“weed out those for whom there is no hope except through our forbearance, am I’m very, very, wear of supporting these losers with my tax dollars…any weeping and wailing over the Poor Little Kids who would perish by immediately gobbling down pills and injecting poisons, is summoning up crocodile tears, in my opinion. They would – and presently do – mature into grown-up idiots and Darwin would be appalled that his lessons were ignored”.

James Randi was not challenged by his peers on his comments. He was then interviewed by Will Storr, where Randi doubled down on his beliefs about Social Darwinism:

“I’m a believer in Social Darwinism. Not in ever case. I would do anything to stop a twelve-year-old kid from doing it. Sincerely. But in general, I think that Darwinism, survival of the fittest, should be allowed to act itself out. As long as it doesn’t interfere with me and other sensible, rational people who could be affected by it. Innocent People, in other words…These are stupid people. And if they can’t survive, they don’t have the IQ, don’t have the thinking power to be able to survive, it’s unfortunate; I would hate to see it happen, but at the same time, it would clear the air.”

Both incidents include a clear set of ideological beliefs that are disgusting and situated on harming others by inaction or apathy. In addition to this, his emotional connection to the issue blurred his rational thought and empathy. Finally, and there is a clear suppression by authorities but not in the traditional sense that we have learned about in this course. Its almost an inverse in the sense that those within the same community of Randi, his peers and fellow scientific cohorts, did not acknowledge nor challenge his views.