Arguing with liberals

[BRG253]

I participate on a track and field forum where off-topic subject such as politics are often discussed. Unfortunately there is strong liberal presence there. I make reasoned arguments in favor of lessaiz-faire capitalism, but facts and logic simply have no effect on them. These arguments, more than anything else, have proven to me what liberalism is really about - hatred of the rich, of western civilization, of whites, etc. The things they say often disgust me to the degree that I can't continue reading their posts and have to leave the forum for days at time. My question is, am I doing anything good by arguing with these people? On one hand, it's clear to me that I can't force most them to think. On the other hand, I'm defending my values, probably frustrating them as much as they frustrate me, and there's a chance that someone else will read my posts and agree with them. Is it good that I argue, or a total waste of time?

[Dante]

Well I'd say the strongest justification for arguing with them is not to convert them, or even to frustrate them, but to provide another, reasoned perspective to someone who might be reading their comments with apprehension, but cannot figure out what's precisely wrong with those comments. Those are the people that you'll never know about, but that you just might have a large impact on. Whether that's enough to justify spending time on it or not depends on you, in the end.

[khaight]

You need to identify what your own interests are. Something abstract like 'defending your values' really isn't good enough. Defending them to whom, and for what purpose? Here are some possible reasons for speaking out:

• To provide intellectual ammunition to more honest lurkers.
  
• To strike fear into your enemies by showing them they face knowledgeable, principled opposition.
  
• To hone your own skills at debate.
  
• To study the nature of your opponents and their ideas 'in the wild'.
  
• Because you're so damn frustrated at the state of the world you have to lash out at a target, and they're available.
  
• Something else I haven't thought of.
  

Your specific reason for speaking out sets the parameters for what you say and when. As an example, if your goal is to strike fear into your enemies then it can be appropriate to make the argument more personal, striking at emotional weak points and using provocative language, whereas if you are trying to provide ammunition to more honest lurkers such tactics would be counterproductive.

Oh, and don't call them liberals if they're actually leftists.

[BRG253]

Oh, and don't call them liberals if they're actually leftists.

Good call. Thanks for the response.

[Mister A]

From my experience, the best way to put leftists in their place is to target their psycho-epistemological weakness: the absence of a healthy, self-contained identity (i.e. not bound to tribal affiliation) that can grasp principles and objective reality. In other words, always make your arguments based on observable reality rather than tribal oneupsmanship; this will force them to come face-to-face with their mental impotency.

Just forget about trying to convert them; the majority are irreversibly brainwashed. The objective is to make them look so ridiculous that they lose credibility with any neutral observer.