AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Liberas rhetoric1/6/2024 ![]() Who knew?Ĭountermeasures: Watch for unstated assumptions. Gay marriage is hidden somewhere in the 14th Amendment, but legal scholars somehow missed that part for over a century. Ultimately, it was settled by the Supreme Court, once again legislating from the bench. However, they’ll fudge on this principle when it suits their purpose. Interestingly, liberalism denies the existence of natural rights. Lazy debaters claimed that Adam and Steve already had this right, and its infringement is the worst atrocity since Tamerlane massacred Central Asia. Honest proponents argued that Adam and Steve should be granted the right to get married. Many examples could be cited, but the gay marriage debate became the noisiest one in decades. Holy Pennsylvania Avenue, Batman! It’s the Virtue Signal!Īsserting that something is a right, even when it’s not recognized by law or even tradition, is a common tactic. Otherwise it’s a sermon, not a discussion. In a formal debate, both parties must agree on basic premises. Other unstated assumptions are preposterous, like “ The Patriarchy“. Presuppositions like “Where are we going out to supper?” are fairly innocent. Basically it involves treating the matter of debate as a settled fact, rather than arguing why it’s true. This means beginning an argument with the conclusion as a premise. If someone resorts to name-calling, or comparing you to a meanie from history, that’s evidence your opponent can’t argue against your ideas on their merits. (Leftists have plenty of dirty laundry themselves.) However, it’s better to be on guard for this tactic and call out anyone for overstating your position. Even if they only espoused peaceful change, they all got tarred by the same brush.Ĭountermeasures: It’s tempting to react in kind. Those concerned about government overreach became objects of suspicion. Bill Clinton blamed talk radio rhetoric, although Rush Limbaugh never told anyone to blow up buildings. This was used to discredit the militia movement, even though McVeigh was never part of it. Quite cynically, the media spun his gruesome retaliation into a propaganda victory. Timothy McVeigh lashed out savagely following the Branch Davidian bungle. If you argue against multiculturalism, you might get compared to a former German chancellor with bad press. For example, concern about Communist subversion is “ McCarthyism“. So is the tactic of associating anything they don’t like with some figure they’ve put much effort into discrediting. Archie Bunker is a prime example, though there are much earlier ones. Ridiculing and stereotyping illiberal viewpoints goes far back. By overstating an opponent’s position-putting words into someone’s mouth-they “win” the debate.Įxample: The “right-wing extremism” narrative Disgusted, you unsubscribe they can have their damn echo chamber to themselves. You never actually argued against immorality merely for keeping private things private. Those two post a nauseating duet about “tolerance”. Some stranger emails you, diagnosing you as feeling guilty about sex. You argue your point, but the dogpiling worsens. Some SJW accuses you of being a prude who only approves of the missionary position. Suppose you’re in a forum and dare question the wisdom of shouting from the rooftops about “anything goes” bedroom arrangements. With practice, you’ll notice their word games repeated like guitar riffs. These are easily absorbed by their fuzzy heads, lacking proper Red Pilled bullshit detectors. Still, leftists must use it quite frequently, since they’ve had hardly any good ideas in decades. Bad reasoning isn’t specific to any one ideology. Logical fallacies have been documented since the Greeks and the Romans studied rhetoric.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |