Comments on: I Don’t Licke Icke (all that much anymore)

By: Tom the rash

Tom the rash — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 18:24:55 +0000

Without reading James Surowiecki (why should ignorance stop opinions?), I suspect he is on the way to self-unfulfilling prophecy. Crowds make good decisions as long as they are made of independent people, he argues. But once someone points that out, everyone watches the crowd which therefore loses any independence it had.

By: Will

Will — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 03:25:49 +0000

Mentions of Master of Orion is a new reason why CT is my favorite blog.

By: fyreflye

fyreflye — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 20:10:10 +0000

I’ve posted more than one reader comment on Amazon blasting the snake oil currently on sale and I’ve never been censored. Often the simplest response to one of these kinds of books is to use the “I recommend instead of…” option to post a link to Robert Carroll’s Skeptics Dictionary. Amazon could hardly complain about a recommendation for a different book in their catalogue.

By: Walt Pohl

Walt Pohl — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:20:48 +0000

Didn’t Yusuf Islam defend the fatwa on Salman Rushdie? Lee: I laughed at your BNP converting to Judaism example. Anway, Dsquared picked Yusuf Islam because he wants to suggest that Icke is going to convert to Islam, and Cat Stevens is a famous convert. Any other famous convert would work as well.

By: john

john — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 18:46:03 +0000

Am I the only one that remembers Yusuf Islam’s pronouncement regarding the Rushdie fatwa, to wit: that the Koran is quite clear that he who slurs the Prophet must die? I took it that this fairly infamous incident had at least something to do with DD’s remark—& to my mind, at least, it was a signal moment in the history of shark-jumping.

By: jdw

jdw — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:48:43 +0000

Okay, I’ll bite. What /is/ the significance of Master of Orion as a theological source? For the Nibiruan Council folk? They just took the races and changed a couple names, I think.

By: Lee Bryant

Lee Bryant — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:21:49 +0000

Cheers Daniel. I agree about Captain hook, BTW.

By: Doug Muir

Doug Muir — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:14:02 +0000

Okay, I’ll bite. What /is/ the significance of Master of Orion as a theological source? (And does it involve Neutron Pellet Guns? Those were always my favorite.) Doug M.

By: dsquared

dsquared — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:02:39 +0000

Lee: for what it’s worth, I don’t consider the Black Muslims to be particularly kooky and I think a CT article on the subject of Farrakhan is long overdue … (I suppose this is as good a place as any to mention my long held suspicion that the reason why Abu Hamza (“Capitain Hook”) got away with it as long as he did is almost certainly that he was/is an agent provocateur in the pay of MI5. It would be extraordinary if the British spooks hadn’t turned anyone in the radical Islamic movement, and Hamza’s actions – and seeming immunity from the racial hatred laws – make more sense in that context than any other) Anyway; I’ve noted Lee’s concerns in the update. I don’t share them but they are well meant and well founded, and I think that’s as close to reflective equilibrium as we’re going to get.

By: dsquared

dsquared — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:57:26 +0000

James … heh. Note how I buried these remarks in a footnote to a review of a different book in order to avoid polluting the review or yours. Must say the book looks very good, and as soon as I can wrest it out of the grip of my missus (who apparently likes it enough to steal it), I will put a proper review up.

By: Richard Kahn

Richard Kahn — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:55:57 +0000

You may be interested in looking at a forthcoming article of mine on Icke’s Reptoid Hypothesis that is set to come out in the next issue of the Journal of Utopian Studies. To my knowledge, its the first time Icke has imploded into the academy. We wrote this prior to the new book, though, so that didn’t get included. If we update the article, we’ll use what you have provided here! ;) IckeReptoid.pdf.

By: Lee Bryant

Lee Bryant — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:52:48 +0000

Scott, The reason we focus on such “tear-off” remarks is because there is an urgent need for understanding and mutual tolerance between Muslims and non-Muslims in the US & UK right now, thanks to the US-led war against the Middle East. This is becoming a serious issue of civic cohesion, which is why we expect academics and educated elites to show more responsibility (not to say they can’t make jokes…). If you think this is “the soft bigotry of low expectations” then I am sorry, but you have to bear in mind the context and the currently low level of understanding towards Islam and its practices. When people are subject to persecution because of their religious beliefs, mocking those beliefs takes on a different character to mocking Falwell et al. Besides, like Daniel, you are comparing raving loons (in his case Icke, in yours Falwell et al) with a reasonably moderate and thoughtful person such as Yusuf Islam. Sorry to harp on about this, but I was clearly not the only one to take offence. I will leave you along to discuss Icke’’s work, which I agree is a hilarious area of enquiry…

By: James Surowiecki

James Surowiecki — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:43:00 +0000

Excuse the non-Icke post, but: Daniel, my publishers at home and abroad have been unusually nice. So instead of having the blurb writer shot, is it okay if I have him flogged with the proverbial wet noodle insead? I don’t know how “screw” got in there: my American flap copy says “you can buy a nut anywhere in the world.” As for the second point, the blurb’s trying to rely on this distinction I make between collective wisdom and conventional wisdom, but . . . well, bring out the noodle.

By: pepi

pepi — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:37:57 +0000

Scott – I agree, but I don’t see this as a case of special treatment for religion, something I most definitely do not subscribe to. Anything can be mocked, religions included. I too find Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam’s beliefs about copyright ridiculous, yeah, whether they’re imam-approved or not (though I couldn’t care less, in fact, I’m definitely thankful he’s not unleashing his stuff on the public anymore). But I don’t see what is AS ridiculous as that about the mere belief in “Allah as the spiritual force behind the universe”. Billions of people believe that, it may be a totally lunatic thing all the same, of course, but point is, they’re not all conspiracy nutters just because of that. There’s no direct relation between believing what Icke believes, which is a lot of truly insane stuff, and simply converting to Islam and subscribing to that “Allah spiritual force” belief. I got the point Daniel is making (I think), but it was a bit spoiled by the way he put it across.

By: jdw

jdw — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:26:04 +0000

it does mean that there is now an Icke-shaped hole in my heart ready for a new Favourite Kook to fill. Here’s an oldie-but-goodie: http://www.nibiruancouncil.com/index.html It’s been fascinating to watch the Nibiruan Council grow from a reverent synthesis of Sci-Fi movies to something sort of like Unitarianism, but with lizards and Wicca and whatnot. I will also add that I think I am the first Nibiru scholar to note the importance of Master of Orion as a theological source.