Is he going to persuade someone who does not have TDS to get it? No way. He's way too over the top for that.
But may he persuade some other people with TDS to oppose wokery? And does the fact that he has severe TDS give him more credibility to do that? Yes.
So on net balance, he's a force for the good.
In The Moral Landscape he literally advocates for pumping people's brains full of "pleasurable endorphins" associated with altruism, if such a thing were possible.
He also repeatedly says that society should be governed by "moral experts" who decide what is best for the collective good, then make and enforce laws accordingly. That goes well beyond even WEF-style technocracy.
One of the only things I've ever read by Noam Chomsky that I actually found agreeable was his part in an e-mail exchange between himself and Harris, where Harris defends Bill Clinton's bombing of a Sudanese hospital with civilians still inside of it, based on faulty intelligence that it was being used to make bio-weapons. As soon as Chomsky published that exchange, Harris threw a tantrum and started whining that it was private correspondence and he never agreed to make it public, even though in the e-mail exchange, he agreed to Chomsky's stated intention to publish it. He was just butthurt because he got destroyed in the debate and it made him look bad.
The man is an outright totalitarian, and always has been. The kind of totalitarian that only someone who never emotionally matured past their adolescence can be. He thinks he has all then answers and he genuinely believes he knows better how to manage the lives of billions of people if we would just let him make all of our decisions for us. The fact that he's too stupid to realize how insane that is only further undermines whatever good he might do. He's a mental pygmy who makes his living by sounding smarter than he is.
Sam Harris is the definition of a very dangerous midwit.
He truly believes globalist technocracy will usher in an utopian age for humanity.
The worst atrocities in history stem from men who became complete monsters in their relentless pursuit of an utopia.
Nothing will help an average man more than learning that all decisions in life involve trade-offs. Sam Harris is incapable of acknowledging such a simple fact of life.
Sam Harris pushes the message that trusting technocrats is the only "intelligent" path forward.
This is what makes him truly one of the most dangerous voices with a platform.
Some of his views are sociopathic.
But I'm not talking about the desirability of his views.
That is the impression I got from his recent Trump outburst. He'll decide who is 'bad' and should therefore be screwed over by powerful institutions. The hypocrisy is just off the charts.
Even with all this in mind, my logic still applies.
Maybe it's just the petty, adolescent part of my own personality, which might make me a bit of a hypocrite, but I get a visceral, cathartic pleasure from seeing people like Harris publicly humiliated. I don't want to keep him around to use as a recruiting tool. Frankly, even the rational side of me thinks he'd be more effective at that when he's reduced to a sputtering, stuttering, incoherent shambles, clinging desperately to his hagiographic self-image even as he's forced to acknowledge how wrong and stupid he is.
Eh, you assume that it will end his career. It won't. So it's basically a win-win. He showed the id of the ruling class, while also gaining credibility with the ultra-left crazies, which he could leverage to persuade them of something actually good.