| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
BACKGROUND
Most conservatives have noticed with confounded puzzlement that the majority of the arguments of the left are wildly in contradiction to logic.
We have all bashed our heads against the wall, as it were, trying to explain it. We have plumbed the depths of the thinking of the left, only to find that beneath the surface illogic, is only more profound illogic. (See especially Evan Sayet and Victor Davis Hanson).
But the leaders of the left aren't dumb. They surely know that their arguments are illogical and not based on the facts. This has only puzzled us more. What is the explanation?
A NEW WAY OF LOOKING AT IT
I suggest that the apparent illogic of the left is not based on a differing worldview with its own rules and rationalities - but is in fact an intentional use of illogic as a weapon. By intentionally using illogic in debate with the opposing side, meaningful debate is destroyed. The public, unable to tell who's winning the argument, is puzzled. The benefit to the left is that they are saying to all, "Join us and win power and money. Nothing else is relevant."
Yes, there are those who are fooled by the illogic of the arguments - e.g. many high schoolers and college students to whom these arguments have been preached by liberal teachers - and who fall for it. But that's not the case with the intellectual leadership of the left, many of whom are too smart to be fooled. The more profound thinkers on the left understand that the illogic is being used intentionally, to achieve a given goal, namely to confound all logical debate, and issue a siren call saying, "join us, and we will help you, and nothing else matters."
HOW TO FIGHT BACK
The counter strategy may be to reach out to Republicans and Democrats who are less active in the party. On a grass roots level, Americans are approachable and interested in separating sense from nonsense. We have to cut into the communication channels between the liberal leadership and the American people - providing the people with all the good info and documentation that the conservative blogosphere produces; revealing to them what is being hidden from them by the MSM; and offering them a choice between logic and illogic, between fact and fiction, between what strengthens the economy and what weakens it, between what keeps America safe and strong and what endangers it.
This can be a grass roots action, conducted in every city.
I propose that the winning approach is to organize cross-party events focused on key issues like the economy, big government, national security, health care - events that welcome people regardless of party affiliation, and just seek to examine the facts. Small rooms in houses and restaurants can be used to bring in guest speakers. Larger political issues should not be discussed - only the facts of the issues at hand - with the goal of making Americans safer, stronger, healthier, and more prosperous. Like Obama or dislike him? Leave that at the door. These days Republican leadership is also not acceptable on many of these issues. E Pluribus Unum should be the motto - out of many, one. It can all be hooked up with, and perhaps even organized by, the burgeoning Tea Party movement, which also rejects current Republican leaders in many instances.
This strategy can separate the illogic of liberal leaders, from the support of the people.
#1
#2
#3Jillosophy,
I was referring more to the group think aspect of modern liberalism, not the individual level. Yes, your procedure works wonderful in a one-on-one debate, I use the same method, coupled with a refusal to let the modern liberal frame the premise of the debate. "Have you stopped hitting your wife yet?" is not a valid argument and I will not accept it as one. Now that really tee's them off.
And while that works well on individuals and small groups, its pointless when encountering larger numbers, because they just all agree they are all cool, and so they win, yeah for them.
In order to take them on, on a larger scale, will require more than just logical thinking and debating. It's going to take a hole new game plan. My initial feeling is to begin by taking back the language from them. They've completely dominated the english language, chaging definitions on a whim.
For example, the modern liberal definition of a racist is who ever disagrees with them. If they approve of an issue, then supporters are grass roots movements, if they don't, they are evil corp. lobbyists and "special interests."
You want to have fun with a liberal, refuse to accept their modified definitions of the language. Drives them nuts because they don't have any other ideas.
#4I like to keep it simple and traditional with language. For instance, if RACE is the bottom line you are a racist and ascribe to racism. Period. Same with sexism and every other "ism" I would venture.
If, on the other hand, race is not the bottom line in your decision making process, you are a rational thinker.
The reason logic reason and facts don't work on modern liberals is because they are mental tools used by mature, science based, rational adults. The modern left is not mature adults. They're still playing the same games we all played in any average, American middle school.
Remember back to those gloroius days of yesteryear. No matter how many various cliques there were, it generally boiled down to two, those kids who were popular, and those kids who weren't. The popular kids got to decidce who was popular, there by also designating those who weren't.
Now, every one wanted to be one of the popular kids, because they were cool, and every one liked them, and no one made fun of them, but they got to make fun of all the unpopular kids. No one made fun of the popular kids.
No matter what the popular kids said as jokes or insults, no matter how stupid it was, all the cool kids laughed. And no matter what the unpopular kids said, it was stupid, and at the very least deserved the threat of a beating.
And that's exactly the arrested mental state of modern liberals today. They consider themselves the "cool kids" and if you don't agree with them that they are cool, then you are, by definition, not cool, and there fore in season.
Why don't modern liberals care when Obama lies through his teeth to them? Because he's cool. And the MSM thinks they're cool, and they get to decide who's cool and who's not.
There fore, the reason modern liberals can not be reasoned with is because they're stuck in early puberity. They've never gotten over the cruel mental games they played deciding who could sit at the cool lunch table.
Have you ever tried to have a logical, reasonable, rational debate with a 13 year old? One on one it can be done. Pop them into their element, and they immediatly revert to middle school cliques.