The rant I love đź’—

SJWs, beware!

Jim Goad, in the first chapter of The New Church Ladies: The Extremely Uptight World of Social Justice: “You’re wound so tightly, I can hear you squeaking. For fuck’s sake, how self-righteous and hypocritical do you have to get before the mass of us who aren’t nearly so self-righteous stand up and start shouting back? The supposedly “intolerant” people have been way too tolerant of your endless tantrums. You are ALWAYS getting offended. You spend every waking moment—and possibly most of your dream life—offended. I remember when the young’uns were the LAST to get offended, but now you’re the most easily offended people on the planet. Get a grip, you little totalitarians, or the backlash is going to give you diaper rash.” I do love this, and it’s so true; I’ve wondered the same thing, why do we take it? In my case, I blog to educate and provoke them-their choice. But for most Americans, I imagine the spirit of “let them have their opinions, I don’t care” is the reason. If you read my last post-An Argument Clinic-what did I say is the necessary precondition for rational debate? It’s a sincere desire to get to the truth of an issue. Mutual understanding is also part of that; if a proposition is true for one person but not the other, what has your debate accomplished?

If you aren’t a just another simple, lowly, brainwashed, drearily predictable zombie witch-hunter and sincerely want to understand what makes me tick, the first thing you must accept is that I’m fundamentally antisocial and never, ever, ever, ever, EVER go with the crowd, no matter what crowd it is. I figure that wherever the crowd is standing at any given moment, they arrived there for entirely the wrong reasons. Wherever a crowd has gathered, there’s never enough space for me.” That’s me also, though I don’t call it antisocial, I call it discerning.

Accordingly, I’ve had a lifelong affinity for heretics rather than for high priests. These days, “racist” is the favorite smear word for the ideologically intolerant. I think the term itself is silly and ultimately meaningless, but it’s not a word that scares me like it appears to cause testicles to leap out of nutsacks and hit the floor running nationwide. But my interrogators—or, just as often, my accusers—hardly ever seem to be looking for explanations. They don’t even seem to know the difference between scientific inquiry and the Spanish Inquisition. Rather, they seem hell-bent on using a rusty knife to pry open my cold heart like a stubborn oyster shell to discover the boundlessly irrational primal HATE they are certain throbs inside. True believers that they are, they take it as an article of faith that evil lurks within the hearts of those who don’t think like they do, and goddamnit, they’re going to find it whether it’s there or not. Never once have I done or said anything that directly harmed a single black person, yet somehow I’m still made to bear the presumption of eternally indelible inter-generational collective guilt—talk about a goofball social construct! And I still don’t understand how pointing out such daffily pseudo-religious inconsistencies makes me the worst kind of human being possible rather than someone who calls bullshit when he sees it.” True, true. Okay, end of this rant. This is only selected passages from the first chapter, and I am looking forward to the rest of 200 pages.

The BIG problem with letting the hippo-mouthed SJWs air their opinions unchallenged is they get the mistaken idea that those who disagree with them are passive enough that won’t oppose their agenda. Unfortunately, more rational people will wait too long to oppose; they interpret they dictum “pick your battles” to mean wait for the perfect opportunity, which means waiting, waiting, uh oh, the camel’s is inside the tent, ass first. The conflict between different approaches for answering a fool according to his folly is summed up in the following Proverbs: “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.” Proverbs 26:4-5. I think what Solomon meant was, don’t shout back at the fool–that’s what a fool does. Instead, disarm the fools’ idiotic ideas with your own blog….or something like that.

 

Author: iamcurmudgeon

When I began this blog, I was a 70 year old man, with a young mind and a body trying to recover from a stroke, and my purpose for this whole blog thing is to provoke thinking, to ridicule reflex reaction, and provide a legacy to my children.

2 thoughts on “The rant I love đź’—”

  1. “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.” Proverbs 26:4-5. I think what Solomon meant was, don’t shout back at the fool–that’s what a fool does. Instead, disarm the fools’ idiotic ideas with your own blog….or something like that.

    Amen! Beautifully stated. Don’t throw bombs back, but aggressively provide the succinct, reasoned, firm, unafraid, unyielding truth in response to his folly.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Robert B Andrews Cancel 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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s