[grey_whiskers]

Ultimately, it's irrelevant. If the only way a viewpoint can survive is through the use of force to quash dissent, it's days are numbered.

So you are simultaneously denying "might makes right" while supporting "survival of the fittest."

Interesting potential conflicts there :-)

And -- if you *do* subscribe to this view, when do you foresee the loss of the Marxist/Gramscian stranglehold on academia?

Cheers!

[Hoplite]

So you are simultaneously denying "might makes right" while supporting "survival of the fittest."

I see no conflict as pertains to the subject presently under discussion. The marketplace of ideas itself is Darwinian. Attempts to stop its proper functioning through the use of force are doomed to failure.

when do you foresee the loss of the Marxist/Gramscian stranglehold on academia?

Outside of my purview. (No clue.)

[YHAOS]

”So you are simultaneously denying "might makes right" while supporting "survival of the fittest."”

There is an apparent contradiction in these two slogans only if we accept Evolution, or perhaps, more generally The Scientific Method, as a complete philosophical set of value systems and ethical constructs. If we understand it to be simply a fact-finding methodology, then we will come to understand that ‘survival of the fittest’ is a theory (at best) based on scientific observational activities, whereas the issue of ‘might makes right’ is a moral/ethical/philosophical question involving cognitive processes much higher than mere fact-finding activities.