Observations on Rhetoric and Dialectic

Vox Day distinguishes between rhetoric and dialectic. As Day uses the terms, dialectic is what most people would loosely call “reason,” i.e., it’s basically noting facts and reasoning about them to draw conclusions.* He defines rhetoric here as “the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion.”

In practice, the latter often means pushing people’s emotional buttons. This sounds like a Dark Art if you just leave it at that, but of course like any art or science it can be used for good or evil. And if a person has shown himself to be immune to fact or logic, what else is there to do? Day quoting Aristotle: “argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.”

(* Day has said that “Dialectic is based on the construction of syllogisms,” but that’s too narrow, if by syllogism one means to include only deductive arguments. Day’s use allows for the inclusion of inductive arguments, I’m pretty sure. E.g., “Every gorpf I’ve ever seen was green, so I conclude, probabilistically, that all gorpfs are green.”)

Having been aware of the Rhetoric-vs.-Dialectic distinction for more than a year now, I offer this report to the world, based on Internet interactions with leftists, SJWs, and other varieties of scumbags, liars, and anti-civilization shills:

(1) The Rhetoric-vs.-Dialectic distinction is very real. It’s not something some guy made up; it’s definitely a piece of reality. Once you’re tuned for it you perceive it easily.

I am a regular commenter on a forum in which politics comes up frequently. That people on the left are more inclined to rhetoric and less to dialectic than people on the right is immediately noticeable. Indeed, in retrospect this is not surprising, since we tried dialectic , i.e., facts and logic, on the left for fifty years and that had zero effect on them. (In our defense, dialectic does in fact persuade many people who aren’t already committed leftists. So it’s not like that was a wasted fifty years.)

So you say something, and the lefties on the forum respond with (a) an insult, and (b) often, an insult that is weirdly orthogonal to the topic at hand. (Projection is obviously playing a role here; more on that below.)

For example, you’ll cite stats on the proportion of terrorist acts committed by Muslims compared to members of other religions, and the response will either be something like, “You’re an asshole,” or something like “You’re just angry because you’re suffering from diabetes.” When you don’t have diabetes and have never mentioned the subject of diabetes before. It’s weird. It’s so completely out of left field, it can only be projection, because how else did that topic even enter their head? This is a weird but useful aspect of the left. They reveal so much about themselves with their weird projective insults.

Remember Elizabeth Warren’s bizarre response to Trump calling her “goofy” and “Pocahontas”? Her tweeted response was, “We get it, @realDonaldTrump: When a woman stands up to you, you’re going to call her a basket case. Hormonal. Ugly.” So completely bizarre in that it had no connection to Trump’s tweet. She was obviously just spewing her own insecurities about her appearance or whatever into her Twitter account. This theme is recurrent in interactions with lefties.

(2) That said, there is an aspect of the Rhetoric-vs.-Dialectic dichotomy that should be tweaked. It comes from this observation:

The thing that makes leftists enraged at me is when I use facts to refute their claims.

When they call me a racist and I call them douchebags or whatever, they just laconically call me a racist again or whatever. But when they say that rapes have been steadily increasing over the last two decades, and then I link to an FBI page showing that in fact they’ve been dropping during a large part of that time, I get sheer hatred in response. The level of rage spikes. It goes from a phoned-in “You’re racist (yawn)” to “You goddam motherfucking shit-eating sub-human bucket of puke!!!” So judging by their reactions, they actually are more sensitive to their lies being dialectically proven false than one would think, if one thinks of leftists as being pure rhetoric-bots.

This is not a call to abandon the RvD distinction – as I said, it’s quite useful – but we need to sort out a little more carefully the way it works empirically. Yeah, most leftists are more rhetoric than dialectic, but they are also sensitive to the propaganda value of their outright lies about matters of fact. They know that refuting their lies is a devastating thing you can do to them and they freak out when you do.

I think the key distinction is this: While they don’t care about the truth, they are aware that there are people who do care. So they freak when you definitively refute their lies.

Other thoughts:

(3) The main forum in which I participate has an option to Ignore another poster (i.e., so that his posts are hidden from you) and there are ways to tell when someone has Ignored someone else. Lefties tend to put people on Ignore not when those people insult the lefties, but when they refute the leftists’ claims using facts. Call a leftist a douchebag, and it’s very unlikely that he’ll put you on Ignore. Basically never happens. Refute his cherished assertions about racism or sexism or whatever, and you stand a small but non-trivial chance of being Ignored. Obviously this is related to point (2).

So this buttresses my foregoing point, that lefties are Rhetoric in that they’re more focused on that compared to righties. But they’re not totally blind and deaf to Dialectic; they have enough awareness of it to realize when their important propaganda points are being proven false, and to feel the threat. As Anonymous Conservative would say, it triggers their amygdalae.

(4) A significant fraction of them are absolute pussies – they attack you only after others have started attacking you. This is fascinating to observe. There are lefties who basically never interact with me, who, if two or three other lefties come at me, will suddenly swarm in and add their own little insults. It’s rare to be attacked by just two or three lefties; usually if it’s two or three, it’s instantly five or six. They really are cowardly swarm attackers by nature. And this is so instinctual that it affects their behavior even in an Internet forum in which we can’t physically attack each other, so there’s no meaningful danger. The only-attack-when-others-are-attacking thing is not based on threat assessment. It’s reflexive; it’s how they’re wired. That rabbity herd instinct is a huge deal with these people.

See my post SJW Mobs and Coordination Mechanisms. It is, of course, the same behavior by the same kind of person.

Another way this herd mentality manifests is the oft-observed fact that when they really want to crush you, they tell you that you’re out of step with the herd. This is blazingly obvious projection. You cite some statistic from the Census Bureau, and their response (if it isn’t “You shit-bag!”) is “Everyone else disagrees with you!” It’s obvious that they regard this as the nuclear bomb of debate. They think it’s a crusher. Of course, it doesn’t affect our tribe at all, since we care about truth, not staying in step with the herd. So we’re just baffled. I was mystified for years whenever I encountered this line from leftists, to the point that I wondered if they were actually making some other, more subtle point that I was missing. Nope. Nothing subtle here; it’s just what it seems to be on the surface: They expect you to care about what the herd says, not about reality. Bizarre.

Notice that both tribes generally misunderstand each other: We tried for fifty years to sway them using logic and facts, and have been puzzled and irritated that it all just bounced off them with no effect. No doubt they’ve been just as mystified that they keep telling us that we’re out of step with the herd (whether that’s true or not), without any effect on us.

Canadian Parent Wants Baby’s Sex Omitted From Birth Certificate

Canadian infant Searyl Doty used remorselessly for parent’s attention whoring:


God, this poor kid. The “parent” is some sort of gender-unspecified dumpster fire, and at first one can’t discern if it’s male or female. However, it’s eventually stated (see below) that the “parent” gave birth to the child, so the parent is a woman. If you check out some photos online, though, she has facial hair. She’s obviously undergoing some sort of hormone therapy to get that. Sick fuck. The photos of… her … are really disturbing. To see her holding a baby is horrifying. She should not legally be allowed within 50 miles of a baby.

This narcissistic asshole is going to fuck up her kid for life just so she can get five seconds of positive attention from other SJWs. Jesus, what the fuck is wrong with these people?

In one link (which I can’t find again) the parent said, “I don’t know Searyl’s gender, they haven’t told me yet.”


God, I thought the 1990s were Heinlein’s Crazy Years. I really did.

Remember how completely sane the 1990s were, in retrospect? It didn’t seem like it at the time, what with “President” Bill Clinton shoving a cigar into Monica Lewinsky’s vagina in the Oval Office and so on, but in retrospect all that stuff was solid, good old-fashioned sanity.

From The Blaze:

Canadian parent Kori Doty, who identifies as a walking cloud of mustard gas “non-binary trans person,” is fighting to make newborn baby Searyl Atli the first to be registered as “gender unknown.” Doty wants to allow Searyl to decide his or her sex, CBC News reported.

Doty identifies as neither male nor female, preferring the pronoun “they,” and wants Searyl, whose sex has not been entered into any government records, to have the same option. Doty gave birth to Searyl at a friend’s home last November.

So the parent is a female. In some technical sense.

So far, Doty said British Columbia is refusing to issue Searyl a birth certificate with no sex listed. The province has, however, issued the child’s health cards with a “U” for “undetermined” or “unassigned,” so Searyl would have access to medical services.

Doty’s lawyer, barbara findley, who refuses to spell her name with capital letters…

These people defy satire.

…said British Columbia allows for only male and female designations on birth certificates…

“When I was born,” Doty explained, “doctors looked at my genitals and made assumptions about who I would be, and those assignments followed me and followed my identification throughout my life.

“I’m obviously completely fucking insane,” she added, “and plainly I belong in a mental hospital.”

Okay, I may have made that last part up.

According to findley, the government does not need to know the child’s sex.

“Certainly, our culture is obsessed with [if a baby is] a boy or a girl, but the government doesn’t have any business certifying that information when they don’t know it to be true,” findley said.

I know it’s been said before, and I’m sorry to belabor the obvious, but the western world has become the asylum of the planet.

– – – Postcript – – –
By the way, while the news is almost 100% bad, it’s not entirely bad. There is one actual silver lining here, and one possible silver lining:

(1) Actual silver lining: Every incident like this advances the average person’s realization of how insane the left is. This can only help the right politically.

(2) Possible silver lining: If this push for genderless ID prevails – I hope it doesn’t, because sanity, but if it does – it deprives the state of a key piece of info about people. This sets a good precedent, now that the surveillance state is one of our biggest concerns. Also, when children under such a regime get old enough, it can have good consequences. E.g.: Should an 18-year-old be forced to register for the draft? If the state doesn’t even know if you’re male, how can it enforce this? (And if everyone has to register, that will make the average woman less amped about “equality,” which is also good, but I digress…) And it can only confuse SJW attackers about whether false rape accusations should be taken seriously. When the anti-male institutions can’t tell if you’re a man or a woman, they can’t tell whether to assume you’re guilty of a BS sexual assault accusation, or to assume you’re innocent. Obviously this isn’t foolproof, but anything that muddies the waters helps.

CNN Sticks its Dick into the Beehive

CNN threatens to dox the person who came up with the “Trump slams CNN” vid meme. (See my previous post if you just got back from a trip to Ophiuchus.) Notably, they didn’t dox him and reveal the info or dox him and not reveal the info. They doxxed him and threatened to reveal the info in the future if he did anything they didn’t like. This is at least morally disgusting, punching down, bullying, and thuggish, and it is quite possibly legally actionable blackmail and/or extortion. It seems to me the guy would have a good case on at least the blackmail charge.

This was their attempt to say, “We’re tough guys, and you don’t dare mess with us!”

As a result, of course, seemingly the entire right-wing Internet started creating “beat down CNN” memes. For example, the Hulk/Loki scene from The Avengers, Trump/CNN style.

Jafrillions more are available elsewhere and more being created at a rate of a zillion per second. My humble contribution:

MemeShotgunEditThe entire Net, including left-wing commenters, has lit up with revulsion at CNN’s thuggishness. The hashtag CNNBlackmail hit Number 1 in the world on Twitter.

Here are some articles:

‘#CNNBlackmail’ trending No. 1 on Twitter

#CNNBlackmail: Outrage after network appears to threaten Reddit user

‘CNNBlackMail’ #1 Twitter Trend As Network Threatens to Reveal Reddit User’s Identity

CNN does not even understand the kind of war it’s in.

Contemplate the sheer stupidity and incompetence: CNN is apparently a media organization that has never heard of the Streisand Effect.

They’re literally that stupid.

As of this writing, all public-facing CNN Twitter accounts have gone silent and the offending page has been blanked.

From one of Vox Popoli’s posts on the imbroglio, Alice De Goon in the comments:

“Could CNN have stuck their dick any further into the beehive?”

I don’t know, but they’re probably trying.

SJWs Eat their Own, Parts 2,307,115 and 2,307,116

People of tolerance: Gay Pride Marchers With Jewish Flags Told To Leave Chicago Parade.

The excuse the anti-semitic leftists used was that Jewish flags made people feel “unsafe.”

In related news, Gay pride marches disrupted by minorities accusing white gays of racism:

Gay pride marches in New York City, San Francisco and in between this weekend will have plenty of participants — and also protests directed at them from other members of the LGBT community, speaking out against what they see as… celebrations that prioritize the experiences of gay white men and ignore issues facing black and brown LGBT people.

The protests disrupted other pride events earlier this month. In Washington, D.C., the No Justice No Pride group blocked the parade route. In Columbus, Ohio, four people were arrested after a group set out to protest violence against minority LGBT people…

“The real test will be, can the LGBT movement own up to its historic legacy of racism and evolve to be more accountable and inclusive of people of color?” Minter, a transgender man, wondered.

In unrelated news, scientists have recently discovered that if you put a number of temperamentally quarrelsome creatures who seek conflict, such as fighting fish, in the same tank, they fight with each other.

Funny Quote on SJWs

It’s funny because it’s true. Cataline Sergius at The Dark Herald:

Come on did you think the Hivemind would give up after we won GamerGate? It can’t give up because it’s not actually sapient. Think of it as mosquito determined to get through the netting and feast on what it protects. Mosquitoes don’t get bored and have no memory of past events. They have nothing better to do than to keep trying. The SJW Hivemind is no different.

Feel the Irony, Bitchez – Long, Deep, and Hard

Lately, faculty at colleges and universities have begun to be alarmed at their students’ contempt for freedom of speech and increasing thuggishness.

Here is just a small set of examples:

1) SJW thugs run amok at Evergreen State College in Washington:

“Bret Weinstein is a biology professor at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash., who supported Bernie Sanders, admiringly retweets Glenn Greenwald and was an outspoken supporter of the Occupy Wall Street movement.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Mr. Weinstein, who identifies himself as ‘deeply progressive,’ is just the kind of teacher that students at one of the most left-wing colleges in the country would admire. Instead, he has become a victim of an increasingly widespread campaign by leftist students.”

2) Allison Stanger, a self-described liberal professor at Middlebury College, was assaulted by leftist students when she tried to have a debate with Charles Murray. She suffered from whiplash and a concussion due to the attack. The fact that she was going to be debating him – “to grill” him, in her words – didn’t save her from the left-wing hate mob.

3) A black movie professor and self-described feminist was driven from academia by her students, a bunch of snowflake fascists who interpreted just about everything in her class as trauma-inducing.

4) At Reason, the title says it all: Reed College Professor on Social Justice Left: “I Am a Gay Mixed-Race Woman. I Am Intimidated By These Students”
The sub-heading: Queer, leftist professors and filmmakers are afraid of being sent to the guillotine by self-professed radical students.

In that article a professor says,

I am intimidated by these students. I am scared to teach courses on race, gender, or sexuality, or even texts that bring these issues up in any way—and I am a gay mixed-race woman. There is a serious problem here… and I’m at a loss as to how to begin to address it, especially since many of these students don’t believe in either historicity or objective facts. (They denounce the latter as being a tool of the white cisheteropatriarchy.)

Who taught them that, morons? YOU DID! You leftist college professors did, for decades! Now the inevitable consequences have arrived. What the hell did you think would happen when you taught students that objective facts are a tool of the white patriarchy? That they’d respect your claims about objective facts? You thought they’d never turn on you because… what, exactly? Because you’re so wonderful? Because the students you’ve trained to be aggressive confrontational thugs would exercise self-restraint? Oooooooops!

Two professors chatting on a college campus circa 1990:
“Let’s create an utterly amoral hate mob. That can only end well, right?”
“Yeah, what could go wrong?”


A liberal can be defined as someone who is so stupid that after they spend a quarter-century teaching students that facts are a tool of the heteropatriarchy, they are surprised when their students tell them that facts are a tool of the heteropatriarchy. A liberal can be defined as someone who is so stupid that after they spend decades arguing that the idea of freedom of speech is just a rhetorical trap of institutionalized power, they are surprised when their students try to silence them, and justify it by saying that the idea of freedom of speech is just a rhetorical trap of institutionalized power.

There is literally no limit to the stupidity of leftists. It goes on and on, forever. Spinoza was only a little off when he said that to grasp infinity, one need only contemplate the extent of human stupidity. He should have said, the extent of leftist stupidity, and he would have been spot on. It’s a little-known fact that when Georg Cantor was developing the foundations of transfinite mathematics, he used the stupidity of leftists as motivating examples.

But it gets better.

If you’ve been to college in the last few decades, you know that a significant fraction of lefty professors have this famous passage about Nazi Germany on their office doors:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

How many of these leftist profs who were happy when the hate mob was going after conservatives have this on their office doors? How many will perceive the irony now that the mob is after them? Hell, never mind the irony; how many of them will even realize that they are in that scenario?

Not to worry, though, lefties! We conservatives and libertarians will now spend a lot of time and energy defending your right to BWAHHHHHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

No, sorry. You spent decades carefully crafting this shit sandwich.

You are now going to eat it.




An Insight about SJW Psychology

I just realized something in the wake of the child-targeting Ariana Grande murders. It’s an answer to this baffling question:

Why do SJWs in the Western world double down on immigration every time there’s a Religion of Peace bombing?

I mean, aside from the fact that they’re just fucking evil.

There’s another reason, and it’s an implication of the oft-noted fact that SJWs see concessions as a weakness, which for them is a signal for a redoubled attack… so they assume we would react the same way!!!

They don’t understand that our psychology is totally different from theirs: If they, the SJWs, make the invader problem go away we’ll stop fighting them. At least, we’ll stop fighting them on the immigration front. Why would we continue to fight if the reason for the fighting has vanished? Why would we continue to fight if the problem has been solved? That would make no sense. At least, that’s how a healthy, sane person thinks.

But that is not at all how SJWs think or emote or react. They are by nature mindless attack-bots. Their existence isn’t much but a search for targets to attack. They see any concession as blood in the water, which for them is a signal for an attack swarm. So, in the assumption that we’re like them, they are either scared to moderate their positions, or they think they’re showing “strength” by not moderating them. Or both.

This explains their utterly bizarre insistence on doubling down on the immigration invasion after every terror attack, even when it’s plainly hurting them politically. Look what happened with Brexit, the US election of 2016, and the recent Italian vote: The Left took damaging hits because they wouldn’t just moderate their freakin’ positions! But they see moderating their positions as baring their throats to our knives.

Oh no no no, you stupid idiots. It’s NOT moderating your positions that is baring your throats to our knives. Is this really not obvious? If you put me and my family, friends, and nation in mortal peril, I don’t have much choice but to fight you. And I have nothing to lose by fighting you, since everything I value will be gone if you win. If you’d just quit it, I’d have no incentive to fight you, and I’d just go have a beer.

For fuck’s sake, morons, just think about it: You know that – until we learned better recently – people on my side would often apologize and make concessions in the face of attacks by your side. If we thought like you, we wouldn’t have done that. After all, you don’t. This proves that our psychology is different from yours.

You might as well try abandoning the invasion thing and going to something else, like environmentalism. Surely, even people as crazy as you can see where this is headed if you don’t back off.