The thing is,this person really obviously believed their own internal logic. I think today was even more proof that the two cultures simply CANNOT be reconciled, and I'll tell you why.
Here's a video from the conservative side here you might watch if you can tolerate it:
I mean it all sounds pretty reasonable right? Who doesn't like the individual vs the big evil government? And God knows I've ranted enough about the problems with institutions as well. But the thing is...if you have noticed a single theme I have more than any other it is that of TRUTH. I lived a lie my whole life until the age of 35. I swallowed it hook line and sinker, only to discover that the leaders of that lie care only about their own power, profit and personal glory.
I digress.
The meat of this conversation with the individual in question is that he called me a bigot for putting down people who have a different opinion than them. This is a branch of the same stupid argument they make about tolerating intolerance, which I addressed here.
The link he posted was right here:
Now I mean, that might be the technical thinking...but is that really what most people think of when they think of the definition...here's the wikipedia entry:
Well that sounds like normal English. So when you expand the google version, you see its based on a 17th century definition, whereas the one in wikipedia is sourced to a modern Meriam Webster dictionary. So we see that the person here who is from a movement everyone else but them associates with misogynist assholes, he insists that their movement represents the interest of ALL blighted XYZ. And to prove that, much like the GOP that trots out women who say, "There is no war on women!" These collaborators say, "Nuh uh! #NotUsingMeAsAnExcuse!" And then idiot and many like him can point to him and pretend that they're not hanging out with mysogonist assholes.
He demands proof. Then he says I'm being uncivil.
So what is this CIVIL thing they keep bringing up?
We'll use the google definition, since apparently that's what contards like.
"formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech."
Where have I heard that before? Oh yes....
Is the incredibly racist slave owning psychopath CIVIL? Can we not at least be CIVIL to each other?
Of course, God FORBID you take offense at anything THEY might say, because you see, to a contard, it is not about what YOU find civil or what society finds civil but what THEY find civil. If they feel civil toward you, if their gloves are still on then they are being civil.
Thus, it isn't YOUR definition of bigotry that matters, its THEIR definition. Where have we heard this before? Oh yeah...
So...let's see here...you have to believe you're racially superior to others or that your race is better than others...and as long as you don't do that, you're not racist! Cause...
You know...by that definition as long as there is ONE PERSON who you like and get along with in that race, who is tame and have the same beliefs as you do politically or socially and you believe that 99.9% of the people of that race aren't like that, then its AOK. You can tell that off color joke because you're NOT BEING RACIST.
Now, never mind that the vast majority of the population finds something like this incredibly racist...
"1 in 10000 negros is actually capable of acting like a white man...." but so long as you don't believe ALL of them are that way, YOU'RE NOT RACIST.
It all makes sense when you think about it. If you define your own words and you don't have to care what 'the collective' thinks, then you can do whatever you want.
Get that?
Where else have we seen it? The Austrian School of Economics which believes that ITS ideas matter more than science. Science is merely part of the "collectivist" paradigm otherwise known as reality. I've already established that by definition conservatives lie more and have a reason for society to tolerate their lies. Libertarians ARE conservatives for purposes of truth.
And thus we see that even the words we use, the conversations we have can't hold them accountable unless society makes LYING a crime if isn't for fiction or parody. Our very dialog, the very words we use, markets (which require truthful information to function) or government simply cannot work if we cannot talk to one another and until the individualists stop using 17th century definitions of words or care that while the REST of us call Racism "Someone else being offended about your stereotype about race" rather than your hypertechnical obscure definition (that happens to be an outdated dictionary definition) then we're all going nowhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment