the
sense in which you used the term.  If you mean he is some kind of
committed right-winger, I don't think that is the case at all.  He's a
chardonnay socialist.
Doyle
I meant that the "liberal" point of view which goes right back to the
Enlightenment, and is as you said above; the "enemy" of the working class. I
thought about using the word, enemy, but I think for the typical scientist, that
sort of hard feeling is not an apt description of their view of their privilege
over me.  They seem to me to usually cling to a model about their work (such as
Dawkins about genetics), but could have many different points of view otherwise
as long as their special status is kept enhanced.  In this case a model of
inheritance which shapes things like social conduct, instead of the elementary
understanding human beings have created their societies.  So one would gather
from your knowledge of Dawkins, he seems to favor working class interests in the
typical labor party way.  Which as we know is highly problematic.  But I would
like to take a moment to praise your making this point.  I am afraid I wasn't
clear enough.
There is a deep distinction we make with the liberal perspective on how society
is constructed.  My own experience is that with Professors, and my brother is a
major mathematician, they don't often get what being a worker is, although
Stephen Jay Gould is a good exception, or Noam Chomsky.  Whereas, since I am
working class, I find most workers, even if their personal beliefs are "Christian",
or heavy metal, or whatever, they have a lot more solidarity with me than does
my own brother, who is a typical liberal.  My brother thinks I am stupid and
lazy.  He is a committed opponent of my working class orientation.  He is not my
enemy.  He loves me.  But he wouldn't choose working people over his class.
Inherited talent such as my brother has is bullshit.  This system short changes
people.  It deprives people in order to keep enough cheap labor.  I am the equal
of my brother any day of my life.  Justifying that class difference between him
and me by claiming there are genes that create selfishness (or whatever the
latest thinking about genetic control of social behavior) is transparently
justifying the way things are.  Of course there is genetic issues in the
structure of human bodies.  That is important.  But any time someone says genes
do such and such about human social conduct, RIGHT!
cheers,
Doyle Saylor






More information about the Marxism mailing list