Tuesday, 11 February 2014
The No Debate Policy of Facebook Leftists
“You will find that most serious non-Muslim critics know more about Islam that its non- Muslim [mainly Leftist] defenders.”
- - Gert Wilders
“[The Left is] obliged to stand behind… facts that are totally beyond credibility.”
- - Michele Foucault
“[Leftists] learned how to toe the party’s line on everything from international affairs to reflex psychology.”
- James Miller
On Facebook and the Internet generally the level of debate is often very low. (Although it's easy to sink low too if the person you are conversing with has done so from the very beginning.) This is less the case in the public arena, such as (live) on TV, on the radio, in a public forum, etc. The reason is that there is less embarrassment about using personal insults and ad hominems on the Internet because it is so faceless and you don’t really need to defend yourself. You can also stand behind positions that completely – and obviously! - lack any truth at all because, again, you don’t need to defend yourself publicly. In the public sphere, on the other hand, you do need to appear at least marginally credible. Hence you will hear or see Leftists defending:
acid-attacks, honour-killings, Turkish Muslims taking over entire districts of Germany (as well as flying the Turkish flag out of their windows), Shia blood rituals, Muslim grooming, Islamic terrorism, Islamic misogyny, Muslim racism, the burka/hijab, Muslim ghettos, “communalist” politics (in the UK), the building of more mosques, Muslim criminals, Iran, Egypt … anything and everything.
The bottom line is that when Leftists politically disagree with you, they will sometimes - or often - say that they are against you for reasons which as not strictly speaking political. If your argument or post/comment is well-reasoned they may say that “has no structure”, etc. If it’s not well-argued and contains bad spellings, etc., they will call you a “knuckle-dragger” or “uneducated”.
Often this is simply their way of saying: I disagree with your politics. However, they often don’t comment on the political content of posts/comments. So if it were all about politics, then why don't they talk about politics instead of on the comment’s/post’s “structure” or its bad spelling?
Of the hundreds of comments I’ve seen, virtually none has been on what the poster or commentator actually said. Thus there are countless ad homimens, endless student sarcasms, talk about things being “badly written”, etc; but hardly anything about politics and what the poster actually argued or said. Often literally nothing.
This should be no surprise. People are emotional beings. And when politics is involved, this is even more the case. If you utterly reject and contradict someone’s political beliefs, which they hold deeply, and that person can’t argue or debate his case (which is often the case with student Leftists and older ones too), then of course he’ll be sarcastic, talk about “poor structure” or class you as a “racist”. Nonetheless, at the heart of all this bullshit, and all this dressing up of basic political differences, is the fact that you’ve spoken against the things they cherish, politically speaking. That alone will mean that they will do anything to destroy you and what you’ve said. On the streets it’s Leftist violence. On the Internet its endless six-form sarcasm, middle-class snobbery and talk about “bad structure”. But at the heart of all this bullshit is the hurt emotions and political anger of the Leftist – all dressed up in all sorts of contrived ways.
So Internet/Facebook users should get used to the fact that if people politically disagree with you, they will say anything in order to rationalise those basic and simple political differences and defend their own position. This is even more the case if the Leftist can’t debate or is politically dumb (which they often are). And because ego and emotions are strongly involved – literally anything will be said to destroy you and what it is you’ve posted…. anything, it seems, other than actual debate!
People are emotional beings; as well as political beings. And when emotions and politics come together, this is the sort of thing that happens.
What do people expect to happen? Your opponent won’t say:
Yes, you’re right. Everything I’ve strongly believed for years is wrong and you’re right.
That won’t happen. Not a chance. No one ever says that. Maybe they never think it either. People do change politically, sure, but not just like that: live and on air, as it were. And because ego and emotions are involved, they won’t show any change either – even if it did occur to them there and then. Don’t expect miracles; least of all from theory-intoxicated and ideologically fanatical and pure Leftists.