How to deal with politically correct busybodies

Years ago there was a syndicated radio show called His Side with Glenn Sacks. Sacks is a father’s rights advocate who hosted the show from California. He regularly brought on prominent feminists to debate men’s issues, primarily father’s rights. He also had people call into show and ask questions.

On one episode, he invited a newcomer feminist blogger named Amanda Marcotte to talk with him. Marcotte had made name for herself with her blistering diatribes and rants on her blog Pandagon. The vitriol that came from her digital mouth knew few limits. There was little she would not write in order to trash men, the men’s rights movement, and advocates like Glenn Sacks.

So as one would expect, when Marcotte appeared on the show she spoke in the most restrained, mousey voice humanly possible. She presented the complete opposite of her online personality, acting afraid and timid and barely speaking loud enough to be heard despite the microphone being inches from her face. When challenged by Sacks on the various charges she had made against him and other advocates, Marcotte had only soft spoken, non-committal remarks.

She proved the utter coward. In further demonstration of this, within hours of the interview Marcotte wrote a seething blog post attacking Sacks and his “hostile” environment on the show. The same person who could barely be heard now claimed that Sacks ambushed her and made her feel unsafe.

While every guest did not behave this way (Hugo Schwyzer continued his narcissistic arrogance and Barry Deutsch, aka Ampersand, became the quintessential jerk), all of them did come with preconceived notions about the topics at hand and would not concede any point no matter the evidence.

What made Sacks’s show so good is that he challenged feminists to their face. He forced them to defend their accusations not only against the father’s rights and men’s rights movements, but specifically their accusations against him. And every time, at least on the shows I listened to, none of them could defend their accusations.

The reason I think this is important is because this is one of the key ways you deal with the ideologues. You force them to reveal that they have no idea what they are talking about it. You let them make their point, and then you ask them to prove it. If they do anything other than present evidence supporting the specific claim they made, they reveal their bias. You can do it in the very polite way Sacks would do it. Or you can do it like Milo Yiannapoulos:

What I appreciate about Milo’s approach is that he gives the young man a fair chance to defend his accusation before Milo shuts him down with a well-deserved “Fuck you!”.

This is how you deal with a politically correct busybody. I do not think that this needs to be the approach every time, but I do think this needs to be mentality one should operate from. Allow them to speak and then ask them to prove what they say, especially when they launch into accusations about bigotry. Do not play their game in defending yourself because they will simply come up with a different accusation to get around their inability to defend the first.

Confront them head on and make them defend their point. No, they will not like you. This is why I get banned from most feminist spaces I participate in online. However, it is necessary in order to demonstrate that these people are the biggest cowards. They will say whatever they want when they think they have cover or support, yet they are unable to defend any of their claims. When challenged, they whine, they name-call, and they run back to their space safe to claim they were attacked.

The last thing they ever do is prove their narrative true.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “How to deal with politically correct busybodies

  1. In the linked video, Milo didn’t really give the guy a chance. When you have celebrity, media savvy, public speaking confidence, high intelligence, a microphone AND control of the room like Milo, it isn’t a fair fight. From what we see in the clip, it was more a demonstration of the use of power than anything else. The PC guy had the courage to stand and speak his mind, and STAY standing despite Milo’s onslaught and mockery by the audience.

    The fact remains that the Alt-Right has white racialist currents running through its veins despite the many ways this is masked by more compelling political and strategic arguments. It’s too complex and tightly woven to argue in a a few minutes under fire, especially Milo’s fabulous megaphonic territory.

    There is also power in not caring. The Alt-Right is characterized by not caring how it affects others. It goes further: it no longer cares about dissent, caring only about smothering the opposition with whatever argument unseats them. Adding these things together: charisma, a don’t-care attitude, powerful six-gun intellects like Milo, Mike, Vox and Stefan, and ethno-cultural theories about Western civilization (and a plethora of European assumptions about what constitutes ‘good’), and you have something that for all intents and purposes is white supremacist without actually taking that standpoint. It’s a tightly woven elven cloak.

    Milo proves here that the Alt-Right is dangerous not for the truth it stands for, which is mostly defensible, but for its smothering and cloaking effects.

    The leaders of the Alt-Right are like Marie and Pierre Curie, doing clever things that will one day lead to Chernobyl. The feminists did this with the Duluth Model – gender-based domestic violence and child abuse theories that would one day lead to Hillary. It feela great now, but it masks a sub-intellectual fever that will one day poison all the ground it touches. The PC-guy in the video obviously senses this. Milo probably does too but is in the delirium of a deathly fever from which he and others in the Alt-Right will soon be unable to escape. Truth is on their side for now, but it will not be for very long the way this thing is going.

  2. The reason so many feminists and other SJWs hate to debate or even explain themselves is because they risk being proven wrong, or worse, having to think about their beliefs, having to look at the flaws in them.

    Also, Jacob, the “alt-right” is a boogeyman, not a monolith. It’s a label the far left slaps on wrongthinkers, like “reactionary” and “white supremacist”, except those have actual meanings that get perverted for the Narrative.

    It’s kinda hard to argue that the Alt-Right is racist when the guy who’s most prominently associated with them is a Jewish/Greek Englishman who likes black men.

    The kid went toe to toe with a professional speaker and provocateur, who has shown himself time and time again to be fast-talking, intelligent, and charismatic, whatever other flaws he has. The kid didn’t come prepared. Don’t blame Milo.

  3. The Alt Right is the fault of the deranged ravings of the PC brigade. They are going to be reaping the whirlwinds now, believe me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s