Same here. Someone calls me a "bigot" and I just truck right through. Doesn't even matter anymore trying to appeal to crazy people's sensibilities because they have none, which is why they're crazy.
They freeze up when they realize you don't care at all about their usage of cliche ad-hominem attacks like racist, sexist, transphobe, misogynist, anti-semite or islamophobe against you.
Whenever anyone attacks me with any of these labels, I just respond with "So what? How does that have anything to do with refuting the argument I made."
They end up unable to argue and they storm out.
It is pathetic how so many of my former "friends" actually performed this same routine.
The idea of calling them npcs is so apt.
These idiots are programmed by media and academia to react with ad-hominems and emotional appeals.
See, you shouldn't be dealing with actual leftisist anyway. The post-modernists literally don't believe in dialog so there's no point talking to them. Just give them a light smack, as you would a dog trying to steal your food, and walk away.
The "I'm not X but..." tactic is for dealing with normies who have been told by their TVs that if you do Y then you must automatically do X. To show them a real life example of a person holding one view and not the other, with logical consistency, starts the process of getting them to question their sources.
The only other time I use it is dealing with people on here who say dumb shit like "You must say you're an anti-vaxxer if you won't get the clot shot". All they're trying to do is use the slippery slope to drag people into their delusions.
The "I'm not X but..." tactic is for dealing with normies who have been told by their TVs that if you do Y then you must automatically do X.
And it doesn't work any more. The wheels fell off the "I'm not X but..." train nearly TEN YEARS AGO and non-leftist millennials are still going around using it like it's still 1999.
I suppose that depends on what your objectives and audience are. When I'm here I try not to do that, because there's not really any consequences for what I say here; and people here are probably somewhere in the 99th percentile of "able to hear uncomfortable/heterodox truths".
When I'm talking to a normal person sympathetic to my cause and trying to nudge him closer to my direction without losing him, sometimes I have to add a little honey to the medicine. Because I realize that I too had to start somewhere down this road, and if I knew beforehand where I'd end up taking it I might have chosen another road.
As much fun as it is to shit on beanie boy, he is an important node in the pipeline, even if unwittingly. Rogan is similar, although moving to Spotify has hampered his utility.
This is a common form of arguing the unprincipled exception. "I'm not anti-LGBT but maybe girls with penises..." you'll be attacked as anti-LGBT anyway so you may as well look at the wider movement. I was arguing with my wife about human neurological uniformity and she was all "differences between the outcome of race groups is because of culture" and I responded that her boomer take was considered just as racist as "differences between the outcome of race groups is because of human neurological diversity" so she may as well embrace the actual correct belief because her "politically correct" take is just as politically incorrect now.
I am proud to say that I don't do this even in real life.
I have lost most of my "friends" during these last two years for expressing heterodox views without cucking out.
My view is that I just lost a lot of dead weight and I am better off for it.
Same here. Someone calls me a "bigot" and I just truck right through. Doesn't even matter anymore trying to appeal to crazy people's sensibilities because they have none, which is why they're crazy.
They freeze up when they realize you don't care at all about their usage of cliche ad-hominem attacks like racist, sexist, transphobe, misogynist, anti-semite or islamophobe against you.
Whenever anyone attacks me with any of these labels, I just respond with "So what? How does that have anything to do with refuting the argument I made."
They end up unable to argue and they storm out.
It is pathetic how so many of my former "friends" actually performed this same routine.
The idea of calling them npcs is so apt.
These idiots are programmed by media and academia to react with ad-hominems and emotional appeals.
Definitely a stupid tactic if you've ever dealt with leftists. They've already decided you're a racist when you utter "I'm not a racist but..."
It's a boomer meme at this point.
See, you shouldn't be dealing with actual leftisist anyway. The post-modernists literally don't believe in dialog so there's no point talking to them. Just give them a light smack, as you would a dog trying to steal your food, and walk away.
The "I'm not X but..." tactic is for dealing with normies who have been told by their TVs that if you do Y then you must automatically do X. To show them a real life example of a person holding one view and not the other, with logical consistency, starts the process of getting them to question their sources.
The only other time I use it is dealing with people on here who say dumb shit like "You must say you're an anti-vaxxer if you won't get the clot shot". All they're trying to do is use the slippery slope to drag people into their delusions.
And it doesn't work any more. The wheels fell off the "I'm not X but..." train nearly TEN YEARS AGO and non-leftist millennials are still going around using it like it's still 1999.
I suppose that depends on what your objectives and audience are. When I'm here I try not to do that, because there's not really any consequences for what I say here; and people here are probably somewhere in the 99th percentile of "able to hear uncomfortable/heterodox truths".
When I'm talking to a normal person sympathetic to my cause and trying to nudge him closer to my direction without losing him, sometimes I have to add a little honey to the medicine. Because I realize that I too had to start somewhere down this road, and if I knew beforehand where I'd end up taking it I might have chosen another road.
Sounds like the pathetic ever-apologizing Tim Pool. He stands for nothing and is ok with anything in moderation.
Beanie boy is cucked.
He is only useful for serving as a stepping stone to redpill normies.
As much fun as it is to shit on beanie boy, he is an important node in the pipeline, even if unwittingly. Rogan is similar, although moving to Spotify has hampered his utility.
I haven't listened to him in a while. What's he apologized for this time?
Everything?
Never defend, never explain, never "reason".
Just keep on message with whatever the facts are and ATTACK. If the other side gets personal by calling you a name then you declare victory.
I'm not a racist but I like to drive at high speeds
I'm not racist but I do love blueberry muffins.
Wait, blueberries are racist now? Against who, smurfs? /s
This is a common form of arguing the unprincipled exception. "I'm not anti-LGBT but maybe girls with penises..." you'll be attacked as anti-LGBT anyway so you may as well look at the wider movement. I was arguing with my wife about human neurological uniformity and she was all "differences between the outcome of race groups is because of culture" and I responded that her boomer take was considered just as racist as "differences between the outcome of race groups is because of human neurological diversity" so she may as well embrace the actual correct belief because her "politically correct" take is just as politically incorrect now.
This is the result of identity politics, everyone has to have a label so morons are not lost. Nobody cares "what" you are.