New Atheism

Sorry I've read the original quote in context and his various apologia, nothing has made me forget what a fundamentally deranged and rabid person he truly is

Pseudo-intellectual liberal faggots

Except that's not what he said. The transcript is on his site. Why not post the direct quote here.

There is literally nothing wrong with the first part of this sentence though.

don't overrate rationality

Awfully convenient for US foreign policy.

jacobinmag.com/2014/12/new-atheism-old-empire/

He's a retard and a fraud who only ever gets a chance to go on TV since he passes the low bar of not being totally gross and having an ok voice that most TV scientists can't pass and had a wealthy, connected hollywood producer mom. He's exactly the kind of "elite" you pretend to be against in your own shithole but suddenly his shallow points and badly reasoned arguments are right because you agree with his conclusions, predictably.

He's a Zionist shill posing as an enlightened free thinker. A partisan hack. Pretty sure he gets paid in Shekels to push his "Israel dindu nuffin!" narrative and justify all their violations of international law and human rights with "Muh barbaric Mediaeval ideology, amirite, fedoras?!" He even goes as far as defending…nay, *advocating* for war in The Middle East cuz again, "b-but radical Moose Lambs, amirite, skeptics?" Translated: They pay me to demonize Muslims and disguise it as "atheism" to get Burgers to cheer on us tomahawk bombing Syrians.

Can't stand him, Ben Shapiro or Dennis Prager.

Well, actually he did say there is no excuse for Israel's human rights violations, however, his point was that the Palestinians weren't innocent lambs and that even going back to '67 borders won't fix things because that's not what a lot of Palestinians want. His point is that violence won't end even if Israel makes all the concessions asked of her, so we have to look at both sides.

I wonder how much consideration he's giving to the "one state; equal rights" solution, which is only ever combatted with shallow idpol retorts

The one state solution would work, except that Israel is an apartheid state, and I think he would acknowledge that.

Neoconservative cancer

I mean I agree that people should be more blunt about Islam and shit but ffs

The only one that is OK in my book is Dennet. The rest are smug af

The violence will end if Israel just listens to The UN for once and stops paying their """chosen people""" to settle Palestinian land. People act like Hamas is as old of a group as The Qur'an itself…

It likely won't, and it's time that we admitted that.

Even Hitchens managed to articulate a full throated support of the Palestinians. The fact that Harris doesn't speaks volumes

So is "New Atheism", similar to Atheism+, which was basically an artificial tool to insert feminist idpol into shit.

Has he ever expressed support for the idea of an egalitarian single state?

I don't know. Not that I can remember, but I don't follow him religiously. He has some good podcasts. His Trump shit is right on the money, but he misses the point that the government does nothing for him. I mean, really why does he care about this shit?

New Atheism is right wing idpol only instead of pushing liberal feminism onto everything they push muh rationalism and muh western values.

It will, but even if it won't whose fault is that? Israel's got a bad rep in The Middle East for a reason and that goes double for The Levant and triple in Palestine. Ain't my problem how """The Holy Land""" plans to shake hands and make friends with their neighbours, but the they can't keep expanding their borders at other people's expense in the name of """peace""" forever.

*THANK YOU.*

Yes! Only New Atheism's spliced with ethnic chauvinism and neocon warmongering instead of that "check your muh privilege" and "muh-sogyny" shit.

...

...

I am all for militant atheism, but this guy is an imperialist-corporate america apologist…

where does he say anything racist or pro imperialist? He says he's in favour of killing ISIS and terrorists and that Islam is a shitty religion founded by a pedophile propagated by subhumans who are jealous that their civilization is inferior in every single way so they become militant idiots that fall back to fundamentalism as a defence mechanism. Where did you get anything racist or chauvinistic from that?

He doesn't think blacks are inferior or subhuman for example he just recognizes that there is a pattern of dumb niggers out there and that this can be explained genetically and behaviourally and these niggers can be improved given time and effort instead of blaming the white man and the police for their consistent failure

Well done, you ain't colour-blind.

stop being a fucking coward and own your fucking beliefs. If your stance is that races are unequal and should be treated as such, then that is racist. If your stance is that this is defensible, then you should defend racism as a valid stance not whine like a bitch about being called one

...

Pointing out that the reason nigger and muslim societies fail at everything is more nuanced than da evil white police and imperialism is considered racist.

It's not about how you treat them it's about explaining their behaviour.

Your position is one of racism. You are a coward for denying it. I have more respect for the Holla Forumstards who come here and say that racism is a rational position than people like you who think they're being slick and "centrist" while tricking absolutely no one. THAT'S why Harris is scum. Not because he is a racist but because he's fucking liar and a coward.

no nigger if I wanted to trick you I wouldn't have put the nazi flag in. I don't fucking care how they are treated it's not about enslaving blacks or genociding muslims but explaining why they behave the way they behave. The consistent far right position is that America should stay out of the middle East and stop supporting Israel as far as imperialism is concerned. If it wasn't for people like Sam Harris it would just be a one sided discussion about the poor sad oppressed Muslims who didnu nuiffin and how its our own fault that these fuckers are so viscous and backwards. Since fucking Muslims themselves are incapable of any self reflection or self criticism then at least they have Sam Harris to give them an alternative explanation as to why they are pieces of shit

This is not Harris's position you adamant contrarian dipshit
Why posture as if you guys are white anyway? We've seen the pics and it just makes you all seem like gigantic projectors
Fucking lol

Yes thank god for Sam Harris and his ilk for repackaged neoconservatism. It's so fucking weird that the anti-imperialist left isn't slobbering all over his balls like you "consistent" far rightists

You have such a strong grasp of historical materialism, it's so strange that you aren't taken more seriously

I am aware that's why I said far right position Sam Harris is not far right.

wow I'm so offended right now. Its testimony to how shitty and cringeworthy leftist discourse has become that even niggers arabs and asians will parrot far right white nationalist memes just to offend leftists and shitlibs.
Well you faggots and your ilk will never blame Muslims or engage in an honest discussion, just blame American imperialism, colonialism and other shit so you ceded the field to people like Sam Harris. Also Harris isn't a neoconservative he just doesn't like ISIS, he never supported the invasion of Iraq

Damn did I hit your trigger word? Weird to pretend to not be offended and follow up with that. And yes, he did defend the Iraq war.

So let me get this straight. You admit that Sam Harris is not anti-imperialist, and claim to yourself be anti-imperialism, but then say that leftists aren't allowed to be anti-imperialist and dislike him for his opposing stance?

Fucking what?

...

kys faggot.

no he didn't.

...

...

...

I gave you the argument dipshit. You can't read? I imagine you are frantically googling trying to find some proof that Harris supported the Iraq war so I'll leave you to it

...

Only a delusional faggot would write this. Even if you hate Islam this is an admission that he both thinks that it is a holy war and one that was waged to benefit the Iraqi people. This is the fucking idiotic liberal you're defending, just another dick-sucker for the Bush admin and their obvious lies. So much for the "anti-establishment" right

And no, I didn't have to google very hard to find the quotes because I knew where I was looking. Some of us don't just talk out of our asses.

What's the functional difference between this stance and being a 9/11 truther anyway? If I deny islamic terrorism do I get to bury my head in the sand like you? Seems convenient

9/11 was an inside job

Get over it fag

Besides there's no right wing conservative patrician flag so I use the nazi one as the next best thing so you have something to strawman and be butthurt about.

Well what's wrong with this? America really did spend billions to attempt to improve their lives established a democracy in Iraq that is still in effect etc.

terrorism is a tactic which you cannot be at war with. He could have used the word radical Islam but if you look at the polls from Muslim countries themselves most of them belive in the radical position anyway.

the west did this

...

The fact that you don't see what's wrong with those statements is exactly why we call you guys rebranded liberals. Things in the real world don't function on ideology the way you want them to and the US is certainly not operating in countries like Iraq out of any sort of altruism. Making the claim that any country's foreign policy functions on altruism is a fucking fairy tale and should immediately discount your "analysis" of geopolitics as anything but a meme. But none of us ever thought otherwise anyway.

And stop spacing your comments so hard you're giving away how much time you spend on the_donald. Just some friendly advice.

Can I get a single fucking citation that Sam Harris believes race science? The only time I've even heard him bring it up was as a potential counterpoint to the idea that all areas of scientific research are socially beneficial.

he had Charles Murray on his podcast and uncritically praised him as some controversial thinker instead of the racist hack he is.

You can tell it's not defensible as a non-racist position since nazi poster and other defenders want so desperately to make the conversation just about islam as if that's even half the complaint

wew
try again

is this supposed to be another strawman boogeyman? There are liberal positions that you can agree with.

You can operate with both pragmatism and use altruism to achieve your objectives since you actually need the local population on your side if you want to win a counter-insurgency campaign.

ad hom and not an argument you fags should try to focus on Harris and Islam and not the six billion, Hitler and reddit.

you don't like the poll? There are many other polls conducted inside Western countries as well.

He had an hour+ long circlejerk sesh with Murray

fine
i guess i'll have to watch the fucking thing
thanks a lot asshole

I'm not ad homing any more than you are faggot. We use a materialist analysis of history and politics while you and your liberal friends just circle jerk about the way things "should" be and "muh culture" all day. No strawman accounts for the facts that your arguments never challenge the status quo. Which is why when you support candidates they end up "surprisingly" being just another neocon with some slight repackaging for all your posturing of being anti-establishment, and also why you end up going to bat for people like Harris who you claim to not even agree with. Why then the desperation in defending his stances I wonder?

Ok he flat out states it in the first 3 minutes.
LOL.

9/11 and all other islamic terror events never happened. 9/11 was an inside job and isis is filmed in a movie studio to justify wars in the middle east. prove me wrong you can't

…states that it's a circle jerk? I'm not sure what you're claiming here

The dude is incredibly hypocritical and willfully ignorant about the situation in the middle east- he rightfully calls ISIS and the like barbaric but has no problem whenever the west performs war crimes that are just as bad if not worse- I know how much the right loves wikileaks thanks to the email thing, so I suggest reading the stuff about the middle east too. The US has performed acts of torture that are just as bad as anything ISIS has done, and we've killed 2 civilians for every enemy combatant since this whole "war on terror" started, probably more when you consider how generous the US is with their definition of "enemy combatant".
If you want to end Islamic terrorism then the west needs to stop funding terrorists and pro-terrorist states like Saudi Arabia, and stop slaughtering civilians. The far-right terrorists, much like the far-right ideologies in the west, only came about because these people feel like their lives are hopeless and they're under attack, and hope that violent, authoritarian ideologies will be able to save them.

He says different races have different average Autism Level levels.

this is a fancy way of saying that you are a bunch of faggots who believe that the West is at fault for having all the money and military power and therefore the Muslims are oppressed in an unequal system and because their civilization and society is poor and shitty they have an excuse to adhereing to shitty religious beliefs and an excuse for being poor until the west hands them money or just collapses.

This bunch of faggotry just proves that you do not want to discuss Muslims without resorting to adhom attacks and name calling rationalizing everything for muslims and giving an excuse to their behaviour.

Except he and Murray are wrong about race determining your behaviour or your intelligence. They're both hacks who don't have the guts to admit that they're a bunch of racist faggots (Murray BTW was funded by the Pioneer fund, a known fascist think tank)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Fund

The fucking US is supported in the Middle East by shit like Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, are you gonna argue to me that these states are not legitimate in the eyes of Islam and their population the Hashemite Monarchy is thousands of years old the House of Saud is 300 years old and Turkey is a republic that formed after world war 1 these faggots are not overthrowing themselves any time soon and their "material conditions" are greatly improved by being allied with the United States and using the US military as a hammer against any rogue state in the region that threatens their interests like Iraq.

No it isn't you iliterate faggot. Read a fucking book

Your virtue signaling does nothing to assuage your support for repackaged neocons again and again like the mindless cretin you are. Surely THIS time saying muslims are bad but really loudly this time will really change things for the better.

See I come to this board and other places like it precisely because if I wanted to, say, discuss the finer details of the Saudi/Yemen conflict or the history of the subcultures in Iran I'd get better analysis than someone who thinks that saying "lol mudslimes amirite" is brave or enlightening. You're just too scared to admit the world is too complicated for you to understand.

:^)

This is how I know you don't know anything about what you're talking about

...

He's possibly the most misquoted and most misunderstood public speaker in the USA. Everything he says gets twisted into something entirely else. It doesn't matter how clearly he raises a point or how carefully he rounds off the points hes making. He still has hoards of people yelling at him for saying things he simply didn't say.

It's strange to watch it happen to him constantly, but he keeps on keeping on despite it all, so he has my respect.

I love his assessments on Trump. Trump supporters hate him because they have no counterargument to what he says or simply have no idea what he's even saying or live in a fantasy world. Ironically, he shares many of their fears against Islam. Even criticizing Hillary for ignore the problems that exist in Islam. The only positive he has for Trump is that at least he brings it up as a threat to western civilization. He just doesn't like how Trump goes about it and thinks of Trump as an aimless buffoon, because he is.

He's a smart guy and I often listen to his podcasts and audiobooks. Down to Earth guy whenever he isn't being super formal. He is actually capable of laughing.

globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881

energydesk.greenpeace.org/2016/01/15/data-how-guns-and-oil-dominate-uk-saudi-arabia-relationship/

How the fuck can there be a "new atheism" when the very concept of atheism is just a disbelief in God? What the fuck can be new about it? It ends with you not believing in God.

Fucking hell you people are stupid.

His critiques of trump are liberal garbage. They rely heavily on critiques of his lack of decorum or "proper" credentials and lackluster speech patterns, proving once again that libs care about nothing more than image.

And the only reason he claims "misrepresentation" so frequently is that he backpeddles so much on his controversial positions without actually admitting he ever made them that he ends up playing a semantic game half the time he's engaging with critics, often taking contradictory positions to do so. How else do you explain a consequentialist saying that "intentions are nearly the whole story when it comes to ethics". None of his stances are well thought our or researched well, he has a novice understanding of philosophy at best, and his own credentials are ironically a joke.

Don't take these people seriously. If you want an idea of what Sam Harris says, read his podcast transcripts or listen to them.

The newest podcast actually raises criticism against everyone calling him a racist.

Scientists are actually just now feel that Murray was being mistreated and that they don't give him the credit he deserves because they would receive worse backlash than Sam is receiving.

All the guy said was that Autism Level is passed down genetically just like how being short or tall passes down. People fill in the blanks in the heads.

That's why Ben Afleck called Sam disgusting racist out of a kneejerk reaction. Where all Sam said was that the basis of Islam is destructive and can only exist in modern secular societies if they reform and become less than what it was designed to be.

All these people are fucking insane. I don't know how Sam has the patience to deal with the swarm of reactionaries on a constant basis.

you keep failing to prove that Sam Harris is a neocon, just because he doesn't like ISIS doesn't mean he wants America to invade the middle east and turn it into a democracy to secure Israel and American interests.

I don't give a fuck about changing things for the better for Muslims. I'm more concerned with them blowing shit up which you provide cover for.

Besides you don't even believe mudslimes have the agency to change anything for the better themselves they are already absolved of all responsibility and agency and that's why they shouldn't be talked about at all and the focus should be on criticizing American foreign policy.

Honestly, he sounds like a dumb asshole. I was somebody who found new Atheism in high school. I watched a lot of the videos, tried repeating some of the arguments, but something felt off. Then I watched Harris vs Chris Hedges and it all came into focus. I lost interest in new atheism and realized it wasn't really as nuanced as it claimed to be.

youtube.com/watch?v=cZJ1g9LTwMs

I'm not too familiar with the history of Turkey but IIRC its a relatively new country and was founded with a strong basis in secular government, its only recently under Erdogan that its begun slipping into a right-wing dictatorship. In the case of Saudi Arabia, it actually IS considered illegitimate according to most forms of Islam, and only exists because the Saudis worked together with the wahabbis and are currently trying to spread their beliefs and genocide other forms of Islam like they're doing in Yemen right now.
Holla Forums and the like generally support Assad and agree that Syria was a relatively secular, modern nation under his rule, right? What if I told you that the only reason we're at war with them is for economic issues and this isn't the first time we've decided to fuck up a country over there for profit? The middle east is in such a fucked up state because the ruling class in the west profits from it, and when people try to flee from the chaos, the people who destabilized the region in the first place turn around and use the refugees to fearmonger and push for far-right economic policies which harm the working class. You're getting played by the same politicians you support, my dude.

I was in this instance calling Trump a neocon, though I know inferences aren't your strong suit so I'm sorry for not making it easy enough for you to figure out

"Change things for the better" means reducing terrorist attacks you utter fucking retard

...

What do you mean by "still" is it America's job to wipe their ass and shower them and brainwash them into enlightenment as well?Or is America deliberately making them Muslim fundamentalists or someshit?

Iran is not allied to America still stones the fags and you still get the death penalty for criticizing Islam.

see

Even Murray strongly backs away from his Bell Curve shit in that interview without actually denouncing it. They're clearly repackaging it to be less obviously toxic though there's been a million well sourced takedowns of his research and work

And yet America is still allied to Saudi Arabia. They won't back stab them because it's not profitable, much like how they won't stop funding radical terrorist cells for the same reasons.

You can't be this fucking retard.

To anyone who wants to push forth the "Murray is actually right" narrative as a way to protect Harris, here are some useful sources:

dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/curveball.html

bolesblogs.com/1998/03/23/a-review-of-the-bell-curve-bad-science-makes-for-bad-conclusions/

blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-real-problem-with-charles-murray-and-the-bell-curve/

bostonreview.net/archives/BR20.6/block.html

mensa.ch/sites/default/files/Intelligence_Neisser1996.pdf

The whole reason Iran is run by religious fundamentalists is because back in the 70s the government tried to nationalize their oil industry and western oil companies didn't like that so they got their pet politicians to back a bunch of right-wing nutjobs to overthrow the Iranian government. Kinda like what we're doing in Syria right now.

Until Trump decides to spread democracy in Syria or Iran then he's not a neocon. Just because he fired at an airfield doesn't mean anything fucking Drumpf is the only reason muh precious communist Rojava shitskins aren't destroyed by Turkey and Assad so far.

Do explain how you change things for the better? I imagine this will involve some variation of how the US should stop being a superpower, Beatles lyrics and stop how it needs to stop being allied with al lthe bad muslims in Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan etc

It's almost like the problems and the US penchant for allying with some and not others has nothing to do with altruism or some intrinsic ideological differences you fucking liberal.

The world doesn't run on ideology that springs up from the ether, but this is something you retards will never understand.

Just carefully listen to his podcasts. I know you listen to them while your hearts racing.

You said it yourself, though I'm guessing if a leftist says it it's wrong because we aren't mean to muslims while saying it. That's why I say you're a virtue signaler. You don't actually care if non-interventionism is enforced you just care if people are mean to your favorite people who say naughty words about muslims.

You really are just another liberal

Geopolitics isn't about apologies or being a tattle-tale or whatever other playground bullshit jfc. Who cares about "blame" you dumb nigger?

This is almost totally true. Ideology only works as far as an excuse for allying with people who have the same interests as you and using them to push your influence on the world stage.

Because the US is directly funding the terrorists and butchering innocents. ISIS and the like are reactionaries, the simplest way to get rid of them is to stop the shit they're reacting to.
How the fuck can you claim to support "western values" then turn around and ally with people who cause the most harm to those same values?
If western corporations saw profit in destabilizing those regions then you can bet your ass we would. At the moment its more profitable for big business to work with them and use their people as wage slaves.

1. Geopolitics isn't about apology you dumb fucking stormnigger, and you do realise that every region has their own unique cultures and political views. Of course the Japanese aren't going to be the same people within the middle east you fucking retard.

2. America was one of the greater opponents to the USSR and MLs, any communist uprisings were quenched to stopped, and they had to rely on people (such as radical islamists) to stop their influence from spreading. As a result, this allowed for Islamists (well equipped and trained by the US) to spread their influence and radicalise others, as well as kill political/ religious dissidents.

I just gave you reasons as to why they behave the way they do, and you're being wilfully ignorant. Do us a favour and kill yourself your lowering the I.Q of the thread with your retardation.

No I'm really a far right post-scarcity fundmantalist christian matrarichical ordered stratocracy

this is a buch of faggotry because you don't even know yourself what you mean by non interventionism. The US and the West will trade ally and maintain diplomatic relations with whoever it is in the Middle East who is willing to do so and they will support the existence of Israel all things that fundamentalists hate. In the real world you don't just withdraw, break alliances and diplomatic relations. In your world the west is so uber powerful that it turns shitskins into terorists and creates bad governments in a global conspiracy and the only thing the West can do in this situation is either collapse or withdraw and break all contact with the Muslim world so who's the virtue signaller now faggot

How are you this fucking dumb? The virtue singaler is still you. Also, I love that you completely backtracked on your own solutions like the faggot you are.

Did you even read the links provided? Of course you didn't. Because you stormniggers don't read at all.

I didn't say anything about bombing the middle east. You can be allied with the Saudi Arabia, Jordan Turkey and Israel and not bomb the middle East or try to turn them into democracies which is the pragmatic position

Huh, really makes you think.

Anyone got that tom and jerry meme?

...

You mean it ain't?

So why can't you not have the angry shitskins imported into your country since anything you do will result in negative consequences anyway?

Countries that had fucking nothing to do with the US invasion of Iraq like Sweden, France, and Germany do get terror attacks because they have a sizeable shitskin population that lashes out on the first thing in front of them. Those people in the UK that were killed in the Arianna Grande concert were shitlibs and leftoids who probably hated American imperialism same goes for Charlie Hebdo and the Eagles of Death Metal and the faggots at the Florida night club it's not as if ISIS is attacking NASCAR rallies and Christian churches they are going after your ilk and you're still defending them.

Poland has zero shitskins and has zero problems with terrorism even though Poland was on board with both the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan while the EU wants to place sanctions on them and force them to import them

Sweden's in Afghanistan and helped bomb Libya to smithereens. We can also note that France was not a target of terrorist attacks before it fully aligned with US under Sarkozy and destabilized Libya. Or how about Spain? They got bombed by Al-Qaeda, withdrew from Iraq as demanded and since have had peace. As far as I can tell at least.

Now since I know you'll get triggered this is not an excuse for any attack of course. But we're not talking about blame or feelings, we're talking about facts.

Huh, it's almost as if they're used for cheap labour to push down workers wages, or maybe some of those refugees are genuine people looking for homes and shelter because they've been bombed by terrorists (or the USA, take your pick they basically feed off eachother)? Or maybe, since they're economic migrants, it's the fault of an economic system which can't sustain itself, and that the material conditions have allowed negative behaviours to gestate and radical islam to spread, considering religion is the Opiate of the masses.

Spooky. Also why do stormfags talk like they're from a d and d game?
I'm giving a reason as to why they are the way they are. The reason why they're like that can be linked to capitalism and imperialism and a bunch of greedy fuckers ruining the middle east and radicalising it over money.

And for the record, Libya is actually more on France than on the US so it's even more damning than them just "aligning" with the US.

Because your beloved corporate overlords profit from mass immigration. Haven't you seen all the economists screaming about how "Europe needs X number of immigrants over the next Y nears to maintain its economy"? Corporations don't give a single fuck about you or any other member of the working class yet you follow an ideology that Mussolini himself described as a merging of corporations and government. In their eyes you are nothing but a resource to be expended.

He makes some good points about a lot of the left not criticizing Islam, but that's about it.

Even considering that he's pretty unremarkable. A lot of righties seem to like him and the other New Athiests.

well they are barely in Afghanistan and did fuck all in Libya. Switzerland had some troops in Afghanistan as well and nobody gives a fuck about Switzerland same as Poland etc Your security against terrorism correlates with the amount of imported mudslime.

The EU has plenty of cheap labor from Eastern Europe already, the mudslime from the refugee crisis wasn't an immigration policy they just entered and nobody stopped them. Most of them are functionally illiterate and don't have jobs

Either way, countries that don't fuck around in the ME don't get attacked. Seems you can't prove me wrong.

Poland had thousands in Afghanistan and Iraq doesn't import mudslime doesn't get attacked. The US has an ocean as a barrier get's attacked far less frequently, Canada and Australia don't get attacked at all since they have an ocean as a barrier and screen their immigrants or make sure that the ones they accept have money or skills

And they do

Shocking that there are genetic differences between groups of people.

Is it racist to point out that Ashkenazi Jews have a higher average intelligence? Or Asians?

Or that certain groups are better at certain sports like running? So much such that it becomes a running (haha) gag?

See many people with an Int of 90 working as a rocket scientist?

Is genetics not linked to Int? Do adopted children suddenly become as smart as their adopted parents?

This is why we can't have polite decisions on what should be obvious. No ones calling for blacks to be euthanized. No more than making a link between being black and higher incidence of sickle cell is racism.

You guys are coocoo.

Still not a single example of someone getting attacked after not fucking around in the Middle East. Sad!

see

Germany

Oh brother…

yeah, that's what I thought

wait, so are you saying Atheism created a bunch of retards so now the #realAtheism wants to make a new safe space to get away from them..?
adorable :'^)

I don't think you realize what is actually being discussed.

Are you joking? You know they were just as involved with Afghanistan as anyone else and are in Syria under the US coalition right now right?

Harris's stance on Murray's theories, which those papers address. You flippant dismissal is noted but ultimately of no use in this discussion.

What's the definitive work of Wolff? Been meaning to get into him, but reading's for nerds, so…

>"Why can't just outright say they're the ebil meany people I say they are!? thinking r hard.." ;(
Did you ever stop to think that you might possibly, just maybe.. be wrong about something?

His stance? Which is? Or are you another Ben Afleck?

If racism is logically defensible it isn't "meany and ebil", dumb faggot.

Do you think Ben Affleck cited studies to make his point? In contrast, all you've offered is your incredulity

To make it short, he offers support for the conclusions and work of Murray, particularly as found in the Bell Curve. The papers I cited offer refutations of that work. I hope that wasn't too hard to follow for a Maher fan.

well tbh all of NATO was involved in Afghanistan at one point or another so you're actually excusing shitskin attacks just because someone sent some meaningless medical and support staff as part of NATO at one point or another and that triggered some shitskin fundamentalist even though that shitskin fundamentalists own government probably supported the invasion of Afghanistan anyway so there really is no way to win here. Fucking serbians do not get triggered and blow up Sweden and Germany even though there are serbs in Sweden and Germany and Sweden and Germany participated in attacking Serbia as part of NATO in fact serbs don't blow up anyone. Besides it's sunni shitskins who do all the attacks and sunni shitskins want America to bomb Assad sunni shitskins are the main opposition to Assad and the main source of migrants and refugees so I doubt that a sunni fundamentalist shitskin got triggered that the West is interfering in Syria since they want the west to interfere in Syria if you read what those shitskins actually write on their social media accounts and interviews you would know that sunni shitskins are triggered by western women and faggots and use it as a justification to attack people just as much as foreign policy is, and this is almost impossible to explain to normalfags because they are convinced that Assad is an evil tyrant and that the west is doing sunni shitskins a massive favour by trying to overthrow him since sunni shitskins themselves want him overthrown there is plenty of evidence that your run of the mill sunni shitskin on youtube twitter and facebook hates Assad and cheers when the West bombs him so the problem is really sunni shitskindom

You know, we played tag a lot in kindergarten. Great times, but at first we had to struggle with a problem: every time someone was just about to be tagged, they declared themselves untouchable; you can't move that way, but as you can't be tagged, either, the… tagger?.. was forced to run after someone else, who of course also used the ridiculous rule to ruin the game for everyone. We got rid of that rule pretty fast, but apparently some of us simply brought it over from tag to political arguments.

...

I hope you realize that Muslim nations that are a.o.k with first cousin marriages like Saudi Arabia are having an inbred crisis, and that being inbred is linked to higher incidence of disease and lower Intelligence.

Thinking someone's a "coward" for just saying "Gee, maybe we do have minor differences in each other. After all, whites have more in common with neanderthals and blacks are almost 0% neanderthal making them more human than us in a way".

No one bats an eye in claiming asians have a higher Autism Level.

Or Autism Level differences are different per state in the USA. Just continue being a kneejerker that can't stand discussion and tosses out blogs and insults as a means to an end.

There's a reason why forensic scientists can tell whether or not a skeleton is of a black or white person. It's almost likely nature doesn't give a shit about making every group 100% identical.

I hope you didn't ignore the other evidence on the other 'side' because it doesn't fit your worldview.

I even included a Rated PG Parental Guidance in but I guess taht was too hard for you to read. Facts don't care about your feelings, and the fact still remains that:

not fucking around in MENA -→ no attacks

The other option as you so well put it is to be geographically isolated enough for it to not be a problem and even then it's not a guarantee, and the only possible benefit to the fuckery is always to serve corporations anyway so it's of no benefit to you

This is how I know you didn't read any of the links I cited

Saying "maybe theres differences in people" isn't the same as "I really wish all blacks were wiped off the earth. I also think they are inferior and should be mistreated"

you turned this into something emotionally charged when it was actually pretty simple

Maybe you should actually have a dicussion instead of tossing out blogposts and calling it for the night.

but you do agree that your run of the mill sunni shitskins want assad overthrown tho? So in this case Western Imperialism fully aligns with the secterian interests of inbred sunni shitskins?

Your run of the mill sunni isn't involved in or gives very little shit about the Syrian conflict. And this isn't an anti-Assad board anyway so I'm not sure how this is supposed to strengthen your position. Your ideas of geopolitics are so infantile it's honestly depressing. You're a burger, right?

How does your ideology account for different american-backed and armed sunni groups in the region fighting each other? Honest mistake? Poor americans didn't know what they were doing and accidentally increased the conflict :(

The blogs I posted were, in order, written by Stephan Jay Gould (probably the most prominent biologist of our time), a Ph.D Zoologist - professor of Zoology and Chair, a respected computer scientist with a degree in predictive analysis, and an expert on philosophy of the mind, cognitive sciences, and a professor of psychology at NYU.

The rest after those four are peer reviewed papers.

I guarantee the combined analysis of the pieces I linked have more salient information than whatever layman drivel you'd rather be discussing.

(cont.)
sorry, I misspoke on the last point. The last one is the APA review of Murray's work. I did not mean to say that there was a "rest" as if there were multiple papers but I guess I'm getting careless in typing these responses.

I'll give them a read.

It's a good idea that while talking to someone to not simply insult them wrong or not. Honestly, you know nothing of me. Calling people racists for considering the possibility that just maybe people are different is the least scientific approach one can attain.

But thanks for the papers.

Your run of the mill American or European isn't involved and gives very little shit about Syria and the Middle East as well but nobody assumes they are innocent when their governments fuck something up. I'm talking about their political and religious figures as well as all of their clean shaven well dressed westernized representatives in NGO's and Western media.

As opposed to yours where the shitskins have zero agency or responsibility and all their governments are puppeted by American interests. They want to be fundamentalists with sharia law, the majority like having Erdogan in Charge, they like having the royal family in charge of Saudi Arabia they are shitty people and always have been.

And? I like Russia Iran, Hezbollah and the Houthis in the Middle East and hope their side wins but I don't care why the middle east is shitty to rationalize their incompetent terror attacks. The more terror attacks they commit the more normals turn into reactionaries and begin to hate muslims.

I don't even think "racist" in and of itself is necessarily negative under the scenario that the stance was defensible. Then it would just be a fact of life. I'm sorry if I came off too hostile to begin with though

You really do know nothing of the left. We make fun of you for believing the ideologies of the mass of people really make a difference to what bougies do for a reason. In case you're confused, you can assume moving forward that critique of the US is critique of the US govt.

Lol "agency". Ruling class acts in their self interest everywhere in the world. This has nothing to do with the "agency" or "responsibility" of general populations. The fact that you can't divorce people from their ruling governments is telling, you guys really are ideologically married to the state after all.

Really speaks for itself

Chaos. Listen to interviews of those that actually go to these conflicts. They state that it's hard determining who to support and who not to support. Natives see Americans packing massive firepower and use it as an opportunity. Sometimes the natives have genuine concerns and other times the soldiers get played.

I am sure on some level what you propose is true as well, but people aren't in as much control as believed. I am also sure Muslims can have an axe to grind whenever another country interferes and an air strike ends up killing their entire family.

It's like the whole Russia interfering with US politics. It doesn't surprise me because that is simply what they do. I see it more as an admixture of problems coalescing together. Fundamentalism breeds uncompromising behavior, and that certainly doesn't help. Personally, I am not a fan of religion especially when it's fundamentalist. It creates it's own problems.

I would show one such interview if I could find it.

It's np. I also apologize. I'll check those articles tomorrow. It's late in burger-town.

Of course I don't propose that intelligence agencies are omnicient or that the chaos you're describing doesn't happen. I'm just saying that they've been doing this for a while and know that it's par for the course, and yet don't seem to be too hesitant to support every up and coming rebel group regardless. Either they're pathologically incompetent or the warring factions is, to some degree, a feature and not a bug.

I use to read him regularly. Basically, he's an arrogant prick that puts way too much weight on intention, and has a really shallow understanding of philosophy, but manages to fool people who have an even worse understanding of philosophy.
It's a shame, because I don't mind what he has to say about meditation. He should have really used his degree to do more research instead of becoming a rambling humanist street preacher.

rhizzone.net/articles/sam-harris-fraud/
The research world is glad that he didn't tbh. Though I agree if he just stuck to the new age-y stuff he'd be pretty harmless.

The ruling elite is not one person, there are factions that are more right wing and xenophobic and there those that are less so those that want mudslime in the country and those that do not want mudslime

yes it does every group of people gets exactly the government and society it wants and deserves faggot.

also love
I don't love them I want them to win over ISIS Saudi Arabia and America. Doesn't mean I love them or think they are good people, they are just less shitty then the alternative.

Also hatred for Muslims leads to less Muslims and is one way of solving the Muslim migrant problem. When a critical mass of people hates Muslims enough they will be in favour of anti Muslim-migrant polices therefore shifting the overton window in favour of Muslim removal, this is already happening anyway and is mainly a Western European problem ,less so in America since we won't accept mudslime refugees under Trump and non existant in Eastern Europe since nobody explained to them about the evils of American foreign policy and how mudslimes are the real victims here

No shit, but they have common class interests that are pushed regardless of surface level ideologies bickered about in public
lmao good one
youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig
which is to say nothing about countries that don't even pretend to be democratic
lmfao "if i hate something hard enough it will go away"

Funny thing about that is, he actually lead me to go further left after his clash with Chomsky.
It was far too apparent who had a deeper understanding of U.S. foriegn policy, and Harris just kept trying to get him to play with these weird "thought experiments", instead of delving into the meat of the matter. It's one thing not to like Islam, but the guy is obsessed with it now.
Also, his incessant whining about Noam got really grating after a while.

It's a plutocracy where there are many competing interests if some faction wins another loses a lot of the time these interests don't even involve making money, take the state of Isreal for example where the ruling class wants to preserve the ethnic makeup of Israel at the expense of importing wage labour from Africa even though they could they don't do it.

wow I bet that was a fucking slam dunk in your mind. Shitskins have millenia to crawl at a snail pace until they hope to reach our refined levels of corruption that is if they don't regress further into the stone age.

well yes that's the way this usually works it's not even that difficult to do, there are deportations happening right now. Finland for example received 32,000 refugees and deported 20,000 of them

They even cite the study they're referencing in the video but your subhuman brain couldn't manage to notice.
yep, just a coincidence that clinton/bush/obama/trump(and clinton for that matter) have barely discernible differences in foreign policy. Weird that the same "faction" always manages to win out in the end.

And yeah, Obama still did more deportations than anyone else. Almost like deportations/immigration has nothing to do with the will of the people. Stay cucked though, I'm sure one day your masters will acknowledge your needs and do what you want them to if you beg hard enough

Before interventions plenty of those countries had similar or better democracy than the US. You're just a delusional burger high on fake american exceptionalism propaganda when the only thing you're exceptional in is consumption.

No I just don't care about lobbying.

your analysis of why foreign policy is the way it is is like that of a fucking child.

Yes faggot, when there is a new administration it generally tends to follow some kind of programme that it got voted in for that the bureaucracy executes or their chances of being re-elected decrease. Obama got voted in and implemented a bunch of welfare and food stamp shit and it is now gonna be removed.

Of Mexicans you fucking idiot.

well, Begging for scrubs off of the table of the ruling elite is your job faggot, just gib a little more welfare plz or I will smashie another trashcan. You're the faggots that actually believe in people power mass movements, collective action in unions and other faggotry.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein?

Lol, both Iran and Afghanistan have more women in their government than the United States does. Really makes you think.

great criteria your'e using, but do they also have a proportional representation of faggots and minorities relative to the population as well?

Plenty doesn't mean all. And I'm sure even you agree it was better left alone.

I like Sam but I wish he was more radicalized.

Saudi is prosperous and are not being bombed, yet women need a 'mahram' to go anywhere outside their home. Only 16% of the workforce are women. Iran is another story. It is advancing but slowly. The youth are far less fundie about their beliefs.

Not really, I can cite you trends in foreign policy and international intervention and all you have is "shitskin". This "no u" comeback is really fucking weak, though I'm not surprised you can't do better.

Literally not true

We're talking about implementation of policy in general you slackjawed moron. It is absolutely relevant

Yep, that's pretty much Capital in a nutshell right there. Burger eductation, fucking lol

The video is directly related to why the populace doesn't have direct control over policy. The fact that you don't see or understand the link speaks volumes

Why would every single one elected as potus simply abandon their ideals?

I just don't care about what you're trying to talk about. You're saying we made them shitty. I'm saying that Muslim Arab terrorism and fundamentalism has always been a fact of life and the answer is not that "muh America did it"

Muslim fundamentalism has been the dominant school of thought in the Muslim world ever since this faggot: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Taymiyyah
When Europe was going through the renaissance they were going back into jihadism and obscurantism they never went through a reformation they never had a 30 year war to sort out their religious differences between sunni and shia they have had this schism for millenia and always will and they will never reform themselves or their religion no matter which superpower is running around in the middle east be it America Russia or China they will never get over their shitty state of existance to actually become something themselves and engage in their own imperialism and colonialism not that they don't want to they just can't.
litteraly don't care
no we were talking about mudslimes and you went on a tangent about a bunch of irrelevant shit having nothing to do with Mudslimes
ofcourse I forgot about the other part which is about engaging in autistic over-analysis of the economic system and then doing fuck all about it while acting like a smug faggot who possesses esoteric knowledge about the ways of the world that others simply lack

I can tell by your irrelevant and belabored points. Your arguments are tired and factually unsupported, and you clearly have no use for facts or reason so talking to you further is pointless. Have fun with your delusions. I hear that terrorism stops if you say mudslimes enough. Congrats on stopping the menace single handedly, amerifat.

Nothing in Capital is about how the government needs to give you welfare, fucking brainwashed americlap

lol I love that nazi poster just straight up admits he's changing the subject because he can't argue the points being made

I've liked some of Harris's stuff about atheism and religion. His politics are pretty worthless, basically a centrist liberal with a taste for neocon bullshit because of his jew tribalism. Any enemy of Israel must be the worst thing in the world. His atheism also leads to bad reductionist politics because he exaggerates the role of religion and frames the most extreme interpretation of religion as the "true" version. So Al Queda or whoever are "correct" about what Islam means, but other Muslims who say they're maniacs are incorrect. There is not true in any objective sense, but it muh privileges extremists as the true representatives of any religion, and is then used to justify extreme measures (like neocon warmongering) targeted broadly with the whole religion in mind. This serves Harris in that it allows him to more easily and broadly demonize religions - as he wants people to reject religion itself - and to particularly demonize the religion held by the loudest opponents of Israel. And for him the USA is basically the best form of government and society, that should be adopted by (or imposed on if need be) the whole world.

Not much vision, imo.

We all know you couldn't really follow along no need to sugarcoat it
He was obviously talking about consistent implementation of policy wrt immigration/deportation and how it was enforced based on general population sentiment. Coupled with the posted video it demonstrates that what the general populace wants has no real bearing on how this policy is implemented and the consistent deportation of Mexicans is one such example. It's not that hard of a thread to follow but it's no surprise it was a little much for you

kekarooni

As far as the West was concerned, it wasn't so "dangerous and insane" a hundred years ago.

I wonder what could possibly have upset them since then….

Yes, but Harris did go a bit overboard when he got voted off this show:
youtube.com/watch?v=X16G2hsVI9w

They're fedoras, there is nothing to say about them beyond that.

I said every country gets the government it deserves I don't fucking care for your attempts to draw any kind of equivalency between the Middle East and Western liberal democracies with your shitty videos you don't for a second believe any of that shit yourselves anyway but use it to score reddit upboats . I could go on and on about civics in the United States about how people in any municipality actually have the power to determine directly shit that affects their daily lives but you don't want to hear any of that you want to make moral equivalencies about shit you don't believe in yourselves and neither do I

I wouldn't worry too much. He's just passionate about radical Islam.

youtube.com/watch?v=ifpIw3EK7-A

he also has the same to say about Bernard-Henri Levy
youtube.com/watch?v=VuEVWhr2D1g

quality banter tbh

lol we all knew you were a ledditor

No, they just actually understand what's going on around them. After high school you might get some perspective but government really doesn't function like you think it does

really have our priorities straight don't we? one person is introducing ideas that are so dangerous they will contribute to a possible extinction event for our species, the other person is an idiot who blurts out nonsensical geo-strategic suggestions (which few deep state spooks would ever seriously consider) and then things that our spooks already do and will continue to do (which makes him nothing more than a regime mouth-piece which is all the new atheists are in the first place). I mean come off it, honestly people get so upset about Harris but Dennett and Dawkins are far more insidious and in the long-term lethal to things we hold dear. Dennett's denial of subjective consciousness and general verificationist bullshit along with Dawkins' admittedly compelling (ultimately retarded) selfish gene theory i think are far more offensive and corrosive ideas.

I would generally agree, but the alt-right doesn't really read Dawkins to my knowledge. Plus Harris casts a wider net (at least in the US) with his multiple appearances on the Joe Rogan Experience.

A world constructed by Dawkins would be more horrifying than one by Harris. I think this is what my fundamental point of disagreement is

To some extent I agree, but I'd like to combine the two, and look at how they bounce off each other. Harris argues that religion is evil and we should abandon tradition in favor of science (something that America has already done), while Dawkins presents a version of that scientific reality. They both try to use science to establish a sort of race theory, Harris cloaked in neuroscience, Dawkins with genetics. I don't know much about either, but I consider genetics to be further along and more in vogue at the moment. Still, by progressing this synthesis, Harris and Dawkins ideas would establish a "scientific" bureaucracy that would read people's thoughts and test their blood purity.

I don't know much about Dennett and Dawkins, so if you could help further the discussion by explaining their ideas, I think that would give us a better picture of what new atheism is advocating.

that wasn't the intention and Dawkins says that humans are the only animal evolved far beyond the instinctive survival-thinking of our genes and can overcome them human culture for example can't be explained by genes wanting to survive in a zero sum game. He says even though altruism may have selfish intentions it is beneficial for long term survivial if you abandon you immediate survival interests and cooperate for the long term then that is far better for your long term survival

What would be in a world constructed by Dawkins? Not at all familiar with the man's politics.

Not the other guy, but I think his main point is that Dawkins just doesn't have the reach of Harris. It's like how ISIS's ideology is probably worse than the standard republican, but if you're in the US you're probably more threatened by republican healthcare policy than by ISIS terror strikes.

If you really examine it, there's not a lot of atheism in New Atheism. For some reason it places extra baggage on atheism that really has no place there, creating this notion that atheists are all supposed to be supporters of humanism, antitheism, scientism, and bourgeois liberalism, which really are not part of being an atheist. It's intellectually limiting in a similar way to how religion is, to the point where sometimes when someone like Sam Harris talks about "regressive leftists" not having the attitudes that atheists ought to have, like a bishop demanding orthodoxy.

Welfare Capitalist Scientific Dictatorship, mega eugenics, no feminists allowed (lol)

yeah i think its a fair argument, Harris is now a public figure and Dawkins is for most people the "God Delusion" dude from 10 years ago.

i'm too tired to refute this stupid drivel that these post-moralist neo-darwinians peddle. For starters your argument is just self-refuting, how can we have evolved past selfish genes if genes drive behavior (something he unironically believed for decades and has only recently pulled back on as epigenetics becomes more prominent) and if in the very next premise he recognizes that altruism is driven by selfish (and not selfish as in from some tabula raza soul, psychological perspective; selfish in the sense of selfish genes of course) genes? then the next thing, obviously there are tons of successful breeding and survival strategies that disadvantage a large number of other members of the species. For instance the Germanic and Jewish oligarchs/court/minister elites in Eastern and Central Europe were exploiting the peasants and they had tons of children who are now all themselves wealthy and will have tons of children. He's a capitalist so he doesn't even try to think about these things carefully, history and most importantly people's relationship with production means nothing other than "tech, tech and then computers' which is all he sees. Total sperg and laughable, pathetic 'scientific ethics".

atheism is just not believing in supernatural crapola. kinda hard to write books about without grafting other stuff onto it.

atheism is a lack of belief in a creator God, its not a lack of belief in magic, which so far would be verificationism or radical empricism or rational skepticism which are not the same thing as atheism. There are people who package them together but that's not the same thing as atheism. you did the thing you accused the new atheists of doing, packaging things that aren't atheism with atheism. Atheism is lacking a belief in a creator god, strong atheism is believing you have a logical proof of some kind or evidence that there cannot be and is not currently a god. They're two different positions and neither has anything to do specifically with the supernatural, though the reason one becomes an atheist may indeed be to do with a lack of belief in some set of things that one believes are supernatural and thus impossible or implausible. That's really a lot of tenuous definitions and shifting ground to traverse, i wouldn't want to have to contend with that philosophically every day. being a pure ignostic agnostic is better.

don't know at which point
Is him against feminists? Strange…he is pretty Progressivist and pro LGBT right overall.

What can i say is that he is basically a liberal pro-eugenics

Not really, religious people make plenty of arguments for the existence of god, and have written long books on the topic. You can get plenty of material by analyzing and refuting Aquinas alone

forgot the elevator gate bullshit.

Yep, he had some criticism from femminists but overall he knows their cultural values.

salon.com/2014/12/08/richard_dawkins_is_there_a_mens_rights_movement/

come on now

no, i'd consider dawkins a feminist actually. I think he buys into most of the basic premises of feminism, but more of a second-wave type. He's sometimes been skeptical or critical of third-wave or rad-fem antics, which is why he's been at odds with feminists sometimes.

I think you're getting to a great point about the lack of historical literacy in the New Atheist camp, as well as their weird relationship with the trans-humanist perspective. Their appeals to "science and reason" ring hollow when we focus on the actions of these people. They essentially spend their time trying to sell books and defend their prejudices from more thoughtful inspection. The takedown piece on Harris essentially showed that he doesn't really get/do science, but that he uses it to push his ideology, which is more about his cult of personality than his actual scientific or philosophical understandings.

A little nit-picky. I doubt you'd find many atheists who believe magic is supernatural phenomena and not the creative manipulation of the natural. Also, if it's only a "creator God" then atheists could believe in Poseidon or Lucifer but not Yahweh or Allah. If you accept this stuff as atheist the difference is semantics.

I kept rading like 20 posts asking myself why the fuck do people still hate him so much, then I figured out that I was on Holla Forums, lol. My mistake to click one of your threads on the front page, terrorist sympathizers. Sorry.

I want to clear up their use of science/transhumanism. They pay lipservice to transhumanism, but are also unable to participate in its advancement beyond praising its doctrine. So they're left without the ability to engage in science or its critiques in a meaningful way, but instead use it to shield their ideologies.

WEW

I think it's great that he is triggering so many liberals and Islam apologists. I wish there was a more radicalized Sam Harris but I recognize that this isn't possible due to the current high-on-idpol left.

kill yourself

Reminder that "selfish gene" doesn't mean our genes program us to be selfish. It means the gene itself is "selfish" in that it just uses the organism as a means to replicate itself.

bump

why does sam harris trigger leftists so hard?

He doesn't care about history or politics, only ideology, which he simplifies to religious writings.

Because he's a cultureless american fag. Since they hate countries wich developped their own culturel he, just like the average americans hate everyone else and want to make the world as retarded as their country is.

Because he interrogates ideas rather than automatically agreeing with left ideology.

Because he supports western imperialism.

Because he supports the state of Israel

I was on board with the New Atheist movement until Christopher Hitchens died and it devolved into the alt-light-light illiterate cesspool that it is today.

It was always an alt-right cesspool though. Your views probably just evolved. The alt-right is what the new atheist movement was back the day. It's literally the same demographics.

He's not factually wrong on the topic of neuroscience and free will, but his conclusions or other opinions aren't always that great.

His neuroscience work is bunk and his idea of free will is so bad he got publically BTFO by Dennett even though they're ostensibly "on the same side" on most issues.

Actually, Dennett is pretty much the only member of the "new atheist" movement who isn't a total retard so as a compromise I'll just tell adamant Harris fans to look to him instead.

I saw a video where he stated that free will was real and Harris fans just attacked him.

Hitchens was pro iraq war, pro torture and said the only good muslim was a dead muslim, he was the original sargonist

Lol, his ideology inherited by an obese man-child.

Pretty typical of a trot.

That's because Sam Harris is a fucking scrub who can't into compatibilism or even the arguments for or against it.

The only good thing about Hitchens is he still never came out as pro zionist as far as I know