While I never planned any kind of series of videos out from the beginning, I do have a video in the works which seems to progress right from my previous one, which progressed from the previous as well–all this business of social justice psyops and globalist exploitation of emotional non-arguments has really struck a chord with me. This post is something I want to cover briefly before continuing though, and that is a particular way in which the deceptive and manipulative left will dismiss the points of their opponents.
As any of us know, facts alone are just the foundation of an argument; the real argument itself is one that employs logic to interpret facts and draw a conclusion. I’ll say it again: facts are not conclusions in and of themselves, they are indeed usually only observational. But as soon as you attempt to draw a real conclusion, even when it is one based in fact, leftists have a tendency to shoot back “That’s just your opinion.” To illustrate: After telling a liberal that people simply vote in accordance to reproductive strategies, hence whites and married, white women voting Conservative while non-whites and single, white women vote Democrat, he told me that in fact “Students, teachers, and young people” vote Democrat while the “Rich and the uneducated” vote Conservative. Assuming that what he proposed was factual, I stated that this is because people who are young and/or in academia do not typical act in accordance with their reproductive strategy because they are not yet fully developed (that is, under the age of 25 and thus not interested in family creation; this is the age demographic that has consistently voted in favor of the Labour Party in the UK for example), or do not need to compete for resources (in the latter case); meanwhile those who do not subsist on student loans or tenure and instead go into the workforce are competing for resources and thinking of their future prospects, hence they vote in accordance to reproductive strategies. So you see what I’ve done here: I have not interviewed 100,000 Americans and asked them “Are you voting in accordance to your ancestral reproductive habits this year?”, I’ve simply taken the facts and employed logic to draw a conclusion based on my hypothesis proposed earlier. Of course he dismissed this as just being my opinion.
In epistemology there are what can be labeled as three acts of mind. These are generally defined as Apprehension, followed by Judgment, and then by Reasoning. In judging what is truthful:
- What is clear and unambiguous: what terms have been sensed and defined?
- What is true and correct: what do we know to be factual?
- What is valid: what can be derived from facts?
It’s not so surprising that Leftists would then support things like Communism and Democracy because they work on paper, but dismiss the failings of these systems in the real world as human error–the product of interpretations and opinions, rather acknowledging failure as a logical end, as those on the Right have done.