What was that about Dawkins’s never having “proclaimed himself as any kind of atheist ‘leader'”?
What about this then – what about Join the Dawkins Circle?
Reason Circle: $1,000 to $2,499 annually (or $85/month)
- Invitation to Dawkins Circle member-only event with RDFRS personalities
- Member-only discount for all purchases in the richarddawkins.net store
Science Circle: $2,500 to $4,999 annually (or $210/month)
All the benefits listed above, plus:
- One ticket to an invitation-only Dawkins Circle event with Richard
Darwin Circle: $5,000 to $9,999 annually (or $420/month)
All the benefits listed above, plus:
- Two tickets to an invitation-only Dawkins Circle event with Richard
For as little as one thousand dollars a year, you can attend a Dawkins Circle member-only event with RDFRS personalities. Wow!! Only a grand, and you get to go to a Dawkins Circle member-only event!! Gollywolly I can hardly breathe at the thought. Granted, there are conferences that charge much less than that where you can probably encounter “RDFRS personalities” or at least be in the same air-space with their majesties. But still, it’s totally worth it to shell out the whole one thousand dollars to get the real deal brand-name authentic Dawkins Circle member-only event.
And even more thrilling, if you spend just another $1,500 for a very modest total of two thousand five hundred dollars per year you get that plus a ticket to an invitation-only Dawkins Circle event with…gasp gasp gasp choke…with Richard. With holy sainted sacred Richard. I know people who would queue in the rain for a month to get a ticket like that. I know people who would throw their first-born children into a bonfire to get a ticket like that.
And if you shell out a mere five thousand dollars per year you get two of those. Two!! Two chances to share air-space with…Richard. Hallowed be thy name.
But never let it be said that he’s ever proclaimed himself any kind of atheist “leader.”
How much for the privilege of licking Dawkins’ butt? Is it half-off just to watch an RDRFS Personality do it for you?
I compare that to the roughly dollar per original verse I get for my blogging, and I want to find rude words that rhyme with “Dawkins”.
“Flawkins”? “Floggin’s”? “Squawkin’s”? “Blockin’s”? “Chalkin’s”?
A veritable plethora of Dawkins rhymerics!! (Rhymes with “limerics” O_O)
Why do you think that facts matter in this argument?
If the Darwin Circle has all the benefits listed above + 2 tickets, shouldn’t you get 3 tickets in total? Otherwise the pricing wouldn’t make much sense, since two people joining the Science Circle would be a better deal than one person joining the Darwin Circle.
So our great non-leader is even more generous than you thought!
How much does it cost for a private audience? Do we have to kneel and kiss his ring? What is the proper attire?
So many questions.
I dont think this particular argument applies to the situation – Since no one is claiming that Dawkins is not a celebrity.
Its similar to what say Kim kardashian could do (and she’d probably be able to charge more than Dawkins )
At least when James Randi asks for $10K, he comes to your event and gives a speech. Personally, when I give a huge sum a money to somebody just to hang out with them, I expect certain favors. At least politicians and prostitutes (but I repeat myself) are somewhat upfront about it. What can Richard Dawkins do for me that’s worth $1-5K?
$420 a month.
Jeeeesus…
Deepak – you don’t think that’s a distinction without a difference?
Don’t forget that AAI gives a Dawkins Award.
I was at a CFI reception in DC the evening before the Reason Rally, with several of the Rally speakers in attendance, ie. they were The Draw to make one pay $50 for hors d’oeuvres. Dawkins said a few words (which he pretty much repeated the next day) and was afterwards more or less mobbed. Since I hate shouldering my way through a crowd, and anyways I’m just not a fanboi by temperament, I went off for another glass of wine.
Anyways, anybody who gets an award named after them, and is used as the candy at an Exclusive Event, is a Leader whether they asked for it or not. You only get to beg off if you do this, frequently and consistently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVygqjyS4CA
Needs action dolls.
The denial is rather strange. It’s not as though there’s anything wrong with being a leader, or even with calling oneself a leader when it’s obviously the case.
“Thought leader” is a different matter, because it’s such a creepy phrase.
@Ophelia
For this specific example – no . He’s trading his celebrity here, not his thought leadership. It’s quite commonplace and you see many other people do this -without the implications of leadership of any type.
For examples like global security council , there obviously Dawkins does think of himself as some sort of leader.
I know people who would queue in the rain for a month to get a ticket like that. I know people who would throw their first-born children into a bonfire to get a ticket like that.
If it’s someone who’d give Dawkins a great big dinner-long deconstruction of what an asshole he is, I’d be happy to fund the $1,500 to make that happen. I am quite serious.
deepak – but he’s doing it in aid of his own personal foundation, named after him. I don’t really see how you can separate that from a claim to leadership.
It occurs to me that I remember sitting next to Robin Cornwell on a panel at WiS2 and listening to her explain that Dawkins is the only person in the atheist or secular movement (I forget exactly what she called it) whose presence at a conference sells enough tickets to pay for the conference.
I have a feeling she decided that capability should be turned into cash for the foundation.
Video of that panel is online, if I remember correctly.
I haven’t bothered to dig into the time-lines but the Dawkins Foundation was run by his mistress for a while, right? Did he create the foundation before or after that? I think she was getting a pretty decent salary – about $80k. I haven’t read the organizations’ tax filings since a couple years ago (back when I still gave a fuck who and what Dawkins was up to) I don’t recall if it was “find the mistress a sweet gig” or “having a toss with an employee” that was going on. I suppose someone could dig out the details; they ought to be in various tax and 501c filings.
Thought Leader is pretty much the same thing as saying cult leader, it occurs to me.
Perhaps that is not how they intend it though.
Yes.
Maybe its because my opinion of Dawkins is at an all time low that I see it more as a Kim Kardashian /Paris Hilton type of vain celebrity with moonstruck fans type of thing rather than a leadership type of thing,
Well to be clear, I think it’s both. I think the celebrity-vanity part has led him into thinking he gets to Lead the atheists (and school the feminists).
And I thought only the Church sold Indulgences.
Ugh, that’s a bullseye.
I tweeted as much. I wonder how soundly I’ll get scolded.
A hit, Hank, a palpable hit.
I wonder if Dawkins realizes that having an exclusive club where rich people pay to gather around and fawn over him… well all I’m saying is after “that Irish Wanker”, “Circle Jerk” springs to mind.
(I used to think this approach was ok – after all atheist and secular orgs need to collect money for their activities like anyone else. Then I went through a phase of just envy at not being able to afford atheist events outside my country, to a kind of queasy feeling about people who explicitly say “I want to hang around with the rich kids”.)
$5,000 for a circle? For that I’d want a full sphere…
I fail to see your point. He’s famous (no one denies that) and he has rich fans, and they’re using that for fundraising purposes. Tickets to charity events also traditionally have ridiculous prices – the price is not supposed to reflect the value of the product you buy.
Hello. Is Dawkings the enemy ? I think he does good job and no harm can be done if he has his own “kickstart”… or is it ? Sorry I dont understand.
=8)-DX @ 27 – well I still do think secular and atheist orgs need to raise money to do things, and that’s fine. I don’t know of any others that attempt to raise money in exactly this way though…by offering as reward proximity to the org’s “personalities” or for more money proximity to one Supreme Star.
Alex @ 29 – see above. Also, fundraising purposes for what? What do they do? Nobody knows.
keisari @ 30 – he does a good job at some things. and not at others. It’s a very long story. Google would probably help you find out more.
Wait, what’s that? Phil Ochs returned from the dead and is giving a concert to one person only for $1000? And he wants me to be that person?
Fuck that shit.
And if that’s how I would respond to Ochs, you can imagine my response to Dawkins.
Right? I mean, what are they thinking? What do they think it looks like, offering the chance to breathe the same air as Dawkins as a reward for a minimum of two thousand five hundred dollars??
Exactly. Whether he/they mean it to or not, it comes off incredibly arrogant and egocentric.
@31: Celebrity event fundraisers aren’t that uncommon. About 20 years ago there was a concert here to celebrate the signing of an anti-landmines treaty, with Jackson Brown, Jann Arden and Bruce Cockburn. For a significant amount extra (but no where near $1000!) you could buy a backstage pass that admitted you to a private reception with the performers afterwards. Since my wife and I were big fans of Cockburn (the other two we don’t much care about) AND we supported the cause, we splurged and went for it. And it *was* nice to chat for a few minutes with someone whose music had meant a great deal to me over the years. So this sort of thing has a legitimate place. Dawkins (although he’s written some wonderful stuff, along with saying some rather stupid things) does not have that kind of influence on me. Now David Hume on the other hand….. ;-).
Thanks Ophelia Benson ill look in more deeply. Just diving in to your site 😉
Ophelia @33:
I have to part company with you here. I don’t see any problem with it. As Eamon Knight says, there are plenty of people who would like to be able to hang out and converse with celebrities — more than he would be able to accommodate at a “reasonable” price. And so he charges a substantial fee, and some money goes from those who are comfortable enough not to miss it to a charity. I don’t think you have to be a die-hard market-worshipping libertarian to see that as a reasonable solution to the problem of “so many Dawkins fans, not enough Dawkins to go around.”
And at least someone like Dawkins is perceived by his fans as being an interesting conversationalist, so it actually makes more “sense” to pay big money to chat with him than someone like a professional athlete or musician. To the extent that it’s even any of my business how other people spend their disposable income.
Of course — to bring this back to where it started — it’s hard to charge people big money for the opportunity to chat with you and still claim that you’ve never pretended to be any kind of leader.
@screechymonkey:
Especially after you’ve set up a (The) Global Secular Thinking Atheist Establishment™ and installed yourself and your bros as its Fellowship Thought-Having Council.
screechymonkey @ 33
What charity? There’s no mention of a charity.
There’s also no mention of conversing. It says “an invitation-only Dawkins Circle event with Richard” – that could mean an event where Richard talks, for instance; it doesn’t say or even imply that it’s a social event.
Also no, sorry, I don’t think it is just natural and understandable to go from “lots of people would like to chat with me” to “I can charge a substantial fee for that.” I think it’s gross and narcissistic to attempt to monetize one’s own awesomeness that way.
Well yes, and I don’t think he should be claiming that. I don’t like self-appointed “leaders.”
The link is to a page on the RDF web site, and the page states “As a Dawkins Circle member you will help strengthen the impact of our work online and in the community. Your investment ensures there is a place where scientific illiteracy and religious fallacies are publicly challenged. ”
I think it’s at least a reasonable inference that the money goes to the RDF. Or are you quibbling over whether it counts as a charity? For U.S. tax purposes at least, it is. Elsewhere on the site, “The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science is exempt from Federal income tax under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. US IRS Tax ID (EIN)#98-0499347”
Do you think it’s better or worse if it’s a social event? Judging from what you say below, I don’t think you care either way.
I find that odd coming from someone who writes for a living. How is it less narcissistic to say “my thoughts are so interesting and profound that people will pay money for them”?
Me neither, but I think at a certain point it becomes perverse to deny that someone like Dawkins is… prominent, influential, pick your word. Not in a you-all-must-follow-me way, but in the sense that many people consider him a spokesperson or leader.
As to the “self-appointed” part — is there another way to do it, practically speaking? Do you count someone like David Silverman as a self-appointed leader? Or is he off the hook because AA’s board (or whoever) appointed him?
This whole essay is just your attempt to vindicate another whole essay taking issue with a single word you found in an essay talking about Dawkins?
Nothing is even in dispute here except the semantics of the word “declare”. If you were sitting in front of Coyne and tried to have this argument he could just say “all I mean by ‘to declare’ is ‘to make an explicit statement'”, and then the discussion is over.
What is even the point of this in your mind? You don’t like Dawkins. No one here likes Dawkins. We get it. Why not just make a post called “Dawkins is a jerk” and be done with it?
What work?
Ophelia @42,
Obviously, the important work of ranking the various kinds of sexual abuse!
Seriously though, I agree that’s a good question. I’ve grown very cynical about charitable organizations over the years, especially ones whose goals are amorphous, difficult-to-measure things like “raising awareness.” I think the JREF has struggled to find a purpose other than being the James Randi fan club.
The Boston Globe had a great expose a year or two ago about how ineffective the charitable organizations of most professional athletes are — many of them are simply ways for the athlete to use tax-free funds to create jobs for friends or relatives, or to throw golf tournaments or other events in exotic/luxury locales for themselves and their friends. Conversely, some of the most generous athletes were the ones who simply wrote checks to existing charities rather than having to have their own Screechy Monkey Foundation or whatever.
Another point @ 40 –
One, I don’t write for a living. I do get paid for some of what I write, but it’s nowhere near a living.
Two…I don’t say that. I’ve never said anything resembling that. I wrote at the original B&W for 9 years for 0 $. People ask me to write things for money occasionally; I never offer. Even the books were other people’s suggestions. I’ve never said “my thoughts are so interesting and profound that people will pay money for them.”
Three, writing is rather different from presence. Writing for a living is different from asking people to pay $5000 to be in one’s presence. I have no quarrel whatsover with the fact that Dawkins is paid to write.
Sorry, I had the impression that you were a full-time writer these days.
And to clarify, I wasn’t suggesting that you literally went around saying “my thoughts are so interesting and profound that people will pay money for them.” I thought it was obvious that I was describing the implicit attitude of anyone who is or aspires to be a professional writer. Something like that is true for most of us, you just need to tweak the language to “my skills at [whatever we do professionally] are sufficiently good and useful that people will pay money for them.” We rarely put it in such stark terms, but that’s the basic thought process, and I don’t see anything narcissistic or wrong about it.
As to the rest of it, I’m still not seeing exactly where you’re coming from or where you’re drawing the line, but I sense I’m exhausting your patience on the subject and will let it drop.
Well I do spend nearly all my time writing these days, but that’s only because I can combine that with a more remunerative job.
For the rest – I don’t know that the attitude is ““my skills are sufficiently good and useful that people will pay money for them.” It might be “I hope my skills are sufficiently good and useful that people will pay money for them.” Or something along that spectrum.
But in any case there is something being offered besides one’s physical presence. Few people think their personal presence is sufficiently good and useful that people will pay money for it. The RDF memberships aren’t offering books by Richard, but just proximity to Richard.
Actually, there used to be even TIGHTER Dawkins Circles before they ran out of room, I guess.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9286682/the-bizarre-and-costly-cult-of-richard-dawkins/
“But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’
The website suggests that donations of up to $500,000 a year will be accepted for the privilege of eating with him once a year: at this level of contribution you become a member of something called ‘The Magic of Reality Circle’. I don’t think any irony is intended.”
Is it pathetic that I wish I had $500 000 a couple of months ago?
Wow.
First of all, $100,000 a year or more!!!!!!!!!!!
Second of all, I missed this last August.
Third, I kind of hate agreeing with Andrew Brown, but oh well.
One.hundred.thousand,dollars a year.
Lordy lordy lordy.
https://richarddawkins.net/junetour2015/
$250 to attend the “VIP reception” with RD and either Peter Boghossian (Portland), Julia Sweeney (Rochester, Minnesota), or Dan Dennett (Boston).
I remember the days when you could be in the Divine Presence for free – that’s right, girls and boys, for zero dollars and zero cents. I exchanged a few words with him, I got a book signed, and I paid not a thin dime for the privilege.
Have I got a bargoooon for you people: for the price of a couple of pints* I will personally bore you to death talking about my cats, my hobbies, my last vacation or two, and whatever philosophical whimsies I’ve been having lately. Sign up now, while there’s still space on my calendar!
*That’s about how much it takes to get me babbling. But it has to be *good* beer.