He's an acclaimed neuroscientist/philosopher/atheist who is anything but a fan of Trump. I think he called him something like 'the world's most dangerous clown' in the days following the election. So obviously not a Trump supporter by any stretch.
But Harris, for a few years now, has been banging the drum about the 'Defense of Civilization' as something that nearly zero Leftists recognize as important, and which only fractionally more Righties understand well enough to comment on it. But Harris had a brilliant line a year or so ago in one of his podcasts, talking about Ben Carson (who, it should be said, Harris has little more than contempt for) and saying (paraphrased), "Even a religiously deluded buffoon like Ben Carson better understands the nature of the religious clash between the West and Islam than Noam Chomsky does--and this is a HUGE problem for the Left--because more and more NOBODY on the Left seems to acknowledge this issue as important." He's also spoken at some length with others--some leftists, some righties--about the subject of preserving Western Civilization in the face of the many enemies which surround it.
Harris is Jewish (though obviously, being an atheist, not a practicing or believing one) and he is an incredibly potent voice for liberalism. He is not a 'white nationalist' and, while he doesn't like much--if anything--that Trump has done, he does recognize that one needn't be a bigot or xenophobe to stand opposed to policies which would erode Western Civilization's strength and position in the world. Certainly all xenophobic Westerners would be interested in isolationist policies; but of equal certainty is that not all those in favor of isolationist parties are xenophobic.
The West gave the world most of the things within arm's reach of where you're sitting--and it did so in the last hundred and fifty years. It's worth protecting REGARDLESS of one's skin color, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender, or political affiliation.
I submit, for your consideration, the possibility that Steve Bannon *isn't* simply a Nazi-of-a-different-color and that the people who read Breitbart *aren't* predominantly xenophobic hatemongers who yearn to goose-step down Pennsylvania Ave. If Bannon *isn't* the Second Coming of Herman Goering, and his readers *aren't* Nazis-in-hiding, how would we know it? (to borrow-and-repurpose that A-bomb of a line dropped by Doc, courtesy of Thomas Sowell).
I'm interested to hear your reply :-) SSI is at its best when cool heads engage in thoughtful debate here in the Korner.