Monster Hunter Nation

The Internet Arguing Checklist

Do you ever find yourself arguing with liberals on the internet? Are you tired of people telling you about how awesome free healthcare is for the economy? Or how you should just shut up and pay your fair share because crack whores need iPhones too? Or how we should ban the super ultra-deadly assault rifle AR-15 shotgun Glock? Or been asked why do you hate old people, you cismale gendernormative fascist, hatey-McHaterton-hatey-hate-hatemongering racist?

Have you grown frustrated because arguing with the willfully ignorant is like repeatedly punching a really dumb cactus?

Well, I’ve prepared a handy checklist so you can accurately predict what your willfully ignorant statist will spout next! Have fun with this, as you can follow your friends arguments and play bingo with these. If you are new to internet debate, just find any kerfuffle on Facebook and see how long it takes for you to check most of these off. It is fun for the whole family!

This may come as a shock to some of you gentle readers, but I am politically opinionated.

Okay, never mind, but as one of the handful of politically outspoken conservatives or libertarians working in an entertainment industry that is overwhelmingly left leaning, at some point I became the voice of an angry generation. (in reality authors are about as evenly divided as the rest of America, but most of the ones on my side keep their mouths shut, but we’ll get to that when we detail Concern Troll Threats)

WARNING!

Left wingers who can actually produce a solid argument are to be treasured and debated fully (that’s sort of the point of debate). Unlike many of my liberal contemporaries, I don’t “manage” my blog comments until I have an echo chamber and my self-esteem isn’t predicated on how many sycophants pat my tender head while telling me how brilliant I am for standing up for some straw man cause de jour. I’ve got a bunch of regular left wing readers who can bring their A Game. I love them. Arguing with them, and honing my points against them makes my arguments stronger for the future.

Sadly, for every intelligent, articulate Eric Flint out there, most arguments against liberal group think results in a legion of poo flinging monkeys showing up.

This checklist is intended only for the willfully ignorant, banally stupid, sound byte spewers incapable of thinking through anything more complicated than a Facebook meme. The lowest form of debater is the pathetic crap sacks that can only follow this checklist.

WARNING 2!

If you are on my side, but this is how you debate, shut up. You’re making us look bad. Good arguing should consist of compelling rhetoric which is backed up with facts and logic. If your tactics are to shut down debate, you are an idiot. It should never be to shut down or scare off, but to WIN.

THE LEFT WING INTERNET ARGUING CHECKLIST

  1. Skim until Offended
  2. Disqualify that Opinion
  3. Attack, Attack, Attack
  4. Disregard Inconvenient facts
  5. Make Shit Up
  6. Resort to Moral Equivalency
  7. Concern Trolling
  8. When all else fails, Racism!

So let’s break this down so you know what to look for, and you can have a good laugh as people who have zero substance, critical thinking skills, or facts make fools of themselves!

SKIM UNTIL OFFENDED:

A poo flinging monkey never actually reads their opponent’s article (That could introduce them to dangerous badthink!). Instead they simply skim down the page until finding something that they can loudly proclaim you were offended by. Remember, being offended grants liberals super powers!

True Example: I would go through this big gun control essay, but the author said that he made a state legislator cry. What a terrible person!

Fascinating, since in that particular case it was because I was testifying about mass shootings the day after a mass shooting, and as I described how disarmed and helpless people had no choice but to hide and pray, she became very emotional… But hey, #1 is satisfied! No danger of badthink here!

This one is hilarious. For example, if you are responding to something from somebody who self-identifies as a democrat or liberal and you use the term, democrat or liberal, they’ll be offended that you are “using labels”. (note, you never see conservatives or libertarians who mind being labeled as such. Go figure).

Today I was arguing gun control, and I put a link to my exhaustive essay on the topic. One poo flinger was a champion of skimming, clicked the link, only saw the covers of my novels, and didn’t like that they were “men with guns and big breasted females” and that was enough to disqualify my years of experience on the topic. I think that might be a new record. Interestingly enough, authors don’t even get much input on covers, as that is up to the marketing people at our publishing house, but whatever, I’ve sold a friggin’ ton of books with those covers.

The thing to get offended by doesn’t actually matter. Remember, liberals are all about claiming victimhood, so anything that allows them to claim that sainted status equals victory.

DISQUALIFY THAT OPINION

This one is lots of fun. Liberals never want to argue ABOUT a topic. They want to argue about why your opinion on that topic doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter who or what you are, there is some reason that your opinion doesn’t count, and it doesn’t have to make sense.

Say that you are a man who thinks abortion is murder, well your opinion obviously doesn’t count because you’re a man! What if my wife said that? Well, her opinion doesn’t count because she’s biased because she has children. What if a childless woman said that? Well, her opinion doesn’t count because she’s probably religious. What if she’s an atheist libertarian who happens to believe that a fetus should be considered a human being and thus receive the same rights and legal protections as any other human being? Hurr… Derp… Don’t legislate my vagina! War on women! Quick, switch to another item on the checklist!

There are several subcategories to this one, as it is the most common tactic on the checklist.

Race, sex, culture, economic status. Say you want to comment on any social issue. Well your opinion doesn’t count because you’re not part of that race or culture or economic group. Usually the liberal you are arguing with isn’t part of that group either, but it doesn’t matter, because white guilt liberals are automatically exempt, and their soft racism allows them to feel good about themselves as they declare that other groups are too stupid to survive without their benevolent guidance.

How dare you say that gangster rap thug culture of single mothers on welfare isn’t the way to go! Your opinion doesn’t count because you didn’t grow up there. And if you did grow up there, well you’re not “authentic” or one of my personal favorites I’ve seen thrown around Twitter against black conservatives “house negro” which totally isn’t racist if it is said by a smug liberal.

The problem with that is that most poo flinging monkeys are white suburbanites, and when they try to disqualify you, and you stop them and say “but I’m not white” which is a problem for them. Obviously this is going to happen more and more as race is an artificial construct that really only matters so liberals can make you check a box on an EEOC form so they can continue to foist social programs on us. Since the poo flingers freak out when their opponent isn’t white, liberals invented the ultimate disqualifier of “privilege”.

Privilege is amazing. It is the new race card, because pick any topic and regardless of what it is or who you are, a liberal can say your opinion doesn’t’ count because you have privilege. What does that actually mean? Hell if I know. It is such a nebulous term that surely everybody has some form. It means whatever the liberal wants it to mean. It is the new Neo-Con.

So you are against some dipshit welfare program because you’ve seen first-hand how that culture of government dependence destroys the human spirit, well obviously you are privileged so your opinion doesn’t count. So wait, even if I was born into a family with dark skin and super crazy poor, and worked my way out of it rather than becoming a crack whore, I’m now too privileged to have an opinion? YES.  It doesn’t matter if you were born in a 3rd world hell hole and were a boat person refugee, if you disagree with liberal group think it can only be because you have privilege.

YOU SOUND ANGRY: This is one of my favorite disqualifiers. Type up a 10,000 word essay going into a great deal of detail, with cites, and graphs, and research, and you could have done it completely dispassionately and some liberal is going to say “wow, you sure sound angry!” Boom. You’ve been safely disqualified. In reality, considering the shit we have to put up with, yes, I’m extremely angry, but I’m still right. What’s your point?

YOU KNOW TOO MUCH/TOO LITTLE: I love this one. My big gun control article was dismissed by many because I am an expert on the subject and was thus “biased”. I’ve seen doctor’s opinions dismissed on health care reform because they were “biased”. Gee whiz, wouldn’t you think that somebody who invested their life into a topic would have a strong opinion on it?

But this also goes the other way. Say you own a small business and think your taxes are too high? Well, you’re not a PhD in Economics from Yale turned democrat appointed Treasury Secretary, so obviously your opinion doesn’t count… So you can be disqualified for knowing too much or for knowing too little.

So how much do you need to know for your opinion to be accepted by a poo flinger? If you are conservative? The answer will either be too hot or too cold. If you are liberal? Well, then whatever you know is just right.

EDIT: It was just pointed out to me that I forgot one. The YOU SURE DID WRITE A LOT. Yes, because if you care enough to write something that covers all the pertinent information, that somehow proves that you care too hard, and thus your opinion should be dismissed.

ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK

The dumbest of poo flingers must find something, anything about their opponent and attack it rather than the actual topic or salient points. Too tall, too short, too fat, too thin, nothing is off the table. I watched one on Facebook where one of my fans disagreed with a lib about Obamacare, and was attacked because of their profile picture “your kid looks retarded.” And yes, their kid was handicapped, but that’s what you get with caring liberals.

When you argue with a liberal online, no matter what you do, you’re doing it wrong. This is a personal pet peeve of mine. I make my living as a novelist. I get paid large sums of money to write books. I’m rather successful. But whenever I argue with a liberal on Twitter I’m not a “real” novelist. And because I write sci-fi/fantasy, I’m no longer allowed to have an opinion regardless of the long and varied career I had before that, which takes us right back to #2. I have witnessed this with many conservative or libertarian authors.

You’ll note that once any of my political posts go viral and it hits the lib blogs, there will be a deluge of posters all feeling the need to point out what a shitty writer I am (which is really funny since they’ve probably never read any of my books, but obviously, a conservative is going to write bad novels!)

And it isn’t limited to my field. I’m friends with some well-known actors. Same thing. Follow Nick Searcy or Adam Baldwin on Twitter for a few days. You’ll see. Doesn’t matter if you’re second billed on one of the top shows on cable, you’re a conservative, so you’re not a “real” actor. Doesn’t matter if you go to DragonCon and there is a line a thousand people long wearing Jayne hats wanting your autograph, you’re a conservative, so you’re not a “real” actor.

You’ll note that I just fisked a cartoonist. Note. I made fun of his ideas, his misconceptions, and his general idiocy, but I never made fun of his art, because the quality of his artwork is totally irrelevant to the worth of the ideas.

Another fun part of this one is the following scenario:

Liberal 1: Attack, attack. ATTACK!

Liberal 2: Attack attack, attack attack!

Conservative: Defend.

Liberal 1: How rude.

Liberal 2: Indeed, how rude.

Liberal 1: You Sound Angry.

DISREGARD INCONVENIENT FACTS

This one is really self-explanatory. It goes hand in hand with our next item on the checklist of Make Shit Up. So you see a liberal post something false. You post the truth. They ignore it. Say that you post a link to an article. They will find a reason to dismiss it. “The Drudge Report? That’s not a *real* newspaper!” So you post the same story from when the WaPo got around to finally copying Drudge a month later. They ignore it.

A subnote on disregarding inconvenient facts. You can be the leading expert in the world on some topic, but if you are arguing with a liberal then you will get “That’s anecdote, not evidence!” or “Link or it didn’t happen!” But the minute that you are quoted in Salon or Mother Jones, it magically turns into evidence. Crazy how that works. While arguing about Obamacare I could truthfully cite the regulations and hoop jumping I had to do for my company of 200 people, and how my equivalent at the company across the street was cutting all their 500 employees back to 28 hours a week because of Obamacare. That’s anecdote. A liberal comedian makes a video about how awesome Obamacare is with emotional music, totally evidence.

So let’s say there’s a new study showing that Japan has fewer violent crimes and fewer guns than America, so the liberals cite that these apples and oranges prove gun ownership equals more crime… They disregard the fact that we’re so socially different that you could flood Japan with AK-47s and their crime rate probably wouldn’t change, and then they’ll disregard any apple to apple comparison like El Paso’s crime versus Detroit’s’. Large cities, similar in population, both ethnically, economically, and socially diverse, only El Paso (right across the border from one of the deadliest crime cities on Earth) has lower crime, but more gun ownership than Detroit (right across the border from big peaceful Canada) with its draconian gun laws… Ignore. Or do Houston versus Chicago. What? I couldn’t hear you. Jamie Foxx was talking about his expertise in use of force laws.

MAKE SHIT UP

This one can get pretty crazy , but if they’ve made it this far down the checklist things are getting desperate, might as well go for the gold.

There are a few levels of this. The easiest one is taking the most absurd batshit insane person they can on the right and putting them as our poster child “Republicans don’t believe in dinosaurs and think the earth is flat and religious people hate science and homeschooling will make children into racist bigots who wage a war on women stay out of my vagina!” This is your usual straw man stuff. Fairly typical.

Then you’ve got the propaganda accepted as fact. Here we are years later, the ACA is going into effect, and millions of us have already had to deal with it, we’ve seen costs skyrocket for three years in a row, we’ve seen the doom and gloom come to pass, we’ve seen the jobs switching to 30 hour work weeks, yet still, STILL you run into people on Facebook ignoring reality and telling you about awesome stuff the ACA is going to do, even though they are talking about hype from when it was getting passed, which never made it into the actual bill.

Then you get into things which are simply flat out lies. As a gun guy, pick any argument involving the technical and legal aspects of building, buying, or using firearms, as reimagined by somebody huffing paint.  But if you’re a liberal, and you just believe hard enough, then reality doesn’t matter, just how hard you feel about something.  I saw where one recently where a particularly dumbass sci-fi author actually told an audience in Australia that Stand Your Ground laws were to make it legal for white people to just shoot blacks whenever they felt like it…

Wow.

RESORT TO MORAL EQUIVALENCY

Find something, anything bad as done by a liberal? “Well, republicans did it too!” Did the president do something stupid? “It is Bush’s fault.” So? Was it okay then? No. Then it shouldn’t be okay now, hypocrite. And of everything on the checklist, this is the one that I’ve seen people on the right be guilty of the most often. Do republicans suck too? Hell yes. They’re pathetic (most often when they’re trying to be democrat lite, oh, freaking retire already, John McCain). So sometimes this is totally true.

But the interesting thing is that this goes hand in hand with Make Shit Up, in that oftentimes it isn’t even true, and they’re not the same on that issue, but it is parroted so often that it has become an accepted truth. Even well-meaning people fall for this trap. Though it can be fun when they automatically regurgitate “well, both sides are the same.” And you come back with “Okay, name one time the republicans have done that.” And they sit there and go “Uh…. Hmm…. Uh… Oh, look Jim Carrey made another gun control video!”

So it now looks like Treasury Secretary Geitner was briefed on the IRS specifically targeting opposition conservative groups prior to the election, so this scandal goes straight to the top. “Bush did it too!” they bleat.  No… No, actually he didn’t. And if he had, the stupid press would have done their stupid job and actually exposed it, rather than just being a propaganda mouthpiece for the administration, you dipshit. To ether party, you can’t whine about statist 1984 nonsense when the other guys do it, and then do the same thing bigger when you end up in charge.

But that check isn’t as big a deal, because elected democrats mostly suck, and elected republicans only half suck, so half the time it’s true.

CONCERN TROLLING

A personal favorite. There are two types. The classic Concern Troll and the Boycotter.

Concern Trolling is a tool to enforce the illusion of monolithic group think where the liberal responds like they care. They care so hard about you, poor misguided right winger, and they care that you are saying these horrible, nasty, awful, racist, mean, things. What will everyone think of you?  What would your friends think if they knew that you don’t like giving a third of your income to support crack whores? Why, they’d think you were a horrible person.

One of my favorites is “I read your article, and it like totally would have swayed me to your side, BUT the way you called liberal ideas liberal and talked about people who are liberals by using the word liberal just ruined the whole thing. You’d be more effective if you used no labels.” Or substitute whatever bullshit there you want, but the important thing is that this combines dismissal and offense, all wrapped up in the fact that they’re not a mindless poo flinger at all, but are rather motivated by how much they care about you.

Horse shit.

These drip with self-righteousness. But it is rather effective, especially on people new to the whole debating thing, or who are easily frightened and don’t want to rock the boat. You see this when you happen to be a relative or coworker of the poo flinger, and they try to scare you on Facebook. Because of course, nobody is a better arbiter of what is correct and good than people who subscribe to the same political philosophy which eventually spawns gulags, purges, and concentration camps.

The Boycotter is rather specialized Concern Troll that usually only gets used on those of us who have some sort of public persona, like entertainers or business people. Because the left absolutely hates dissent, they will try to squish anyone who gets out of line.

“I came to your blog/facebook/twitter because I’m SOOOO very interested in your book/movie/product, but then I found out what a horrible, awful person you are, so now I’m never going to buy any of your stuff ever again. You should totally never share your badthink again because it will totally scare away the legions of people like me and you’ll starve in a ditch.”

Uh huh… How about I just keep on producing the best quality work I can and keep on sleeping on a giant pile of money? The thing is this type is super effective. I’ve been shocked how many conservative Hollywood people I’ve met who keep a low profile about their beliefs out of fear of getting blackballed. For every openly conservative writer like me there are probably half a dozen who share my opinion who won’t talk.

That’s what the poo flingers want. Screw them.

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, RACISM!

The most obvious one of them all, because if you are going to argue with liberals you WILL be called racist. It is inevitable. However that is good, because it means you just won. It is the final line on our checklist for a reason.  Just keep in mind that you’re in good company. Charlton Heston marched across the Selma Bridge with Martin Luther King, and he was smeared as racist for believing that the 2nd Amendment applied to everyone equally.

The topic probably doesn’t even have anything to do with racism. Don’t matter. You disagree with liberals, you’re a racist. The clever poo flingers will snidely insinuate it, while the dumb ones will screech it at the top of their lungs. This one has been epidemic since we elected Barack Obama, and obviously the only reason you could hate a weak foreign policy, stupid gun control proposals, a shitty economy, a ridiculous bloated monster of a healthcare law, and the general corruption of our federal apparatus, is because you don’t like a black president.

You may not have had a racist thought in your life, but it won’t matter. A good author friend of mine was smeared as racist because he was against some stupid liberal nonsense even though he’s been married to a black woman for 20 years and has biracial children, and worked with every ethnicity there is during a career in the military.

I mentioned Nick Searcy above. He fights with liberals on Twitter for fun and has made it into an art form. At least a couple times a day, Nick will be called racist—usually for not being an Obama fan is enough—and he always posts the same thing. “Don’t tell my adopted son that because he’s black and thinks I love him.” Outspoken conservatives get uselessly tarred as racists so damned often that you can have the response ready as a cut and paste. Shit. I used the word tarred. I guarantee some liberal just thought that was racist (probably because they don’t know history).

Back in the olden days calling somebody racist was the liberal nuclear option. It was what they would use to instantly squash dissent, because most people are decent human beings who think actual racism is repulsive, so their opponents would recoil and backtrack, desperately trying to avoid giving perceived offense. The problem was that they overused it. It lost all its meaning. And people like me got sick of their shit and transformed it into a joke.

For years and years they kept calling people racist for things that clearly weren’t racist even if you squinted at them really hard, so now when real racism occurs it is lost amid the noise of poo flingers crying wolf.  The definition of racist turned into anybody who has won an argument with a liberal. They were so used to the word having such power that they pulled it out at every opportunity. 1/8th black Peruvian Obama supporter who’d never done a racist thing in his life shot a young black man in a fairly obvious self-defense shooting? You’d have thought it was the second coming of Robert Byrd (D).

You think every law abiding citizen should have the right to have a gun to defend themselves? RACIST. You think Eric Holder illegally shipping thousands of guns to Mexican drug cartels in an illegal effort to frame gun dealers to promote more gun control is bad? RACIST. Because obviously I only dislike felony gun smuggling when the Attorney General is black?  EXTRA RACIST. But what if those guns were used to murder hundreds of Mexicans, including innocent women and children? RACIST. Because obviously liberals only care about Mexicans when they are an easily exploitable near slave class with no rights brought across the border, and made dependent upon democrat social programs so that they can be used to fraudulently increase democrat voter turnout. HOLY SHIT I CAN’T BELIEVE HOW RACIST THAT IS!

And off topic, but that reminds me that I really need to write a blog post about the most racist term still in use, People of Color. Man, I hate that term so very much. It is just Colored People backwards, but of course, liberals are all about grouping people into easily manageable victim blocks and don’t really give a crap about the content of anyone’s character, so this shouldn’t exactly be a surprise. And they love individuality, as long as you totally agree with them, because otherwise, out comes the Check List!

THE MORAL OF THE CHECKLIST

I often get people who agree with me posting stuff like “well, you wasted your time on that doofus!” Ah, but you miss the point. You don’t defend your beliefs in the hopes of convincing the willfully ignorant. That’s a lost cause. The willfully ignorant aren’t to be convinced, they are to be mocked. Their flaws are to be pointed out until everyone around them realizes how full of crap they are. Remember that argument is theater, and your performance isn’t aimed at your opponent, but rather at the audience. If you choose to follow the Fisker’s Path, your goal is three fold.

Give ammo to the people already on your side.

Convince the undecided .

Allow your opponent’s to display their petty ignorance to the world.

EDIT 2: WARNING! Somebody suggested making this into  drinking game… If you do that, YOU WILL DIE! If you took a shot each time you saw one of these on Facebook you’d be dead in less than twenty minutes.  😀

EDIT 3: Some fun new ones were pointed out on Facebook that I forgot. These all happened in a single thread! They fall under Dismiss. If your profile picture has you holding a gun? Instant Dismiss! A PFM actually looked at my bio and pointed out that I only went to a state college! Dismiss! (by the way, if you are an adult and you are still listing going to college as some sort of achievenment you probably suck at life).

And a particularly vile one, if you are active duty military or your profile pic shows you in uniform, then you probably must have PTSD or a Traumatic Brain Injury, you poor Bush tool victim. Dismiss! That’s really disgusting, but not surprising.

EDIT 4: Read through the comments. Hilarity ensues as a PFM comes in, hits all the points, and then calls me racist. We’ve even got object lessons. 😀

Next Book Bomb, Monday the 23rd, something completely different
Writing updates, scheduling stuff, and book & short story releases

Leave a Reply

237 Comments on "The Internet Arguing Checklist"

Notify of
avatar

Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

I get a lot of funny responses from liberals on my blogs. On my “About” page in the comments section (see http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.com/about/#comment-5912), one liberal accused me of being a fake (i.e., that I made up my credentials and background). It was quite humorous actually. I mean, how do you convince somebody that you really do, in fact, exist?

B
Guest
B
3 years 7 days ago

From my experiences, whenever a liberal accuses someone of something there’s a very real chance they’re already doing it themselves.

If I woke up tomorrow and read that the Left was accusing conservatives of cannibalism, my first thought would be “Oh, my God! The Left is eating people!”

Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Exactly!

Cargosquid
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Rush Limbaugh has been saying that EXACT thing for 20 years. Want to know what the liberals are doing? Pay attention to what they are accusing Republicans of doing.

thewriterinblack
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Projection is their stock in trade.

Now ask me why I was concerned when they started claiming that Bush would orchestrate a crisis and refuse to leave office at the end of his second term. Go ahead. Ask me. 😉

Zaklog the Great
Guest
Zaklog the Great
2 years 11 months ago

Although I first read this last night, for some reason it only struck me as hilarious late this afternoon. I will be reposting it (with link & attribution) on Twitter & Facebook.

Thank you for making me laugh uncontrollably for (from the point of view of my co-workers) no apparent reason.

John
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Oh, a new blog to follow 🙂 Thanks. It is interesting reading the comments from Shannon.

Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Thanks, John. I’m following you now as well.

jonvil
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

cogito ergo sum: “I THINK, therefore I am”

Bruce Taylor
Guest
3 years 5 days ago

That should be, cogito ergo cogito sum: I think therefore I think I am, as I could in fact be delusional

Michael Z. Williamson
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Are you familiar with Kafkatraps?

And yes, I love how Mother Jones trumps my decades of military and civilian experience with firearms. Whose mother is she, exactly?

LittleRed1
Guest
LittleRed1
3 years 7 days ago

As I understand, she was a labor union belle and a real mutha’. But I’m just a historian, so I don’t know anything.

B
Guest
B
3 years 7 days ago

Larry, you just outlined practically every conversation I’ve had with a liberal since 10th grade world history in 1980. So much for “progressive” thinking, ne?

david mills
Guest
david mills
3 years 7 days ago

DAMN……just damn!

Cy
Guest
Cy
3 years 7 days ago

“..sci-fi author actually told an audience in Australia that Stand Your Ground laws were to make it legal for white people to just shoot blacks whenever they felt like it…”

Who was that author? Just out of interest.
I also live in Australia and I’m a gun owner.

Johnathan Knight
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

N.K. Jemisin is who I believe he’s referring to.

Jordan S. Bassior
Guest
3 years 1 day ago

She’s the one who publicly advocated that fantasy suffers from too much consideration of how its magic systems work.

A_Wood91
Guest
A_Wood91
3 years 7 days ago

I believe that it was NK Jemisen

Cy
Guest
Cy
3 years 7 days ago

Thanks

Rob Crawford
Guest
Rob Crawford
3 years 5 days ago

Thanks! On the same list with Scalzi, now.

kylagwolf
Guest
3 years 7 days ago
I get called racist all the time which is so far from the truth it isn’t funny. Anymore I just let them rant and if they take me off their Facebook then they aren’t worthy of my time. I won’t cower from posting how i feel on a subject. I got told I was violating someone else’s first amendment right because I commented on something they posted on my wall. But yet if I post a conservative comment I get told off for being hateful and racist and all sorts of other names. I have now come to the conclusion… Read more »
Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

This is what happens when you accuse liberals of racism:

http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.com/2012/03/04/the-lefts-cognitive-dissonance-on-race/

Their cognitive dissonance is so intense, it’s as if some of their heads were about to explode.

Foolhardy Expendable Minion
Guest
Foolhardy Expendable Minion
3 years 5 days ago

I think you’re hamstringing yourself with “Reverse Discrimination”. How about just calling it ‘discrimination’ or ‘racial discrimination against whites’. Since ‘racism’ is inherently bad, ‘reverse racism’ is probably good, so you start with an uphill battle.

Words matter, and conservatives got shot in the foot by tacking the ‘reverse’ on. I vote to drop it.

Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

Foolhardy Expendable Minion,

That’s a fair point. If there’s one thing that liberals have mastered, it is twisting language to their benefit. Notice how I don’t call liberals “progressives” since the term “progressive” implies that anyone who is against them must be “regressive.” Liberals are not pro-abortion, they are pro-choice. It’s not institutionally-backed racism, it’s “multiculturalism.” If George Orwell were alive today, he would be impressed by how the American left has turned thoughtcrime into an art form.

Sean Patrick Hazlett
Guest
2 years 5 months ago

Ha! Ha!

I just got a:

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, RACISM!

claim in the comment section of my website.

A liberal came to my site and just insinuated I was racist. When I called him/her out on it, he/she said my “ideas” were racist and then broadly called my argument’s “dumb” without providing any evidence to support the claim. And the moral relativism demonstrated in the argument is pretty eye-popping. Apparently, racial discrimination is okay if his/her side is doing it.

Also, some liberals actually believe that if they say something is true, it will make it so.

kywrite
Guest
kywrite
3 years 7 days ago

I got called a racist for defending two conservative black bloggers. It has no meaning at all these days; my teen kids and their friends fling it around as a casual insult.

joecrouse
Guest
joecrouse
3 years 6 days ago

I always like when they bring up racism. The best comeback is which race?

If they say anything other than human (If you hate the human race its not racism its misanthropy)

It leads to the a nice way to turn it around on em and ask who is the racist here ME who doesn’t acknowledge a race other than human OR you who is separating people by roughly 30 percent melanin variance and facial features.

Shibes Meadow
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

When I get called a raciss. I just say “Yeah. So what?”

Leaving my accuser with no weapon and a mouthful of teeth.

passingliaison
Guest
2 years 29 days ago
I had a similar situation on my Facebook page, a former friend of mine was constantly posting pro-abortion memes and when I would correct her errors or point out her flawed logic She would get pissed. So eventually I stopped posting responses. Then after 3 months of silence and ignoring her memes I saw one I just could not ignore and when I did a guy she has a crush on decided to insult me and call me some nasty names. When I responded in kind, and pointed out that doing so served no reasonable purpose after I did it,… Read more »
Keith Glass
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Full of win, for HOW to win. Of course, one MIGHT ask the question, why argue logically with a Liberal: they don’t think, that’s objectifying white penis science or something. (Someone called it that in an argument I was in several years ago.. . . ) Liberals FEEL, and DEEPLY. . . . Ask them, they’ll tell you. . .

Dan Lane
Guest
Dan Lane
3 years 6 days ago

Why argue?

It separates the willfully ignorant from the merely ignorant. The latter is salvageable. The former rarely is, short of the sort of drastic measures I wouldn’t want to see inflicted on another human being, even a liberal.

However, being liberal, they sometimes bring such measures upon themselves, for which I cannot feel any personal remorse…

mea
Guest
mea
2 years 11 months ago

Liberals are human?

Lauren
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

I just shared this on Facebook, but I can almost guarantee it won’t go viral–the lib…Sorry. The people-who-are-always-right-even-when-they’re-wrong don’t want their tricks made public. Can I just say I love your writing?

Joanie Boucher
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

Hi Lauren, I am having the same experience. I’ve got a facebook friends list made up of mostly liberals (being left-leaning myself). Its surprising how much time people want to spend shouting about their views but won’t even acknowledge, let alone engage with a counterpoint to their ranting.

thewriterinblack
Guest
3 years 7 days ago
The dumbest of poo flingers must find something, anything about their opponent and attack it rather than the actual topic or salient points. This. Definitely this. Let’s see, I’ve had arguments where the other person’s “evidence” was my “receding hairline” (actually not, I just wear it pulled back most of the time), the purple streak, and the mustache (“70’s porn-stache”* was the term). But the capper, and the only time I have every reported an individual for harassment against me was “aren’t you bothered by looking like a serial child-molester”*? (Did not receive a response to the report.) The tolerance… Read more »
thewriterinblack
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Sorry about the screwed up tag. In case of any confusion, my text starts with “This. Definitely this.”

Wayne Blackburn
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

Shoulda offered to show him a picture of your panel van (whether you have one or not).

Johnathan Knight
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

So, if boycotters attack conservatives who already have a successful career, do you think there’s a such thing as gatekeepers, folks who block self-admitted conservative writers who haven’t yet established a position in the industry?

Mike_in_Kosovo
Guest
Mike_in_Kosovo
3 years 7 days ago

“men with guns and big breasted females”

Should’ve pointed them to the “Oh John Ringo No” page and watched their head explode…. heheheheheheheheh

stevepoling (@stevepoling)
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

I’m reminded of something Rush Limbaugh said, “You cannot wake up someone who is not asleep.” I suppose the take-away from this post is that when I find someone feigning sleep, I should get out a Sharpie and start drawing on his face. This is an excellent strategy for dealing with the obtuse. Thank you.

votermom
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

That’s also an old Philippine aphorism:
Mahirap gisingin ang gising

Possibly a lesson taught by cats
http://youtu.be/ZyEyXSZdKNQ

RES
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Generally attributed to Jonathan Swift is the advice: It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.

OTOH, you can so embarrass his stupid liberal ass that others refuse to associate with him and realize how effing stupid his position actually is. That is, in fact, what they attempt when they screech racist sexist homophobic hater — except when you employ reason and facts it is easier to leave their arguments bruised and abused, crushed before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

lucienlafayette
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Liberals cannot be embarrassed. Embarrassment requires some sort of moral standard.

Foolhardy Expendable Minion
Guest
Foolhardy Expendable Minion
3 years 5 days ago

They DO have moral standards. Anything advancing liberal utopia=good. ‘Concern’=good.

Figure out what their hypocritical values are, and publicly show the lib to be destroying them, and they will cry.

See: Correia making state legislator cry. “Concern for children” + terrified children praying to non-existent diety + adults foricbly disarmed= tears

Guest
masgramondou
3 years 7 days ago

My answer a “You’re RAAAAAAACCCIST!!!11!1!!!” jab is to say ‘Why thank you, yes I am. My next race is the Long Beach Marathon in 3 weeks” (or whatever the next race happens to be).

That tends to cause confusion in their poor little brains.

I do occasionally make another answer that goes like something like this. “Yep, how astue of you to notice. As Cecil Rhodes said the great thing about being English is that I have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life. I can’t help it. Sorry. Better try being born English in your next life”

lucienlafayette
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

“Discussion” threads on most popular internet threads serve as my evidence for the eminent demise of any remaining vestige of a republican form of government or, alternatively, the validity of the argument for political secession by some portion of the country. Ideally,

Michael Modes
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

If you cite Adam Smith or Hayek they will tell you to stop quoting Fox News Hosts. I find “Fox News” to be the number one tactic. There was no political disagreement until Fox News came along.

Jusuchin (Military Otaku)
Guest
3 years 1 day ago

Fox News is the new Godwin’s law?

James
Guest
James
3 years 7 days ago

“I would go through this big gun control essay, but the author said that he made a state legislator cry. What a terrible person!”

They say that like politicians are people. And here I thought they were the vengeful spirits of failed law students who just hated the rest of the world. My bad.

Scott
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

“They say that like politicians are people. And here I thought they were the vengeful spirits of failed law students who just hated the rest of the world. My bad.”

I’m going to share that with a formerly-politically-active friend of mine. His major in college was polisci/international relations…

LepusKhan
Guest
LepusKhan
3 years 7 days ago

I think the acronym ‘PFM’ should go viral…

Marie
Guest
Marie
3 years 7 days ago

Great stuff here….

Bob
Guest
3 years 7 days ago

Thank you for arranging the fine points of debating liberals in such a cogent manner. Of course, on the other hand, since you can cure ignorance by education, but stupid is terminal, there may be no hope in ever reaching this sort of person anyway!

CMB
Guest
CMB
3 years 7 days ago

Ah, I remember arguing with a Marxist on the internet.

I neatly labelled my information so she could tell what was anecdotal, what I had been told and what I had researched myself.

Her response? To have a go at the “anecdotal” indicator. Not the anecdotes, the text indicating that the paragraph was anecdotal.

I pointed out that she was “picking out” something to argue about while ignoring the rest. Her response? “I’m sorry you’re feeling picked on.”

I started ignoring her at that point.

Jeff Perren
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

I see I’ll have to update my Progressive’s Handbook of Argument:

http://shavingleviathan.blogspot.com/2009/11/progressives-handbook-of-argument.html

Tim Weaver
Guest
Tim Weaver
3 years 6 days ago

I don’t understand why this is considered a liberal check list. It seems very consistent with conservative arguing techniques as well. Perhaps we should just realize that most people arguing on the internet are ideologically motivated idiots.

Stubbs
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

I would actually disagree that they are ideologically motivated. I would argue they are mostly ontologically motivated. Ideology makes for excellent debate. Ontology is what brings out the checklist and makes it impossible to exchange cogent thoughts. I agree that I see both sides using the same unfortunate tactics. I typically read arguments and posts for content, and comments for entertainment (or when my blood pressure feels a little low).

Bryan
Guest
Bryan
3 years 6 days ago

Lefty kkkooks are like terrorists- they only respect strength. In my experience, shortly after “Concern Troll”, there is a moment that they realize that they have hit an immovable brick wall in me and quit trying.

If you extend an olive branch to a kkkook, he/she will happily beat you about the face and ears with it.

Don’t give them ANYTHING.

Foolhardy Expendable Minion
Guest
Foolhardy Expendable Minion
3 years 5 days ago

Actually, they don’t respect strength, they respect violence. There is no organization on earth stronger than the (until lately) despised US military.

The left actively ridiculed them at every opportunity, calling them baby killers and rapists. The left did so knowing full well that the US military wouldn’t punish them for it.

No, they suck up to those willing to terrorize and commit violence upon the weak. Chavez, Che, Castro, Stalin, Obama, Pohl Pot, Idi Amin…

Yes, big O’s only getting started, but he’ll drone you, or supply your local drug gangs with guns, or…

Reziac
Guest
1 year 4 months ago

That’s prey animal behavior. No need to worry about the big bad predator who doesn’t actually eat their kind. Nope, they save the worry and the sucking up for the ones who might eat them for real.

James Moon
Guest
James Moon
3 years 6 days ago
I am so glad I was turned on to your blog. I find it humorous as well as relevant. What is your opinion on attacking the author’s credibility due to a simple grammatical error (grammar Nazi), such as “why should I listen to your perfectly concise and well thought out argument when you can’t even spell the word “of””? The only thing I do not agree with was your comment on adults being proud of a college education. I did not go to college until I was in my forties, and am quite proud of my accomplishment. I am a… Read more »
trackback

[…] is some good stuff. The Internet Arguing Checklist | Monster Hunter Nation Reply With […]

Achillea
Guest
Achillea
3 years 6 days ago

You should number these. It would really save time. Next time some leftista troll starts in, we could just say “bzzzzzzt! #5, #2, #9! You fail. Thanks for playing.”

B
Guest
B
3 years 6 days ago

“We’ll work up a Number 6 on ’em!”

peavybob
Guest
peavybob
3 years 6 days ago

Or keep a count on how often you hear them frieza-style:

Eben
Guest
Eben
3 years 6 days ago

Had someone compare owning a gun to slavery. Trying to decide how to politely respond to that.

Deena
Guest
Deena
3 years 5 days ago

“The slaves would have been delighted own guns. They wouldn’t have been slaves for long. That’s kinda the POINT of owning a gun…”

Rob Crawford
Guest
Rob Crawford
3 years 5 days ago

I’ve figured that what really angers lefties about slavery is that they didn’t get to hold the whip — the idea of forcibly confiscating people’s labor for the benefit of a privileged class certainly doesn’t phase them. They also act like what angers them about the Klan is that they never got invited to the lynchings — because they sure do seem intent on ginning up some of their own.

Since they don’t have a coherent philosophical position against slavery, they make comments like the one you noted.

Foolhardy Expendable Minion
Guest
Foolhardy Expendable Minion
3 years 5 days ago

I’d say:
“Dear PFM.
If you received an invitation to the lynching of Clarence Thomas, your sheets would be off the bed before Weiner could wake up.”

BobtheRegisterredFool
Guest
BobtheRegisterredFool
3 years 5 days ago

That’s only if you buy their claim, the claim of Leftist Democrats, that the Demcratic Party of today is fundamentally different from the Democratic Party of yesterday.

As you point out, there are some reasons to think that the only changes may have been purely cosmetic.

Jordan S. Bassior
Guest
3 years 1 day ago

In a sense, they did get to hold the whip … the Democrats were the pro-slavery party. And they practiced censorship, both violent and administrative, to keep Abolition from being discussed in the Old South.

Jerry
Guest
Jerry
3 years 4 days ago

“Deacons of Justice, Negroes With Guns, Athens, Tennessee revolt. Google them and then we’ll talk.”

That’s how you respond.

Eben
Guest
Eben
3 years 6 days ago
Current gun control argument stats THE LEFT WING INTERNET ARGUING CHECKLIST 1.Skim until Offended Check 2.Disqualify that Opinion Check 3.Attack, Attack, Attack Not yet unless nondirected insults count. Bagger, delusional, etc. 4.Disregard Inconvenient facts Definitely checked. 5.Make Shit Up Yep. 6.Resort to Moral Equivalency Yep. Slavery laws equal gun laws. 7.Concern Trolling Mostly the “I should CARE about the slain” crap. 8.When all else fails, Racism Does the slavery comment count?
Randall Rapp
Guest
Randall Rapp
3 years 6 days ago
Just for everyone’s edification, the definition of Privilege from the Merriam-Webster online dictionary: priv·i·lege noun ˈpriv-lij, ˈpri-və- : a right or benefit that is given to some people and not to others : a special opportunity to do something that makes you proud : the advantage that wealthy and powerful people have over other people in a society Full Definition of PRIVILEGE : a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : prerogative; especially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office Examples of PRIVILEGE Good health care should be… Read more »
passingliaison
Guest
2 years 29 days ago

“a right or benefit that is given to some people and not to others”
Seems to me the left has become the privileged ones by this definition. Because only the left seems to be getting away with using racist and bigoted remarks without being called out on it by anyone but Conservatives.

Randall Rapp
Guest
Randall Rapp
3 years 6 days ago

Another apples and oranges comparison I’m always seeing is comparing firearm fatalities to other types, WITHOUT breaking down firearm deaths into legal, criminal, & accidental. I’m sure the Naval Yard Shooter’s death will go right in there with his victims when their trotting out their death totals. I keep wondering if anybody has the percentages for the above categories, or if they just don’t keep track of the differences.

Connie Howell
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

good one…I find I get into just as many “discussions” with the radical right wingers as I do with the liberals and conservatives….it has gotten to the point where I just don’t bother with them….they are too concerned with being right and me being wrong to even begin to listen to my point….

Keep it up Mr. Correia

Uncle Mike
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

The way I put it on my blog is that calling someone a racist is the modern day equivalent of calling someone a poo-poo head, and usually comes from that level of mentality. Now that picture is stuck in my head and I start to giggle when the race card comes out. When they start as you say ‘flinging the poo’ now I’ll add to the image someone who needs their diaper checked and in need of a nap. Great column, I enjoyed it.

Wayne Blackburn
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

I think you left out a version of Concern Troll: The Pretend Conservative/Republican/Libertarian (whichever they think you are). The ones who come in with, “I was always a big (Republican/Whatever), I even voted for (Somebody), but you guys are going off into crazy land, and I can’t stand with you any more.” And they usually employ some of the other items on the checklist to prove either how you are no longer part of the group, or how the group left them. Kind of like most of the seminar callers to talk shows.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
3 years 6 days ago

Concern Trolls stopped using the pretend bit because it is too easy to derail them simply by saying “You are lying. You are not a member of our group. Fuck off.”

Works particularly well with victim-disarmament supporters who claim to be rational gun owners.

Simply tell them that grampa’s old rifle in the closet at best makes them a dumb-assed Fudd.

trackback

[…] really wrong with this world at all. Such is the case in Larry Correia’s latest blog post, The Internet Arguing Checklist. This is a must-read for anyone who values reason and logic over the emotionally manipulative (and […]

Gerry Martin
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

That is like the woman who called me “Transphobic” on the internet the other night. This was after I asked them to justify their comments about an author online after this woman called the author a “vile, bigoted, piece of shit” and then actively refused to try to explain her comments. She basically used all of the steps in an abbreviated fashion (this is Twitter after all) to try and avoid an actual debate and then even used Scalzi as a way to say she won. *sigh* I miss actual, real debates. 😀

Thomas Bryant
Guest
3 years 6 days ago
The same holds true of internet atheists, except their number 8 is that we’re “stupid and afraid.” I’m currently engaged with an atheist on FB who is arguing that there is no such thing as bias based on unreasonable doubt, since both science and philosophy use doubt to .”correct” for bias. He’s currently at number 2, and trying to say that I don’t understand philosophy. (I have a BA in Philosophy from Clemson and an MA in Religious Studies (Biblical Archeology and Textual Criticism). I’m tempted to post the link here, or the one on Vox Popoli and ask him… Read more »
RS
Guest
RS
3 years 6 days ago

I tried for years to politely argue with liberals on my FB page but it’s pointless for all the reasons you detail here. I purged my friends list about a year ago and never regretted it. It got old seeing all these posts on my newsfeed that I (as in someone of my political affiliation) was a horrible person because of my core beliefs.

Jeff Elkins
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

Dear Mr. Correia,

Being a fan of older SFF authors like Asimov, Heinlein, Pournelle, Niven et al, I don’t keep up with modern authors. Luckily, I read of you on Vox Day’s blog.

I just finished and very much enjoyed your Hard Magic trilogy. I especially enjoyed the JMB and 1911 references, the 1911 being the finest handgun in the world.

Thanks for some fine fiction. I’m looking forward to reading more of your non-fiction essays, the one above was excellent.

pdwalker
Guest
pdwalker
1 year 8 months ago

Seconded. And ditto.

Now stop writing these long racist creeds and write moar books, you privileged racist!

(Seriously, Hard Magic, and MHI were really enjoyable)

Pox Vay
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

“Willfully ignorant” is used a lot in this post. Correia doesn’t understand he’s describing himself. He is the one to be mocked.
http://poxvay.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-internet-arguing-checklist-for.html

Foolhardy Expendable Minion
Guest
Foolhardy Expendable Minion
3 years 5 days ago
Perhaps you could help me understand what looks like a contradiction in your blog’s comment. You wrote: Blacks are arrested and convicted of murder at much higher rates. But they are also arrested for other crimes more often than their white counerparts even when the actual committal of crimes is the same. There’s no reason why that wouldn’t apply to murder as well. Then there’s the fact that black people, after having less than 60 years to undo the damage of systematic oppression, are more likely to live in poverty. Poverty leads to desperation, which leads to violence. So are… Read more »
Pox Vay
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

The stats were about drug crime.

I’m saying that the same stats are a factor, not the only one, but certainly a factor in the 700% difference in murder rates. Widespread poverty being another.

Pox Vay
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

It appears that you are Vox’s mental mini-me because that’s clearly not what I’ve said. I’ve said that statistics need interpretation and that your his (and maybe yours) always points the finger at blacks. That’s why he (and maybe you) are racist.

jimc5499
Guest
jimc5499
2 years 11 months ago

We had a City Councilwoman complain that 86% of those arrested in her district were Black. She said that it was racist. She wanted more Whites arrested. The look on her face was priceless when it was explained to her that 94% of the people in her district WERE Black.

DaveP.
Guest
DaveP.
3 years 5 days ago

Linkwhore much?

Pox Vay
Guest
3 years 5 days ago

More of a link slut.

Og
Guest
Og
2 years 11 months ago

AAAAAAnd thats the internet for today, folks. Thanks for playing!

James May
Guest
3 years 6 days ago
The exact same people who expressed outrage on Twitter that there are still segregated proms in the South are responsible for a “safer space” segregated room complete with PoC dinner as well for non-whites only at the feminist bigot fest called WisCon. Of course I’m talking about K. Tempest Bradford and Jaymee Goh, 2 of the worst anti-white racial bigots in SFF fandom. Their comments about whites are non-stop and 100% negative. Here’s Bradford crowing about her racial segregation at WisCon together with Jaymee Goh, who once referred to whites on Twitter as “sourdough-faced.” http://tempest.fluidartist.com/wiscon-36-poc-safer-space/ Their dissonance about race is… Read more »
Stephen St. Onge
Guest
Stephen St. Onge
1 year 5 months ago

        “Safer space?”  Safer in what respect?  Could someone present statistics on assaults, robberies, accidental bruising, or whatever it is that the “safer space” is supposed to keep “PoC” less at risk for?  This is fascinating.

John Douglas
Guest
3 years 6 days ago

My conclusion on the effectiveness of ‘reasoning’ (presenting verifiable facts) with liberals (also Christian vs. cultist) is that it is as futile as poking holes in mud, no matter how many holes you make it remains mud. The best you can hope for is that the mud drys up and blows away
We are dealing with people who invent facts and are void of logic, reason and common sense, unforunately they never dry up and blow away.

mikee
Guest
mikee
2 years 11 months ago

Google Peterson Syndrome. Your observation has been made real in the case of Joan Peterson, Brady board member and blogger.

GCM
Guest
GCM
3 years 6 days ago

This post reminds me of a crack whore who claims they are not a addicted to a drug simply because they are not using at that particular time.

This checklist is employed by conservatives, communists, atheists, socialists, and the Christian Libertarian intelligentsia. Thy name is…confirmation bias.

BobtheRegisterredFool
Guest
BobtheRegisterredFool
3 years 5 days ago

Question: I’ve been known to argue that gun control must be suspect on the same grounds if usage by Segregationists in Jim Crow makes Poll Taxes and Poll Tests forever suspect and probably Racist. Would this be considered a conservative violation of rule 8 on this list?

Asher
Guest
Asher
3 years 5 days ago

Not if it is not being used to slur the other guy, no. That said, such a claim contributes little to the discussion unless you are using it to draw some particular conclusion. Throwing it in there without drawing a conclusion can, actually, detract from your comment.

DaveP.
Guest
DaveP.
3 years 3 days ago

Something else to remember is that gun control does in fact have blatantly racist roots: in Dredd Scott, one of the reasons Chief Justive Taney cited for barring blacks form citizenship was that if they were citizens, they could own guns.

lucienlafayette
Guest
3 years 5 days ago
In all seriousness, one of the problems with “arguing” with progressives is that they do not use the same portion of their brain and we frequently wind up not even discussing the same point. Effectively we are arguing past each other. Conservatives try to discuss facts and history. Most progressives are trying to make points strictly based on an emotion and feelings. Additionally, because of their view of life, they don’t see themselves as fitting into any sort of a continuum. In spite of their refrain of “for the children” all of their positions are of a “lifeboat” nature: what… Read more »
Asher
Guest
Asher
3 years 5 days ago
@ Larry Often liberals seriously misuse very precise terms to the point of rendering them meaningless. Vox already specified the term “privilege” and I would add “bigot”. If you want to identify someone by a term then you need some sort of validation criteria/criterion. Myself, I have a large number of positions on which I have consumed massive amounts of information and spent countless hours contemplating those issues. It makes complete sense that if one has invested a great deal of time and effort considering a particular topic then one is likely to have a strong position on it. Leftists… Read more »
Asher
Guest
Asher
3 years 5 days ago

Heh. Pox Vay just put up a silly response to your list with a list of his own. I engage him and he began deleting my comments. Typical leftist intellectual dishonesty.

Pox Vay
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

You’re a fucking liar. I deleted one redundant comment and the rest of your ridiculous responses are left up. That’s not censorship. Get a brain.

needmoreammo
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

Dude Chill. Get a word processor that has spell check and come back when you think of something insightful.

perlhaqr
Guest
3 years 5 days ago

Oh. Is that where all those cactus spines in my knuckles are coming from?

gabriel
Guest
gabriel
3 years 5 days ago

DISREGARD INCONVENIENT FACTS

When you cite a statistic, “your statistic is wrong (or irrelevant)”, “because we’re dealing with people”

Lissa Albert
Guest
3 years 4 days ago
I can (but won’t) name PFMs who have engaged me in every single one of these tactics. I’ve been unfriended on Facebook by those calling me a lying racist (boo hoo hoo). I’ve been called a neo-con by those who have no clue what it means. But the most common attack I get is, “you have no say, you’re CANADIAN.” As if we “peace-loving Canadians” must keep our peace-loving opinions behind our peace-loving borders. When they find out I am an NRA member they believe it is a fraudulent membership because “Canadians can’t join the NRA.” This piece had me… Read more »
peavybob
Guest
peavybob
3 years 4 days ago

I will admit that I didn’t think canadians could join the nra either. It is the “national” rifle assossiaction after all. Then again, it’s not like you’re from another country (joking).

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
3 years 3 days ago

Yeah, you can join the US NRA, even if a citizen and resident of a foreign nation. It’s not real common (for obvious reasons), but it does happen.

BikerDad
Guest
3 years 3 days ago

Sure they can. They can also join the NMRA, aka National Model Railroad Association. If they do, they’re only allowed to model the Canadian National Railroad though… can’t have them spooking about and impersonating REAL railroads. :p

(yes, mostly off topic. Which # does this fall under?? )

Jerry
Guest
Jerry
3 years 3 days ago

It falls under #5. 5.Make Shit Up.

trackback

[…] post of a couple of days ago failed to mention why I had read Larry Correia’s The Internet Arguing Checklist, quite purposefully. I was in the middle of a “discussion” with a liberal over gun […]

Larry Atchley, Jr
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

“…because arguing with the willfully ignorant is like repeatedly punching a really dumb cactus?”
Wait a minute. So this suggests there are intelligent cacti? I knew it! Evil genius cacti are controlling the world as a super secret shadow government bent on enslaving humanity under a yoke of tyranny through their New World Order directives. Fight the real enemy!

jabrwok
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

There were, but the Doctor eliminated them: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Zolfa-Thuran

peavybob
Guest
peavybob
3 years 4 days ago

Nice, I’d forgotten that one.

Brad R. Torgersen
Guest
3 years 4 days ago
Very late to the party. One of the more disheartening trends in liberal street thinking is the equivalence between disagreement, and disrespect. Our newest generation of progressives have been so thoroughly spoon-fed their perception of self-preciousness, that even the slightest hint of disagreement now becomes a shattering experience for them. “Stop disagreeing with me, it’s disrespectful!” This is especially common in certain echelons of so-called feminism. Disagreement — of any sort, for any reason — is automatically interpreted as a direct personal attack. Such people constantly and perpetually need to have their own opinions reflected back to themselves. Anything otherwise… Read more »
James May
Guest
3 years 3 days ago
Mr. Torgersen, I am: A. Curious as to who wrote the emails at SFWA wanting to exclude you based on your race. B. Wonder if you’ll ever say who it was. C. Wonder if you’ll release the emails without the names attached. D. Wonder if you plan any future action. E. Wonder if you’d send me those emails privately. If this had happened to Aliette de Bodard, Saladin Ahmed or N.K. Jemisin, the uproar and stink would still be flying around. This needs to be exposed and the SFWA asked about their sad double standards where right and wrong are… Read more »
Lauren
Guest
3 years 1 day ago

People who argue when they’re uncertain of their position will ALWAYS take disagreement as an attack. It’s just the nature of the beast.

If someone attacks me because of my opinions, I assume they know their position is weak.

Kenneth Harkin
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

I have a deranged left wing cousin who stops short of calling me a racist on Facebook but likes to use the term fascist. He doesn’t know what it means.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
3 years 4 days ago

Describe FDR’s old National Recovery Act to him, the one that the SCOTUS overturned.

Ask him what he thinks of it.

Then let him know that it was a verbatim English translation of Mussolini’s Fascist party legislation.

Ken
Guest
Ken
3 years 4 days ago

Hmm, why is it that most of the argument seem to be ad hominem. BTW, you can recategorise your arguments using latin:
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html

Asher
Guest
Asher
3 years 4 days ago

“Ignorant” is another term frequently, and egregiously, misused by leftists. It’s not the same thing as “uninformed”; hint: the root is the same are the verb “ignore”.

Kenneth Harkin
Guest
3 years 4 days ago

My new meme for the majority of words used by liberals.

Josef Mengele
Guest
Josef Mengele
3 years 4 days ago

Here’s another one I heard recently from a liberal. I saw a debate in the comments section on a youtube video about health care. And guy A (who I assume was a liberal because this is something they usually say) said to guy B “You need to stop getting your facts from Fox News”.

Guy B never mentioned Fox News once. It’s a mix of making shit up and dismissal based on false assumption.

Liberals aren’t just bad arguers, they’re actually mentally retarded.

trackback

[…] For a more polemic and perhaps cynical view, see The Left Wing Internet Argument Checklist: […]

Rex May
Guest
3 years 3 days ago

Great piece! I’ve quoted, linked, and riffed on it here. And added you to my blogroll.
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2013/09/leftist-toddler-debating-tactics.html
Ex-Army would be gratified to be added to YOUR blogroll, too.

trackback

[…] internet argument checklist for liberals Related: A little hamster appeared in my comments on my n-count […]

trackback

[…] it’s yet another case of them being able to dish it out, but never take it – check out Larry Correia for examples of this intellectual dishonesty if you don’t believe […]

Sarah
Guest
Sarah
3 years 6 hours ago
Perhaps you can help me. I noticed that you were faithful in responding to most of the commenters, and I could use some well informed advice. I was raised in a very conservative home, so of course, I was a very democratic/liberal young adult (rebellion at it’s finest). However, the older I get the more compelled I am to have my own opinions. My issue is finding non-partisan information. I read articles on both sides, and the comments, hoping for fact based debates, but your checklist reads true for both sides. Ignorance abounds and though I am tired of being… Read more »
trackback

[…] The Internet Arguing Checklist (larrycorreia.wordpress.com) […]

Terry Mcintyre
Guest
2 years 11 months ago
Being a libertarian means that I have twice as much fun on the internet – everyone has a bone to pick with me! So, I love this liberal check list – and I’ve seen examples, believe you me, every time I argue against gun control, against welfare programs, and so on and so forth. I have to add, I’ve seen the same crap from conservatives. Oh, they won’t call me “racist” – but calling me a faggot, or unchristian, or unpatriotic? Yeah, that’ll obviously checkmate my carefully-reasoned facts and prose instantly. Or I’m “liberal” because I agree on something –… Read more »
Klapton
Guest
Klapton
2 years 11 months ago

You would love Tom Woods’ “Interview with a Zombie.”

trackback

[…] [High Praise! to Monster Hunter Nation] […]

Paul Havemann
Guest
Paul Havemann
2 years 11 months ago

In my extensive experience, you omitted one: Change the Subject.

It doesn’t matter how unrelated or stupid it is – it works all too often. Drag in Bush, blame Reagan, babble about global warming. Get them to forget what they were defending in the first place.

trackback

[…] Finish reading all this at Monster Hunter Nation. […]

Weisshaupt
Guest
Weisshaupt
2 years 11 months ago
I can’t believe you think the “actually can make an argument” type of liberal is someone worthy of debate and respect. They are, in fact, the worst. They are just seeking self-affirmation of their superiority a different way – and are displaying just as much bad-faith and they are just as disingenuous as the run of the mill lefty you describe in the article. Yes, you can hone your arguments and points with them – because they are trained at debating. They were probably in the ir High School or College Debate club — but what they are really doing… Read more »
nrabenefactor
Guest
nrabenefactor
2 years 11 months ago

It’s funny how Liberals totally discount amazing people like Dr. Ben Carson, rushing to apply the “Uncle Tom” tag to a man who has accomplished more in his life than most of us could dream of doing, despite his disadvantaged childhood, simply because he is successful, black, and advocates for personal responsibility and integrity (as they do with Bill Cosby). Liberals demonize him because he destroys the victim-hood narrative they depend on to maintain their voter base.

Ortho Stice
Guest
Ortho Stice
2 years 11 months ago

The ironic thing about that is, Bill Cosby is as lefty as they come, with the exception of wanting black kids to speak clearly, and pull their pants up.

trackback
2 years 11 months ago

[…] how to do it on the internet. I’ve said it before that when you argue, you’re doing it for those on the sidelines […]

P.S.V
Guest
P.S.V
2 years 11 months ago
Oh brother! How many mirrors do you have in your house? Your page is one incredibly long-winded one sided pontification. Good lord! It’s like you’re in love with yourself the way you masturbate your ego. You know, (instinctively, I’m sure), exactly what any and all reasoning persons of diametrically opposite political opinions would choose to argue. Not only that; you know exactly what they would say and what, then, you would say etc…(ad nauseam ). As one gives witness to the other, you are that unfortunate combination of arrogance and ignorance that has of late attempted to poison the very… Read more »
Wayne Blackburn
Guest
2 years 11 months ago

HAHAHAHA! Projection at its finest, I’m sure.

bogie
Guest
bogie
2 years 11 months ago

A Niece-in-law, who is a teacher, discredited the bumperstickers on an obviously right-leaning individual. How? By claiming their opinion didn’t matter because he was driving a Geo.

When I pointed out that it got great gas mileage, and asked what was wrong with a Geo. The answer was that the only Geo driver she had known was a poor high school student.

Don’t know why she hates on poor people (she certainly didn’t grow up rich), or students, but that was the whole rational that the Geo driver’s opinion wasn’t valid.

You can’t make this sh*t up.

JT
Guest
JT
2 years 11 months ago

Sound bite. Or more exactly, soundbite. Not “sound byte”. Not everything is an ersatz ‘puter term.

Hope that doesn’t get me “labeled” a “skimmer”, “disqualifier” or “attacker”. Because I definitely ain’t making this shit up, and I am genuinely concerned. For the children. 🙂

Love your stuff, keep up the good work and the good fight.

JT
Guest
JT
2 years 11 months ago

From now on I want to be known as “poisoner of the very wellspring of American Democracy with exclusionary partisan hate mongering and divisive derision” ‘Cause I think that means I hate me some lefties.

If poison doesn’t work is it okay to shoot ’em? No? Shit, ’cause poison is so slow and in any case does not seem to be working.

Fred2
Guest
Fred2
2 years 10 months ago

The point of a smart car is you can park in places that will cause the police to try find another reason to ticket you. 😉

That and driving in weeny Europe streets built before the US was officially discovered

8truelyisenough
Guest
8truelyisenough
2 years 10 months ago
Found your blog and love it. Makes me laugh, think, get angry … you know, the usual responses most normal people get when reading. Side note. read this from the check list, in the head was the voice of Kim Kardashian. Not sure if the outside world is getting in more but it made sense to me in that voice. “I came to your blog/facebook/twitter because I’m SOOOO very interested in your book/movie/product, but then I found out what a horrible, awful person you are, so now I’m never going to buy any of your stuff ever again. You should… Read more »
trackback

[…] Monster Hunter Nation (Larry Correia) – The Internet Arguing Checklist […]

trackback

[…]      The Internet Arguing Checklist […]

trackback

[…] This is all over the internet right now, which is good, because people need to realize just how rigged the system is. The left in America simply cannot tolerate disagreement, deviation from group think is heresy, and when you piss them off, if they can’t dismiss you, they steamroll you. The actual topic is irrelevant. This particular one was homosexuality, but it just as easily could be guns, healthcare, or global warming. This event is just another example of the Liberal Arguing Checklist writ large: http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/ […]

mikevp
Guest
mikevp
2 years 9 months ago

This article is a thing of beauty and a joy forever. I resolve to, when I get PFM attacks in the future, to just respond with “PFM Debate Tactic #2” or whatever, with a link to this article.

Thank you.

DL
Guest
DL
2 years 9 months ago

You might need to add a number 9: “In the end, act above it all”. This is used when even screaming RACIST fails. They act above it all by saying ‘well at least people are talking about this issue now’ as if they’ve performed some sort of public service and we unwashed masses are now better off.

mikevp
Guest
mikevp
2 years 9 months ago

“No, we are not ‘talking about it now’. You won’t shut up about it until you’ve cowed or alienated everyone who doesn’t agree with you.”

Which is overly optimistic; they’d still never shut up about it.

trackback
Ryan Williamson
Guest
2 years 7 months ago

Don’t forget “summoning the concern trolls,” also known as “siccing one’s minions.” Often employed by people with legions of rabid followers when they can’t think of a rebuttal.

fontofworlds
Guest
2 years 7 months ago

Thanks, Larry, this is a useful list. Knowing what’s coming actually helps diffuse the kneejerk frustration smelted into fury.

trackback

[…] it’s Item 2: Disqualify that Opinion, subcategory “You sound angry” from Larry Correia’s Internet Arguing Checklist. Though humorous in its presentation, we all know that he’s not exaggerating for effect: we’ve […]

trackback

[…] chains already have a checklist and bingo card ready for these sorts of predictable things, http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/ we are used to their tantrums and immunized by being actual grown ups with lives, but since this […]

trackback

[…] via The Internet Arguing Checklist | Monster Hunter Nation. […]

Wag_a_Muffin (D) (@WagaMuffin1)
Guest
ymarsakar
Guest
2 years 5 months ago

I have yet to see enough evidence that people part of the Left’s utopia death cult have free will. Humans are supposed to have free will and the ability to determine things based upon their own conscience, not this kind of Global Warming Gaia cult that everyone says and thinks the same thing as the Divine Dogma tells them.

Yet they Obey Evil, so either they are tools and anyone can use them, or they are part of the organization giving the orders.

trackback

[…] Yes, you fucking twatwaffle, it would be nonsense because you made it all up. When you can’t actually debate somebody libprogs go for Make Shit Up. And once you’ve hit that check box, they can go for Dismiss. For my new readers, here is a handy checklist for when you are arguing with morons like Damian. http://monsterhunternation.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/ […]

trackback

[…] Skim until Offended […]

trackback

[…] was written some time back, but I’ve just stumbled on this incredible dissection of lefty arguing techniques by Larry Correia.  Although it ostensibly describes nonsense rhetorical techniques for the […]

Chevalier de Johnstone
Guest
Chevalier de Johnstone
2 years 5 months ago
Coming here because of John C. Wright’s link. I’ve rarely encountered any of these argumentation “techniques”, perhaps because I don’t bother arguing with liberals with whom I’m not at least friendly. Mostly the argument I get is the “it makes me feel bad” response. Me: Preventing law-abiding citizens from buying handguns is especially harmful to women, who are more likely to need a handgun for self defense. 90 pound Liberal Female: I don’t like guns, people shouldn’t have them. Me: If you were walking to your car from the office at midnight and six grown men, say average 6 feet… Read more »
trackback

[…] Since I’m a prolific political blogger, with thousands of posts to pick through, you’d think these people would have some actual example of where I’d been racist, homophobic, or misogynist, but they don’t. Go figure. In reality, all of us right wingers simply know that the outrage crowd attacking us is so boringly predictable that we have a checklist ready to go for them: http://monsterhunternation.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/ […]

trackback

[…] Since I’m a prolific political blogger, with thousands of posts to pick through, you’d think these people would have some actual example of where I’d been racist, homophobic, or misogynist, but they don’t. Go figure. In reality, all of us right wingers simply know that the outrage crowd attacking us is so boringly predictable that we have a checklist ready to go for them: http://monsterhunternation.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/ […]

trackback

[…] The Internet Arguing Checklist – A guide to arguing with progressives written by author Larry Correia, who is more experienced with it than he’d prefer […]

dyingearth
Guest
dyingearth
2 years 4 months ago

Larry, I’m quoting this little blogpost left and right the past couple of days. This is seriously useful.

trackback

[…] hand, Correia himself infrequently engages in argumentative excesses opposite liberals, such as claiming that “[l]iberals never wish to disagree ABOUT a topic. They wish to disagree about becaus… Neither side in this sell has been a indication of politeness and reasoned discourse. The tongue on […]

trackback

[…] via The Internet Arguing Checklist | Monster Hunter Nation. […]

trackback

[…] Hogy kicsit tisztább legyen, miről is beszélek, idézek pár mondatot Larry Correia sci-fi író tollából: […]

trackback

[…] hosszas elméleti bevezető az első részben olvasható – ez a cikk Larry Correia sci-fi író cikkének kivonata. A téma a kettészakadt nyugati vitakultúra, amiben egy tárgyilagos, témaközpontú […]

trackback

[…] punishment, and — ding! — they start typing about the racist, racist death penalty.  (Rule 1 of Larry Correia’s Internet Arguing Checklist, for those keeping score at home — […]

trackback
2 years 4 months ago

[…] gun porn literature with and without monsters. this is from his website, check out his Resume! The Internet Arguing Checklist | Monster Hunter Nation An opinion on gun control | Monster Hunter Nation TERM LIMITS, NO HEALTHCARE and NO […]

trackback

[…] this is right out of Larry’s Internet Arguing Checklist, arguably (hehe) the single most important guide to understanding how people are wrong on the […]

guedenimbo
Guest
2 years 4 months ago

I had to check this list recently. It needs a 9th check box. “rage quit”, when you can’t win, quit in a fashion that uses one of the above checks to make sure everyone knows not only were you right, but the mean wrong person was really wrong, and possibly a monster.

trackback

[…] that thread is a clinic in point-missing.  Or a classic illustration of Larry Correia’s first rule of internet arguing: Skim until offended.  Since Morgan mentioned “pulling his man card” in the third […]

Larry Freeman (@Thaeldes)
Guest
2 years 29 days ago

I am a moderate I have views that sit on both sides of the fence, when I mention this I get it from both sides saying that I do not have a mind of my own and that I need to grow up an pick a side.

Poca Hot Ass
Guest
2 years 12 days ago

This is the stupidest site I have ever seen. And I have been to a lot of websites. Ever been to the site about Felching?

thewriterinblack
Guest
2 years 10 days ago

That is the stupidest troll I’ve seen, and I’ve seen a lot of trolls. Ever seen clamps?

Achillea
Guest
2 years 10 days ago

Since the Checklist is almost a year back in the archives, I’m going to take a wild guess that Pulga here just got spanked with it somewhere else. And spanked so hard, it forgot what year this is.

Guest
2 years 9 days ago

You’re one of the most ineffective, weaksauce-filled trolls that I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen a lot of trolls. You fail horribly, and we are all dumber for your efforts.

Stephen St. Onge
Guest
Stephen St. Onge
1 year 5 months ago

Poca Hot Ass:
Thank you for teaching me a new word, one that I would never have discovered on my own.

trackback

[…] someone from college – “interesting” in that it was yet another example of the Internet Arguing Checklist from a rabid liberal. I expected nothing less, actually, but I wished to engage merely for the […]

yohannbiimu
Guest
2 years 5 days ago

The only part of this checklist that I’ve never encountered is the “concerned troller” or “boycotter,” I guess you have to have to be well-known to get those.

IronOx
Guest
IronOx
2 years 2 days ago

Hmmm. There’s another great game potential here: MadLibs for Mad Libs.

paulhonsinger
Guest
1 year 11 months ago
I’m a conservative, published Science Fiction novelist, as well as a retired attorney and former debate teacher, and I encounter these tactics all the time when I dare to voice my opinions on my own Facebook page. I’m particularly fond of how the PFMs use my experience teaching debate and the insight it gives me into logic and argumentation–which most people would regard as qualifications in this area–as disqualifications. It is almost as if they are saying “What is this thing you call logic. It is a dirty lawyer’s trick used to undermine those who make policy based on caring… Read more »
James May
Guest
1 year 11 months ago
Well then you’ve learned it is fruitless to debate such people. If you say you’re colorblind they’ll say well you have that privilege. If you say white people are being slammed with slurs they’ll say there’s no history of that and no such thing as ethnic white slurs. There is no logic in PC land, there is only skin and gender and that is the god these folks worship. In that world straight white men are never right. There are never non-white colonialists or murdered natives in Spain, the Balkans or Greece; only in the Third World. Nubian colonialists and… Read more »
thewriterinblack
Guest
1 year 10 months ago

Larry, should “rage quit” be added to the checklist (although sometimes it’s more of a “sulk quit.” 😉 )

wlinden
Guest
1 year 7 months ago

“Liberal 1: Attack, attack. ATTACK!

Liberal 2: Attack attack, attack attack!

Conservative: Defend.

Liberal 1: How rude.

Liberal 2: Indeed, how rude.

Liberal 1: You Sound Angry.”

This also applies with Atheist/Neopagan and Christian. They also proceed to sneer at the target for not “loving” them.

wlinden
Guest
1 year 7 months ago

Another is

Lefty: You keep making blanket statements, without giving any examples.
Conservative: Example
Lefty: That’s just one!
Conservative: Another example
Lefty: That’s just two!
Conservative: Another example
Lefty: That’s just three!
Conservative: So what is the magic number of examples you were just criticizing me for not giving?
(Silence)

Reziac
Guest
1 year 5 months ago
Boy am I late to this party, but I gotta relate a conversation I’ve had, well, every time I’ve tried to discuss political candidates with a liberal. Lib: I’m voting for X. Me: Why? Lib: X is smart. and the flipside, Lib: Your candidate is stupid. Me: Why? Lib: He just IS. It never gets beyond that. Their candidate is smart and yours is stupid, but they never offer any reason for either. I want to hear the bloody reasons, cuz who knows, maybe they know something I don’t, and maybe I’d change my vote if I had more information;… Read more »
Reziac
Guest
1 year 5 months ago

Oh, and since no one mentioned this…

https://xkcd.com/386/

trackback

[…] they can be challenged . . . if you do it right. A couple of years ago, Larry Coreia came up with a handy-dandy guide to dealing with Leftist […]

IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
Guest
IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
1 year 5 months ago

}}} Charlton Heston marched across the Selma Bridge with Martin Luther King, and he was smeared as racist for believing that the 2nd Amendment applied to everyone equally.

Got a cite for that, sirrah? Not that I doubt it’s true, I just want to be able to back it up with a “reliable source” when I repeat it. 😉

IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
Guest
IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
1 year 5 months ago

}}} Nick will be called racist—usually for not being an Obama fan is enough—and he always posts the same thing. “Don’t tell my adopted son that because he’s black and thinks I love him.”

LOL, the libtard retort to that one is obvious:
“Clearly, he’s just a beard for your racism.”

😀

IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
Guest
IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses."
1 year 5 months ago
}}} I often get people who agree with me posting stuff like “well, you wasted your time on that doofus!” Ah, but you miss the point. You don’t defend your beliefs in the hopes of convincing the willfully ignorant. That’s a lost cause. The willfully ignorant aren’t to be convinced, they are to be mocked. Their flaws are to be pointed out until everyone around them realizes how full of crap they are. Remember that argument is theater, and your performance isn’t aimed at your opponent, but rather at the audience. If you choose to follow the Fisker’s Path, your… Read more »