...wow.
So, I'm listening to right-wing radio on the drive in to work, and I have one of those "okay, are you actually that ignorant, or do you just think your audience is?" moments.
The host was commenting on a recent remark by President Obama that Paul Ryan supported social Darwinism. And the host was befuddled by this, because (as he put it), "Darwinism is, like the religion of the Left. Darwin is their God." So of course, the host couldn't understand why anyone on the Left would invoke Darwin in any negative light.
I'm not touching this "religion of the Left"/"Darwin is their God" claptrap. Nor will I address the point that social Darwinism has long been a "religion", in that sense, of the Right. I'm still trying to figure out whether this bozo genuinely didn't understand what social Darwinism IS, or if he was deliberately conflating economics (and social policy) with biology (as many opponents of evolution are wont to do).
But it gets better. He brought on someone he addressed as "doctor", so presumably the guest has a degree with a D in it, from Oklahoma Wesleyan University. The guest parroted back the "religion of the Left" talking point, then the two discussed the issue of Ryan's fondness for Ayn Rand vs his Catholicism.
And this is where things get amusing. The host agreed that Rand was, on the whole, not a nice person. Certainly not a religious one. And to be sure, her "I've got mine, fuck you" take on Objectivism doesn't mesh well with Christianity. However, host and guest agreed that you could pick and choose which parts of someone to embrace, which portions of someone's philosophy to take as your own.
That you could, again to use their phrase, "cherry-pick".
So it's not possible for someone to accept the theory of biological evolution while rejecting the concept of social Darwinism, but Paul Ryan can cherry-pick from Rand.
Yeah, wish I could say I was surprised.
The host was commenting on a recent remark by President Obama that Paul Ryan supported social Darwinism. And the host was befuddled by this, because (as he put it), "Darwinism is, like the religion of the Left. Darwin is their God." So of course, the host couldn't understand why anyone on the Left would invoke Darwin in any negative light.
I'm not touching this "religion of the Left"/"Darwin is their God" claptrap. Nor will I address the point that social Darwinism has long been a "religion", in that sense, of the Right. I'm still trying to figure out whether this bozo genuinely didn't understand what social Darwinism IS, or if he was deliberately conflating economics (and social policy) with biology (as many opponents of evolution are wont to do).
But it gets better. He brought on someone he addressed as "doctor", so presumably the guest has a degree with a D in it, from Oklahoma Wesleyan University. The guest parroted back the "religion of the Left" talking point, then the two discussed the issue of Ryan's fondness for Ayn Rand vs his Catholicism.
And this is where things get amusing. The host agreed that Rand was, on the whole, not a nice person. Certainly not a religious one. And to be sure, her "I've got mine, fuck you" take on Objectivism doesn't mesh well with Christianity. However, host and guest agreed that you could pick and choose which parts of someone to embrace, which portions of someone's philosophy to take as your own.
That you could, again to use their phrase, "cherry-pick".
So it's not possible for someone to accept the theory of biological evolution while rejecting the concept of social Darwinism, but Paul Ryan can cherry-pick from Rand.
Yeah, wish I could say I was surprised.