Intelligent Design and Leninist Intolerance

When Lenin said, "The Marxian doctrine is omnipotent because it is true," everything depends on how we understand "truth" here. Is it a neutral objective knowledge or the truth of an engaged subject? Lenin's wager-one that is today, in our era of postmodern relativism, more relevant than ever-is that universal truth and partisanship, the gesture of taking sides, are not only not mutually exclusive but condition each other. In a concrete situation, its universal truth can only be articulated from a thoroughly partisan position; truth is by definition one-sided. This, of course, goes against the predominant doxa of compromise, of finding a middle path among the multitude of conflicting interests. If one does not specify the criteria of the different, alternate narrativization, then this endeavour courts the danger of endorsing, in the politically correct mood, ridiculous narratives like those about the supremacy of some aboriginal holistic wisdom, or those that dismiss science as just another narrative on par with premodern superstitions.

A Plea for Leninist Intolerance, Slavoj Zizek

Intelligent design has returned to the news this week: the Dover, Pa. school board election, the Kansas School Board vote, and the lovable Pat Robertson’s latest diatribe. I tell myself not to think of intelligent design ensuring that intelligent design is what I am thinking about today.

One can pretend that Intelligent Design is not about politics. However, the demand for specifics about the nature of the Intelligent Designer and how She operates is greeted with embarrassed silence, or answers to different questions. The political nature of Intelligent Design forces itself upon the imagination after a serious inquiry into the Intelligent Designer. Politics is the irreducible remainder of such inquiries.

Those who want Intelligent Design taught in public schools come from Fundamentalist Christian organizations. They proclaim their ideas as agnostic when speaking publicly, yet speak of god when lecturing before Fundamentalist Christian groups. They admit that Intelligent Design is about teaching Fundamentalist Christian religion in the public schools.

Many have noted that Intelligent Design founders politically because it is religion and violates the separation of church and state.

Since the issue is political, what decides the issue? Let’s face it, part of the confusion or plain lack of curiosity in the issue is based upon intellectual laziness. I can believe that god created everything as it is 5,000 years ago, grab a beer from the fridge, and watch the game, or I can do some heavy lifting by learning how Darwin organized and set the research agenda for modern biology. It is easy to stand aside and say it does not matter if a statement is read to high school classes about Intelligent Design and let it go at that.

The core issue is politics though. The Fundamentalist Christian movement wants way more than Intelligent Design taught in high schools. They want the Fundamentalist Christian world view taught in high schools. I say world view because it is about more than religion. They want everyone in the United States to share their values. The Fundamentalist Christian values are often antithetical to the values of people who seek a society which promotes the interest of other classes and not just the interests of a small and powerful ruling class. The Christian who embraces enlightened social values that are not Fundamentalist is every much the foe as the atheist when it comes to this clash of values.

One of the interesting demands of the Intelligent Design devotee is requiring philosophic scientism from its opponent's arguments while claiming that Evolution is too rationalistic and is itself blatant scientism. The boundary between two separate spheres of knowledge, science and religion, is hopelessly blurred by their faith that something other than evolution is true. Yet this blurring should not be excused as a mere philosophical confusion because at the heart of the Intelligent Design argument is a desire for dictatorial control by the Fundamentalist Christian, whose dogma is necessarily linked to all spheres of life. The ideology is insatiable in its appetite to control all cultural, political, economic, and religious beliefs. Democracy can as easily aid and abet this process as old fashioned fascism. All an Intelligent Design devotee needs to do is convince me to grab a beer and watch the game until the whole thing blows over. When it does not blow over, I can say, “well, there was really nothing I could do about it anyway.”

Are the fish biting? It appears in Dover, Pa. they are not.