A Call to Action from Gad Saad

Important truths from an important thinker:

Let me begin with a disclaimer: If you know anything about Gad Saad – and about me – you might be thinking, ‘OK, Bill is offering a review of Saad’s brand-new book, Toxic Empathy: Dying to Be Kind. Well, I certainly plan on doing just that, but it will be another month before the book is released and the copy that I preordered arrives from America.

So here I do what might be second-best: encourage you to look out for his new volume while reminding you of one of his other key works. I refer to his important volume released earlier this decade, The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense (Regnery, 2020, 2021).

That volume is well worth being aware of if you have not yet read it. The Lebanese-born, Canadian-based psychologist, professor and writer has been leading the charge against our PC and woke culture. In the Preface he says this:

Some people are truly irredeemably clueless. They post comments attacking me for criticizing the SJW (social justice warrior) mindset instead of supposedly tackling “important” matters. Yes, because having a set of idea pathogens take complete control over the minds and souls of millions of people in academia, government, companies, the media, and the general society in a manner that is akin to religious superstitious dogma is “unimportant.” … That at times I use satire, sarcasm, and humour to battle against the enemies of reason should not detract you from understanding how serious this battle is. (xiv)

It should be noted that in recent years he has come out much more antagonistically toward political Islam while defending his own Jewish heritage. He calls himself ‘culturally Jewish’. As to this book, however, I simply want to share a few quotes from Chapter 8: “Call to Action”. He begins by reminding us that we ALL have a role to play in defending that which needs defending:

All things being equal, whether you are talking about a military conflict or the battle of ideas, it is generally better to have a large army than a small one. The more people we have defending our core values, the more likely we are to triumph against the enemies of reason. And yet, countless persons who share our values fail to speak out. The reasons are manifold.

 

Most people are too busy to notice the dangers of idea pathogens or wrongly assume that they are unimportant. The intrusion of anti-science, anti-reason, and illiberal movements occurs slowly and incrementally without many people becoming aware of the larger problem. Hence, the slow and inexorable death of the West by a thousand cuts. Instead of ignoring the problem, recognize that while it affects others today, it could reach you tomorrow. You may not have children in college, but if you work for a firm or are perhaps a business owner, campus lunacy will affect your business soon—if it does not already—perhaps starting with your human resources department and the enforcement of “progressive” government regulations that demand adherence to the cult of diversity, inclusion, and equity. Parts of Europe already have sharia enclaves that are no-go areas for infidels (and the police). You might not have them in your city yet, but your nation’s immigration policies (and Ostrich Parasitic Syndrome) might bring no-go areas sooner rather than later.

 

Another reason people are reluctant to join the battle of ideas is what we call “diffusion of responsibility” or “the bystander effect.” In the late 1960s, psychologists John Darley and Bibb Latane documented what at first glance seems counterintuitive. The greater the number of people present, the less likely an individual is to help someone in need because it is easier to rationalize that someone else will do it. It is easy to diffuse responsibility to others who are willing to stick their necks out: “Thank you, Dr. Saad, for standing up on our behalf. I really support your efforts. You got this.” No, I don’t. Everybody has a voice. Activate your sense of personal responsibility. You have agency. Participate. Do not be a bystander as truth, reason, and logic call out for your help. Do not subcontract your voice to others. Do not self-censor. You and your children have a stake in the outcome of this battle, so don’t be afraid to speak up. (pp. 171-172)

As someone who has long been on the front lines in the culture wars, I can say a hearty ‘amen’ to that! Often people would tell me, ‘We are right behind you.’ I was always tempted to say, ‘I wish you were here with me rather than way back there!’

He goes on to look at the modern aversion to “judging”. He mentions how so many folks fear straining relationships by speaking out on controversial topics and taking sides. And he reminds us that while the “West is founded on a bedrock of Judeo-Christian traditions,” some think Scripture forbids judging, as in Matthew 7:1-2. (p. 175) I have discussed that faulty understanding in various pieces, including this one: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2007/06/14/jesus-and-judgment/

Saad looks at other reasons why we refrain from making important judgments:

Cultural relativism also impedes people from casting judgments, especially against otherwise abhorrent religious and cultural practices. Several generations of university students have been indoctrinated into the false belief that it is gauche if not bigoted to judge people of different ethnic or religious backgrounds, especially if you are a white Westerner. In April 2011 the University of Notre Dame hosted a debate between William Lane Craig (a Christian theologian) and Sam Harris (an atheist neuroscientist) on the natural versus supernatural foundations of morality. During the debate, Harris recounted an anecdote that perfectly summarizes the moral blindness that cultural relativism engenders. It centered around a conversation he had with an appointee to President Obama’s Council on Bioethics.

 

“She said, ‘How could you ever say that forcing women to wear burqas is wrong from the point of view of science?’ I said, ‘Well, because I think it’s pretty clear that right and wrong relate to human well-being, and it’s just as clear that forcing half the population to live in cloth bags and beating them, or killing them when they try to get out, is not a way of maximizing human well-being:’ And she said, ‘Well, that’s just your opinion.’ And I said, ‘Well, okay, let’s make it even easier. Let’s say we found a culture that was literally removing the eyeballs of every third child, ok, at birth. Would you then agree that we have found a culture that is not perfectly maximizing well-being?’ And she said, ‘It would depend on why they were doing it.’ So after my eyebrows returned from the back of my head, I said, ‘Okay, well say they were doing it for religious reasons. Let’s say they have a scripture which says, “Every third should walk in darkness” or some such nonsense:’ And then she said, ‘Well, then you could never say that they were wrong’.” (pp. 175-176)

Saad goes on to say this:

To judge is to be human. It is perfectly natural to judge others. It is an integral part of being a well-functioning adult. A central feature of human decision making is the process of judging several competing alternatives. This is precisely why the Society for Judgment and Decision Making and its flagship journal Judgment and Decision Making exist. We judge whom to include within our close circle of friends. We judge various prospective suitors prior to marrying our eventual spouse. We judge the performance of our students and employees. Life is laden with endless judgments. If I were to ask you to think about the people whom you consider to be most interesting, they would likely have one thing in common: they judge; they opine; they take positions. Fence-sitters who equivocate about the pros and cons of every conceivable issue without ever pronouncing a judgment are profoundly boring people. To never judge is to be an intellectual coward for it serves as an insurance policy against the possibility of being a polarizing figure. The most charismatic public intellectuals are typically those who share their judgments on a broad range of issues. Thomas Sowell and the late Christopher Hitchens are two of the leading public intellectuals of the past four decades precisely because they never shied away from sharing their opinions on contentious issues. Of course, not all judgments are created equal. The difference between a judgmental ideologue and a judgmental intellectual is the process by which each arrives at his position. As long as one uses well-articulated arguments in support of one’s judgments, it is perfectly acceptable to judge. (p. 177)

And to make careful distinctions, to discern, and to carefully judge and assess is NOT being hateful:

To criticize Islam does not make you an Islamophobe (a nonsensical term) nor a hater of individual Muslims. To scrutinize radical feminism does not make you a misogynist. To question open borders does not make you a racist. You can have an open heart filled with empathy and compassion and yet reject open borders. To assert that trans women (biological males) should not be competing in athletic competitions with biological females does not make you a transphobe. Many situations in life involve a calculus of competing rights. With that in mind, the right of your eight-year-old daughter to feel comfortable and safe in a public bathroom supersedes that of a 230-pound, six foot two trans woman. To reject the idea that so-called “other forms of knowing” (whether the indigenous way of knowing or postmodernism) are as valid as the scientific method does not make you a close-minded bigot. To reject the hysterical demonization of white men as exemplars of toxic masculinity and white supremacy does not make you Adolf Hitler. The name-calling accusations are locked and loaded threats, ready to be deployed against you should you dare to question the relevant progressive tenets. Most people are too afraid to be accused of being racist or misogynist, and so they cower in silence. Keep your mouth shut and nod in agreement or else prepare to be tarred and feathered. Don’t fall prey to this silencing strategy. Be assured in your principles and stand ready to defend them. (pp. 186-187)

Our universities especially need to wake up to these truths:

While civil and aeronautical engineers are constrained by physical laws when designing bridges and planes. the humanities professors spreading anti-science, anti-logic idea pathogens are impervious to downstream ill effects. These professors have created a university culture where insanity is rewarded. This must stop. And the first step might be to fight back against unconstitutional speech codes and delimited free speech zones. Under the Constitution, the entire United States is a free speech zone. Say no to the thought police…. (p. 187)

If you have not yet read this book, please do so. And when his new book comes out in a month or so, please get a copy of that as well. We need to hear what this important thinker is saying.

[1838 words]