How to Destroy a Liberal’s Worldview

In debate, I find the best tactic is always to ask questions.  The reason is remarkably simple.

Suppose Tim and I are having a debate.  Tim already strongly dislikes me for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that in his mind he has categorized me as an evil conservative who stands in the way of his grand vision of society with my backwards, brainwashed ideas dicated to me by that religion that I don’t actually have.

It’s easy for that dislike to spill over into abject distrust.  When I speak truth to him, he hears lies.

But the nice thing about the truth is that it’s true.  I find that it’s very easy to distrust someone who you don’t respect and assume they’re lying.  I find that it’s easier to hear a lie than to tell one.

That’s why the best remedy for a pigheaded progressive liberal idiot-type is to ask them questions which they can’t slither out of with party line lies they would rotely recite to escape giving an honest, well-thought answer.  You see, if you ask a question that the recipient has heard before, they’ll just parrot how they’ve heard others like them answer.  If you ask a liberal about abortion, for example, you’ll get the liberal talking points.  They’re just repeating what others say about it.  You haven’t engaged their anti-lie mechanism because they aren’t telling their own lies, they’re just telling someone else’s.  The goal is to elicit the emotional response associated with telling a lie.  Since most people who would even be interested in this type of conversation don’t want to be liars – particularly to themselves – if you make them feel their lies, they might be more receptive to altering their worldview, which is of course our end-goal.

I’ve broken it down into convenient categories on all of the major liberal talking points.  Try them on your liberal friends!

Abortion

In response to “an embryo isn’t a life”, counter by asking them: “Would you eat a human embryo?”

In response to “it’s my body, it’s my choice”, counter with: “Did you become impregnated without the assistance of human sperm?”  Follow up with, “Then isn’t the baby only half yours?  You do believe in democracy, right?”

In response to “the mother can’t afford to take care of ..” or any quality-of-life-for-mother-or-infant line of argument, ask: “So, in your world view, if a person can’t be fed, they should be actively killed to eliminate the risk of death by starvation?”

In response to “what about rape” question, ask: “Is your father a rapist?”  (the answer will be no).  Follow up with: “if he were, would I be allowed to shoot you dead right here, right now?”

Vegetarianism:

For health-excuse vegetarians, ask some of these:

“Did you know that A. Afaraensis, H. Habilis, H.Erectus and most likely even archaic H. Sapiens’ diets subsisted very largely on bone marrow, scavenged from the remains of predator kills?”  (lots of evidence in the fossil record of bones smashed with human tools).  If questioned about the relevance, answer: “Well, I’m just sayin’, if our ancestors hadn’t eaten meat, our brains would not have evolved to the point where we could even have this conversation.  I feel sorry for your children.”

Speaking of children, a fun one is: “Are you aware that it is illegal in most states to raise a child under the age of 3 as a vegan, even if you include breast milk?  Could you explain that law to me?”

For the moral vegetarians, ask some of these:

“Why is animal life more valuable than plant life?” (the answer will involve some kind of bullshit about brains and feelings).  Follow up with: “If I anesthesized a cow, or killed it in a way in which it did not suffer, wouldn’t it be equivalent to harvesting a blade of wheat?”

“Were you a cow in your last life?”  (no or maybe).  “Then how do you know that they suffer on factory farms?”  (they look sad) – “Can you send me a copy of the research you read that proves the animals we eat make facial expressions and the meaning of each?” (or a restatement of what happens on factory farms, stuff they got from a PETA video) “Would you say that you’re just projecting on the animals?  Like, because you wouldn’t want to live as livestock on a factory farm, you’re assuming they don’t either?”

There’s the age-old, “If you were stranded on a raft at sea and all you had to eat was Spam, would you die of starvation?”  (the answer is of course no, with a “but that’s different”).  Follow with, “So your morals fade away when you face death.  Isn’t eating a way to prevent death?  Isn’t the only variable here how impending death is and how available vegetables are?  In other words, would you say that your morals are only possible because of modern luxuries?”  Follow with, “Since we only started farming about 8,000 years ago and humans have been around a lot longer than that, would it be fair to say that your moral luxury is possible only because we ate meat, not in spite of it?”

For environmental nonsense:

Use this after you’ve closed the “feelings” door: “Doesn’t farming in general wreak collateral damage?  Sure, a lot of amazon rainforest is being chopped down for cow pastures, but how many trees have been chopped down to clear fields?  How many field mice have been caught in combines?”

Global Warming

“What do plants breathe?”  (if they’re not retarded, CO2).  “Wouldn’t an increase in CO2 cause more plant growth, thereby creating a greener earth?”  (Only until it burns up from the greenhouse effect).  “How hot would it have to get for rainforests to die?” (no answer).  “Wouldn’t we see a rapid evolution of heat tolerant plant growth, when all the other plants die out?”  (no).  “Why not?” (because evolution takes a long time).  “Can I borrow your crystal ball?  I want to buy stocks.”

“If the earth increases by an average temperature of 5 degrees, wouldn’t that make more of the earth habitable because Canada and Siberia wouldn’t be so cold?”  (no, because the oceans would rise).  “How much would the oceans have to rise to make us lose enough continental space to account for the combination of Siberia and Canada?”  (No answer, because they don’t know.  Your goal here is just to point out how little they know about their eco religion).

This is my favorite.  “What percentage of the Earth’s atmosphere is currently carbon dioxide?”  (even smart people who detect your trap will guess something like 5%.  The real answer is 0.0383%, also known as less than 1 tenth of 1 percent). 

“How much does the atomsphere weigh?”  (the answer is 5 quadrillion tons, aka 5,000,000,000,000,000 – that’s 15 zeroes). 

“If the humans pump 1 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year, how many years will it take to increase the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.038% to 0.04%?  (The answer is 25,000).

“Could you rank the following sources of greenhouse gas by order of most to least: oceans, forests, decomposing plants, all human activity combined?  Could you assign a weight to each?”  (they won’t be able to, but it might inspire them to learn about the carbon cycle.)

“Have you seen the inconvenient truth graph about temperature and CO2 charts?”  (yes).  “Did you know that the earth’s oceans are accountable for the vast majority of atmospheric carbon dioxide?”  (they’ll say yes, but are lying).  “Did you know that as the globe temperature increases, the ocean’s temperatures increase?”  (yes, duh).  “Did you know that as the ocean gets warmer, it loses its ability to store CO2 in solution, so it gets released into the atmosphere?”  (yes, again lying).  “Did you know that it takes almost 1,000 years for global temperatures to be reflected in the oceans, because the oceans are such a gigantic heat sink?”   “Did you know that Al Gore’s graph is on such a large scale that it doesn’t really show the fact that the CO2 levels rise about 1,000 years after the earth warms?”  “What do you suppose the cause-effect relatonship would be, given all those facts?”

I’m wearing myself out.  Stay tuned for part 2.

 

 

About these ads

« It’s Not Marriage, It’s the Woman

More Like “Not So Online” »