Teh Stupid! Make It Stop!

As a few commenters have noted in the previous thread, Chris Muir has actually managed to submit a strip that’s even stupider than yesterday’s offering. Kant remains a nihilist and moral relativist, because if anything is true of categorical moral imperatives, it’s that they render you unable to make moral judgments, and force you to treat all acts as being morally equivalent. But it gets even better, as John Locke is summarily dismissed from the tradition of “Judeo-Christian” philosophers. I actually think this is even more instructive: to an authoritarian (and apparently theocratic) cultist like Muir, it’s not enough, like poor, America-hating Locke, to put forward a theological justification for private property: apparently, to be “Judeo-Christian” you have to support the divine right of kings as well. That explains a lot. And, of course, all of this egregious bullshit about philosophers neither he (nor, fortunately for him, anyone in his audience) have read is used to defend the laughable claim that the New York Times is anti-American and sees Islamic terrorists and Americans as “the same.” Because, of course, the Times has written some editorials critical of the current administration (although these Lockean nihilists rolled over for the war when it mattered), and le pays, c’est Bush. And God–or even Kant–knows the thing is painfully unfunny, but evidently that’s a given.

There’s dumb, there’s FD, there’s CFD, and then there’s Chris Muir, and then there’s anyone who thinks he’s good.

…of course, we could keep doing this forever, but as several have pointed out it’s also amusing that Muir thinks that the Framers were (half-)influenced by Schopenhauer (b. 1788.) Really, the man should stick with his trademark T&A, right-wing nice guy ressentiment and commentary about evil left-wing blog commenters.

…Norbiz points to his priceless collection of Muir remixes.

….(djw here) as Dale notes in comments, the reference to Locke has mysteriously dissapeared. The panel now reads, “as well as Kant, Shopenenhauer, later.” So one howler is removed, but the incoherence is ramped up a notch. I guess we have an answer to the question, “How stupid does Chris Muir have to get before he embarrasses himself?”

…(from Scott) actual philosophy-talkin’ person Hilzoy explains why Muir is the poseur’s poseur in more detail.