Patience with Crybabies.

I am not a naturally patient fellow. I keep a sword beneath the bar-top. My Supplier often sends me little notes with the ales and wines and Spirits, reminding me to 'be nice: be kind; Love your fellows'. I am often in need of the advice. For we live in crybaby times and tantrum-throwing brainwashed folk seem to be the only growth population around, demanding this and that and throwing their toys around - and damaging many of our precious possessions. Statues, peaceful streets, even long standing living arrangements are all under attack. 

Would that being patient was a job for which we could be paid for our practice. But wait, it was once for me. I could sit and patiently listen to the most awful drivel and gently help the driveller to examine their thinking and emotions and behaviours, and point them toward a different and altogether more satisfactory way of living.  All they had to do was cease damaging themselves and all around them. I was paid handsomely by the hour and had a deep well of patience to draw from. 

But that was then and now I run a Tavern, dispensing fine Ale. 

We had a couple of folk in today giving their views on how to go about the task, unpaid. It was particularly useful advice too, and aimed at that medium we all share these days, the internet, with its squabbles and folk of varied competence, maturity and intelligence, and the lack of such qualities all in all too many.

Jim Goad, was all for goading. He put patience in second place to action.  Dereck Hunter was one for showing how it was  done in a specific instance, from which we can all learn. He talked about a fine man - Mike Rowe - and how he dealt with a  tantruming crybaby.

I do have an issue though with Dereck's overview, about which I will say something when he speaks.

First though, Jim. He quite rightly sees that most of the crybabies dominating the scenery outside the Tavern's hedges, have been brainwashed in Hilary's Village. It is a village which supplies other villages with Idiots. And Witches. Almost universally in our society they are 'leftists'.  Leftards. Those that are not, once they go through 'grown-ups learning centres' - which used to be called Universities - they are brainwashed into being Lefties. And often very nasty ones too.

How to Deal With the Brainwashed

I awoke this morning to the creaking sound of the Western mind closing shut. 

I felt it squeezing in on me like a car crusher. Public discourse is more controlled and political dissent more squashed than at any point in memory. 

Try as I may, all the evidence suggests we are on the brink of an ideological Dark Age the likes of which America [indeed the westen and Anglophile civilisation] has never seen. It seems we’re only inches away from living in a world where stating the obvious will be criminalized.

Online, the chief enablers of this situation are the smirking young progtards, who are unwilling to even touch any viewpoint that hasn’t been spoon-fed to them in school or beamed into their eyeballs via TV. 

 http://takimag.com/article/how_to_deal_with_the_brainwashed_jim_goad/print#ixzz3BKJhEnY4

Their brains have never hatched a single original idea in their lives. They are mere hollow carriers of infectious ideas, not so much Trojan horses as little pink Trojan ponies.

The modern young leftist is a weak, wretched, psychotic creature, at once nasty and cowardly. Notice how these bespectacled, bearded nerdlings didn’t have one shred of bravado until they had the full weight of the government, media, and academia on their side. They are the sort of cowards who were terrified to make a peep until it was absolutely risk-free. They are extremely bold—at least behind a keyboard—until directly confronted when there’s no crowd around to protect them. A lone earthworm has more spine than any hundred of them.

“They are immune to logic as if they’ve been vaccinated against it—so go for their emotions.”

Bandwagon-riders that they are, they tell everyone who doesn’t think in lockstep with them to “Get with the times,” which is a dishonest way of saying, “Be a conformist like I am.” Hence their smugness as they tilt at windmills that were destroyed generations ago. They are still deluded that they are fighting the power rather than working for it—often without pay or benefits.

It’s one thing to be unwittingly brainwashed, yet quite another to assent to one’s brainwashing once it’s been made clear. These hateful little f**kers are defiantly brainwashed, and whether it’s cognitive dissonance or doublethink or pathological lying, they’ve made it impossible to rationally engage with them. Believe me, I’ve tried. For decades. Honestly. Foolishly.

It took decades for me to realize I was dealing with fundamentally dishonest people. 

I naively thought I could politely discuss ideas with people for whom “reason” is a dirty word. But you can’t debate the brainwashed. Their cognitive dissonance is too powerful. The truth doesn’t matter to them at all. This is why, in nearly all cases, they will flee from the gentlest offer of an earnest discussion.

Only when they are charged a modest fee will they sit still. Even then it takes patience, simply waiting for the lights to go on. Their wheel turns but their hamster is dead. The generator has stopped. Then, of course, they will take the pay of any super-wrecker that has deep pockets.

There is to be no debate. There is a reason they won’t engage, and it is not because they are certain they are correct. Censors are motivated by insecurity in their own beliefs, but they are not remotely honest enough to admit it.

Their holy cause is all that matters to them, and they feel they’ve already established—or, rather, declared—that the cause is unassailable. And anyone who challenges the cause must be vilified. So they don’t ever engage in debate, only vilification.

To be a modern leftist is to embrace a constellation of lies. 

They eat lies as if they were corn flakes. Leftism is based on a false premise, and all political systems whose roots are planted in quicksand will inevitably sink into totalitarianism. They start with one flawed premise—equality, which is a laughably obvious lie—and embrace it as an untouchable truth. And they will tell a billion other lies to protect that main lie.

You’ve heard the lies again and again:

*There’s a clear line between free speech and hate speech.

*Rape has nothing to do with sex.

*If you dislike something that we like, you suffer a mental disorder known as a phobia.

*Race doesn’t exist, but racism is ubiquitous.

*Evolution is real, but somehow, inequality isn’t.

*There is no such thing as an anti-white hate crime or anti-white racism.

*Whites are the only group in world history that has ever been ethnocentric.

*The nations and peoples who were colonized were peaceful and advanced, and it’s not as if they would have been colonialists themselves if only they’d had the technology and organizational prowess.

*Conformity is a sign of virtue rather than weakness.

*Women can’t be every bit as nasty and violent as men.

*Homosexuality is genetic and has nothing to do with possible childhood sexual trauma.

*Children need to be taught to be racist, which is why, um, we spend so much time teaching them not to be racist.

*We want equality rather than power.

*Two wrongs make a right; in fact, it’s known as “justice.”

*We are open-minded atheistic humanists, which is why anyone who disagrees with us is a subhuman piece of shit who needs to rot in hell.

As the saying goes, the first casualty in war is truth. These little creeps have clearly shown that they feel no compunction to play fair. Leftists are fighting as if they’re in a war, and they’re acting as if they smell blood. 

They interpret your fairness as weakness. 

If you don’t even realize that someone has declared war against you, you’re probably going to lose that war. But you can’t win a boxing match when your opponent is swinging a mallet.

People who accuse you of being insincere unwittingly reveal a lot about themselves. Same goes for those who accuse you of being hate-filled. Or of being intolerant. 

I noticed his Patience reserves were being tapped. I anticipated that he'd soon be out of it altogether. I took steps. 

Psychological projection is the currency of the hysterical moralist.

People usually play their hand by attacking you with whatever line of attack would work best on them. 

If their consistent MO is to lob one ad hominem Molotov cocktail after another at you, that’s a tacit admission that they fear nothing more than public humiliation. 

By dictating the rules of the game, they unwittingly let you know precisely what it would take to beat them.

They are immune to logic as if they’ve been vaccinated against it—so go for their emotions. Mock them. Endlessly mock them. Publicly mock them. Take their cancerous hatred—which they’re openly projecting onto you—and smash them back in the face with it. They’re begging for it. They are only being relentless because you’ve been too nice. Despite how boldly they act, they are obviously horrified of their own shadows.

I was obliged to pull a long pint of cooling Ale for him at this point, just to reduce the heat. "Now, now", I said. "Be a nice gentleman".

They’re going to call you a “hater” anyway, so you might as well blow off some steam at their expense. Sure, you may have a compulsion to drag them out into the streets and beat them toothless, but that would only validate their fantasies and get you arrested. 

No, do what they do—only harder. Humiliate them. Publicly. 

Point out that they are hate-filled, intolerant liars. 

Toss that bomb right back at them where it belongs.

So many—if not all—of them are obviously reacting against childhood bullying. [Really?] And even though no one has dared bully them for years, they can’t seem to let it go. So bully them back with such soul-crushing gusto, they’ll start praying that they were back in high-school gym class. Tie them in pretzel knots made of their emotions.

All it takes to blind them is to hold a mirror in their face. This way they’ll know that when confronted, they were the ones who blinked. Never let them forget that.

This is why they will hate you far more than they did when they first picked this fight. It is also why you will win.

I would not go so far as to advocate running away. By all means remove yourself from brain-dead company unless they are paying you handsomely for your good office and patience, and have an intent of recovery,  but otherwise do not risk infection. 

No. One has to confront. 

Chose how to with care though.

Dereck showed how it can be done but leads with an unsound initial description. A tad too 'clickbaity' for me. His  claim for 'destroying' a person is not quite a lie as an exaggeration too far. 

Mendacious bravado. 

Resist that.

The aim is not to 'destroy' an opponent. They bring the fight to you but your job is to defend yourself and your fellows, defeat and send the attacker to the King. 

That is, to Him Up Top. 

If you are to destroy someone, use a sword or a double-tap with a small ballistic weapon of your choice, or a long one under #Rule 303. I am anticipating quite a bit of that in the coming few years.

But responding to attacks in the media requires some candid and firm retort, replete with Truth. It should be designed to 'right' the wrong rather than double-wrong it. It should be to take the attacker's argument down and him down a peg or three, not cut his legs off.

So, to Dereck and his example of Mr Mike Rowe: a first-class Knight.

Mike Rowe Absolutely Destroys Guy Who Accuses Him Of Being A White Nationalist

 “Dirty Jobs” host Mike Rowe had some choice words Tuesday night in response to a question he got accusing him of harboring “white nationalist” sympathies.

Rowe posted a question submitted to him on his Facebook page that accused the TV host’s advocacy for the skilled trades of amounting to anti-intellectualism, and therefore racism.

 http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/23/mike-rowe-absolutely-destroys-guy-who-accuses-him-of-being-a-white-nationalist/?utm_source=site-share

A man named Chuck Adkins asked, 

“One of the tenants of white nationalism is that college educated people are academic elitests. Comment? No? I’m not surprised. You never take a political stand because you don’t want to alienate anybody. Its bad for business. I get it. But there is a current of anti intellectualism in this country – promoted by Republicans. Those people love you, and they think your initiative is their initiative. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is kickin our ass academically.”

Rowe, a popular jovial TV personality, went off in a long, brutal response.

“Since we’re being candid, allow me to say how much I dislike your post. Everything about it annoys me – your smug and snarky tone, your appalling grammar, your complete lack of evidence to support your claims, and of course, the overarching logical fallacy that informs your entire position,” Rowe wrote. 

“What really bugs me though, is the fact that you’re not entirely wrong. It’s true; I haven’t shared any political opinions this week, in part anyway, because doing so might very well be ‘bad for business.'”

“What can I say? I work for half-a-dozen different companies, none of whom pay me to share my political opinions. I run a non-partisan foundation, I’m about to launch a new show on Facebook, and I’m very aware that celebrities pay a price for opening their big fat gobs. Gilbert Gottfried, Kathy Griffin, Colin Kaepernick, Milo Yiannopoulos…even that guy from Google who just got himself fired for mouthing off. There’s no getting around it – the first amendment does not guarantee the freedom to speak without consequences. And really, that’s fine by me,” he continued.

“So no – I’m not going to share my personal feelings about Charlottesville, President Trump, or the current effort to remove thousands of statues of long dead soldiers from the public square. Not just because it’s ‘bad for business,’ but because it’s annoying. 

I can’t think of a single celebrity whose political opinion I value, and I’m not going to assume the country feels any differently about mine,” 

Rowe wrote. “So, rather than blow myself up, or chime in with all the obvious observations about the cowardly scum in the pointy hats, I’m going to talk instead about my belief that comments like yours pose a far greater threat to the future of our country than the existence of a memorial to Thomas Jefferson, or a monument to George Washington. Ready?”

Then Rowe started in on Adkins’ insinuations.

“You say that White Nationalists believe that everyone who goes to college is an ‘academic elite.’ You then say that Republicans promote ‘anti-intellectualism.’ You offer no proof to support either claim, but it really doesn’t matter – your statements successfully connect two radically different organizations by alleging a shared belief,” Rowe said. “Thus, White Nationalists and The Republican Party suddenly have something in common – a contempt for higher education. Then, you make it personal. You say that Republicans “love” me because they believe that my initiative and ‘their’ initiative are one and the same. But of course, ‘their’ initiative is now the same initiative as White Nationalists.”

He continued “Very clever. Without offering a shred of evidence, you’ve implied that Republicans who support mikeroweWORKS do so because they believe I share their disdain for all things ‘intellectual.’ And poof – just like that, Republicans, White Nationalists, and mikeroweWORKS are suddenly conflated, and the next thing you know, I’m off on a press tour to disavow rumors of my troubling association with the Nazis!”

“Far-fetched? Far from it,” Rowe continued. 

“That’s how logical fallacies work. 

A flaw in reasoning or a mistaken belief undermines the logic of a conclusion, often leading to real-world consequences. And right now, logical fallacies are not limited to the warped beliefs of morons with tiki torches, and other morons calling for ‘more dead cops.’ Logical fallacies are everywhere.”

Not near done, Rowe wrote, “As I type this, a Democrat on CNN is making an argument that says, ‘because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, those Republicans now opposed to tearing down his memorial are ‘pro-slavery,’ and therefore aligned with the modern day KKK.’ That’s a logical fallacy.

“Over on Fox, a Republican is arguing that ‘any Democrat who has not yet condemned the Senator from Missouri for publicly wishing that Donald Trump be assassinated, is guilty of wishing for the exact same thing.’ That’s a logical fallacy.

“Yesterday, on The Science Channel, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, a noted astronomer, tweeted that the ability of scientists to accurately predict the solar eclipse, was proof that predictions of global warming were also accurate. That’s a logical fallacy.”

Then Rowe turned the tables on his accuser, continuing, “Want to hear another one? Imagine something like this, unfolding over on MSNBC.

“‘Good Evening, America, our top story tonight… Chuck Atkins is a racist! Why? Because he can’t spell. Just look at his grammar! In a recent post on Mike Rowe’s Facebook page, Mr. Atkins, while bemoaning America’s global academic standing, not only misspelled ‘elitist,’ he used ‘tenants’ when he meant ‘tenets.’ He neglected to use a hyphen in ‘anti-intellectual,’ and he misplaced several commas and apostrophes! But why is he a racist, you ask? Simple. Because everyone knows racists are ignorant. Chuck Atkins is clearly a poor speller. Poor spelling and grammar are signs of ignorance. Ergo – Chuck Atkins is a racist! Boom! The matter is settled!”

“There’s not much we can do about the news, but here on Facebook, I think we can do better. This isn’t Twitter,” Rowe said. “We’re not limited to a few inflammatory sentences and a flurry of emojis.

Now here is where the Good Knight attempts to send the defeated foe to his King.  

Take a moment, Chuck. Think. Make a rational argument. Otherwise, just link us to a cat video. People love those, and they’re almost never ‘bad for business.’ (Unless of course, the cat gets hurt. People hate that.) Just don’t assume that people will care about your beliefs, if you’re not willing to back them up with some relevant facts and a rational conclusion. Here, for instance, are a few facts that matter to me, with respect to my foundation and the recurring charge of ‘fostering anti-intellectualism.'”

Rowe then defended his charitable work, writing:

 “mikeroweWORKS is a PR campaign for the skilled trades. For the last nine years, we’ve partnered with numerous trade schools, raised millions of dollars for work-ethic scholarships, and called attention to millions of jobs that don’t require a four-year degree. But that doesn’t mean we’re ‘anti-intellectual.’ We’re not even ‘anti-college.’ We simply reject the popular notion that a four-year degree is the best path for the most people. 

And we’re hardly alone.

“Millions of reasonable people – Republicans and Democrats alike – are worried that our universities are doing a poor job of preparing students for the real world. 

They’re worried about activist professors, safe spaces, the rising cost of tuition, a growing contempt for history, and a simmering disregard of the first amendment. 

These people are concerned that our universities – once beacons of free speech – now pander to a relatively small percentage of students who can’t tolerate any political opinion that challenges their own. And they’re concerned – deeply concerned – that millions of good jobs are currently vacant that don’t require a four-year degree, or any of the catastrophic debt that comes with it.”

Returning to the original attack, Rowe concluded, “Again – these are not the concerns of ‘anti-intellectuals.’ 

They are the concerns of people who care about the future of the country. 

I don’t know how many of these people are Republicans, but I can assure you that no one who actually supports my initiative is remotely confused about my feelings on education, because I’ve been crystal clear on that topic from the very beginning. To quote Thomas Jefferson, (while I still can,) ‘If a nation expects to be ignorant and free and live in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.’ On this point, my foundation does not equivocate.

“In other words, Chuck, I have no idea what The White Nationalists think about my efforts, or the Republicans, the Democrats, the elitists, the Italians, the Presbyterians, the unions, or the self-proclaimed anti-intellectuals. And really, I couldn’t care less. My question is, why do you? 

Mike”

After his long rant, Rowe added two postscripts to lighten the mood a bit.

“PS. Ok, I’ve just re-read this, (in a desperate search for typos,) and I want to apologize for pointing out that you’re a lousy speller. This is probably not the time to trot out The Grammar Nazi, but your tenor and tone pissed me off, and I responded in my own snarky way. Sorry,” he wrote.

“PPS Maybe this is how political correctness begins? Maybe we start by correcting each other’s grammar, and then move on to the business of correcting everything else? Today a missing hyphen, tomorrow a missing monument. Or, maybe not,” he concluded.

I think we can all take lessons from that.

Read it all again. Patiently. Don't rush like you just did.

Drink deep.

Pax.