N
NY.Transfer.News@blythe.org
Guest
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Conservatism's Unintelligent Design
Via NY Transfer News Collective All the News that Doesn't Fit
Tpm Caf(c)/Tom Paine via CubaNow - November 19, 2007
http://www.cubanow.net/global/loader.php?&secc=10&item=3733&c=2
Conservatism's Unintelligent Design
By Greg Anrig, Jr.
Cubanow.- Last night, PBS aired a superb Nova documentary about the
Dover, Pennsylvania "intelligent design" case. My 11-year twins were as
riveted as I was as the story unfolded from the suspicious burning of a
student's mural depicting man's evolution from apes, to a school
committee member's questioning of how the high school's science
teachers approach evolution, to raucous board meetings, through the
trial. Throughout, both Darwin's theory and the arguments made on
behalf of intelligent design were presented carefully, engagingly, and
clearly enough so my kids (and even I) could fully understand them.
Ultimately, of course, Judge John Jones ruled that intelligent design
is grounded in theology rather than science, and thereby would be
unconstitutional to teach in public schools. He was subsequently
subjected to death threats. After the town's voters ousted the school
committee members who had tried to introduce intelligent design, Pat
Robertson issued a warning: "I'd like to say to the good citizens of
Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just
rejected him from your city."
In watching the documentary, I was struck by the parallels between the
Dover story and movement conservatism generally. The selling of
"intelligent design," and the idea itself, has much in common with
Social Security privatization, supply-side economics, the invasion of
Iraq, school vouchers, and other half-baked causes that the right has
relentlessly been pushing in recent decades.
For example, central to the selling of the intelligent design idea was
the creation in 1996 of The Discovery Institute's Center for Renewal of
Science and Culture, initially funded by the Ahmanson family and the
MacLellan Foundation (which supports organizations committed to
"furthering of the Kingdom of Christ"). The Center housed and otherwise
supported an eclectic mix of people, usually affiliated with
universities, who in one way or another tried to come up with examples
that would reinforce their claims about intelligent design.
It developed an internal game plan called the "Wedge Strategy," which
states as an overarching goal the replacement of science as currently
practiced with "theistic and Christian science." What the center was
most effective at was developing a soft-sell marketing pitch intended
to minimize the opposition that would arise against a creationism
hard-sell. So, for example, it advocated that biology classes "teach
the controversy" as a means of incorporating its attacks on Darwinism
into lesson plans, rather than insisting that intelligent design
replace evolution.
Basically, the Discovery Institute's Center was in the business of
marketing"not research. It had a product to sell " intelligent design
- -- and was focused on doing whatever it could to sell that idea. Even
the name of the idea itself was changed from creationism to make it
more palatable. Much like the unobjectionable moniker "Center for
Renewal of Science and Culture," later changed to simply Center for
Science and Culture, which is about as perverse as the right's Center
for Equal Opportunity.
Now think about the role played by the Cato Institution and the
Heritage Foundation in selling Social Security privatization. Akin to
the "Wedge Document," they developed the 1983 game plan "Achieving a
'Leninist' Strategy." For years they honed a pitch aimed at reassuring
everyone that, far from phasing out Social Security, they actually
wanted to bolster it. They even softened the lingo from "privatization"
to "private accounts." When confronted with fundamental flaws with the
concept, such as the massive additional federal debt it would create
while imposing added risks on Americans, the think tanks came up with
lame excuses while steaming full speed ahead with the same
ill-conceived idea that would advance their broader agenda. Just as
some intelligent design advocates outright lied in saying religion had
nothing to do with their motivations, many privatization advocates lied
in saying they wanted to strengthen Social Security.
One other parallel: at the end of the Nova program, Judge Jones said
that the debate over the teaching of evolution in the schools will
continue for generations to come, despite the one-sidedness of the
factual evidence against "intelligent design." So, too, the debate over
the other lame-brained agenda items of the well-financed, relentless
conservative movement.
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
Our main website: http://www.blythe.org
List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFHQ5KViz2i76ou9wQRAs3PAKCWXAESFP8qYpV6JZHHcV/qQHMvBACeP2yz
IkNUA0/cB50IWyAonuTslBc=
=BhMZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
Conservatism's Unintelligent Design
Via NY Transfer News Collective All the News that Doesn't Fit
Tpm Caf(c)/Tom Paine via CubaNow - November 19, 2007
http://www.cubanow.net/global/loader.php?&secc=10&item=3733&c=2
Conservatism's Unintelligent Design
By Greg Anrig, Jr.
Cubanow.- Last night, PBS aired a superb Nova documentary about the
Dover, Pennsylvania "intelligent design" case. My 11-year twins were as
riveted as I was as the story unfolded from the suspicious burning of a
student's mural depicting man's evolution from apes, to a school
committee member's questioning of how the high school's science
teachers approach evolution, to raucous board meetings, through the
trial. Throughout, both Darwin's theory and the arguments made on
behalf of intelligent design were presented carefully, engagingly, and
clearly enough so my kids (and even I) could fully understand them.
Ultimately, of course, Judge John Jones ruled that intelligent design
is grounded in theology rather than science, and thereby would be
unconstitutional to teach in public schools. He was subsequently
subjected to death threats. After the town's voters ousted the school
committee members who had tried to introduce intelligent design, Pat
Robertson issued a warning: "I'd like to say to the good citizens of
Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just
rejected him from your city."
In watching the documentary, I was struck by the parallels between the
Dover story and movement conservatism generally. The selling of
"intelligent design," and the idea itself, has much in common with
Social Security privatization, supply-side economics, the invasion of
Iraq, school vouchers, and other half-baked causes that the right has
relentlessly been pushing in recent decades.
For example, central to the selling of the intelligent design idea was
the creation in 1996 of The Discovery Institute's Center for Renewal of
Science and Culture, initially funded by the Ahmanson family and the
MacLellan Foundation (which supports organizations committed to
"furthering of the Kingdom of Christ"). The Center housed and otherwise
supported an eclectic mix of people, usually affiliated with
universities, who in one way or another tried to come up with examples
that would reinforce their claims about intelligent design.
It developed an internal game plan called the "Wedge Strategy," which
states as an overarching goal the replacement of science as currently
practiced with "theistic and Christian science." What the center was
most effective at was developing a soft-sell marketing pitch intended
to minimize the opposition that would arise against a creationism
hard-sell. So, for example, it advocated that biology classes "teach
the controversy" as a means of incorporating its attacks on Darwinism
into lesson plans, rather than insisting that intelligent design
replace evolution.
Basically, the Discovery Institute's Center was in the business of
marketing"not research. It had a product to sell " intelligent design
- -- and was focused on doing whatever it could to sell that idea. Even
the name of the idea itself was changed from creationism to make it
more palatable. Much like the unobjectionable moniker "Center for
Renewal of Science and Culture," later changed to simply Center for
Science and Culture, which is about as perverse as the right's Center
for Equal Opportunity.
Now think about the role played by the Cato Institution and the
Heritage Foundation in selling Social Security privatization. Akin to
the "Wedge Document," they developed the 1983 game plan "Achieving a
'Leninist' Strategy." For years they honed a pitch aimed at reassuring
everyone that, far from phasing out Social Security, they actually
wanted to bolster it. They even softened the lingo from "privatization"
to "private accounts." When confronted with fundamental flaws with the
concept, such as the massive additional federal debt it would create
while imposing added risks on Americans, the think tanks came up with
lame excuses while steaming full speed ahead with the same
ill-conceived idea that would advance their broader agenda. Just as
some intelligent design advocates outright lied in saying religion had
nothing to do with their motivations, many privatization advocates lied
in saying they wanted to strengthen Social Security.
One other parallel: at the end of the Nova program, Judge Jones said
that the debate over the teaching of evolution in the schools will
continue for generations to come, despite the one-sidedness of the
factual evidence against "intelligent design." So, too, the debate over
the other lame-brained agenda items of the well-financed, relentless
conservative movement.
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
Our main website: http://www.blythe.org
List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFHQ5KViz2i76ou9wQRAs3PAKCWXAESFP8qYpV6JZHHcV/qQHMvBACeP2yz
IkNUA0/cB50IWyAonuTslBc=
=BhMZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----