Sunday, August 12, 2007

The Marxist Revival (8): Hysterically Moving the Goal Posts

First a reminder that the Petition to the Mayor of Brussels to allow the 9/11 rally "Stop Islamization of Europe" can be signed HERE.

I posit that - apart from considerations, such as public safety - the same Postmodern mechanism, at work in the redistribution of free speech, is also applied in the indefinite suspension of the civil rights of Europe's indigenous peoples: so-called 'levelling the playing field' by lumbering the supposedly stronger party with 'handicaps', viz. no demos directed towards minorities!

~ Continued from Part 7: Of Reversed Sophistry & Mythical Creatures ~

But back to the present series on the peculiarities of Postmodernism (or crypto cultural Marxism) as we are looking at the use of language, speech in particular. Two other aspects of speech tactic left to analyse, are the use of generalizations and the apparent shifting of the rules in mid-play.

Thus when a Postmodern's opponent commits a generalization, for example in categorizing the behaviour of one small group of deranged terrorists together with all the other well-meaning, peace loving Muslims in naming urban Jihad, Islamic terrorism, this is considered "unfairly lumping all Muslims together".

If however, the boot is on the other foot and it is Postmoderns (Pomos, in Pomo lingo) that are categorizing all white males as rapists, this is perfectly acceptable.

It is the widely used tactic of moving the goalposts in mid-play, at least, so it would seem to objective people. This however is a mistake: it is erroneously assumed that both parties use the same rule book, but nothing could be further from the truth, as we shall see on the next instalment. It all has to do with the redistribution of free speech and the levelling of the playing field by lumbering the supposedly stronger party with handicaps, moving from equality of opportunity, to equality of outcome: a time honoured Leftist pastime!

All that surprising stuff is apart from the fourteen ordinary, day-to-day fallacies (PMFs) already identified - the result of Postmodern or Subjectivist thinking, of which innocent bystanders by force of habit, or pressure of fashion, might have become a victim. Conscious adherents are beyond such a simple aide. They are strongly advised to seek professional medical assistance which might entail years of analysis as the entire cerebral edifice of orthologics is rebuild from scratch.

Dr Sanity recently discovered a typical problem of a psychological nature, that is the result of the philosophical basic lie of Subjectivism. Consider her post "It's Official, the Left is Completely Hysterical":

"Hysteria is a concept characterized by a wide variety of physical and mental symptoms that result from dissociating one's cognitive functioning from one's emotion and/or behavior. The psychological defense that makes this happen is known as dissociation ... (unmanageable and excessive) emotions are primary and are not subject to an objective reality ..."

"This is a world where there is no objective reality or truth ... if you believe something is true, then it is ... something can be "fake but accurate" or ... captured enemy combatants in the middle of a war are ... in a "gulag" or ... a "religion of peace" beheads people ..."

"Mass hysteria occurs when large groups of people engage in psychological dissociation; and political mass hysteria ... when all the emotional excitability and excess happen to serve a political function or ideological agenda."

It's all mighty interesting, and a personal as well as a political tragedy. But the philosophical problem for Postmoderns is, that the charges of delusion cannot be reversed, as they are so fond to do. The good doctor:

"Probably the first prerequisite for accusing someone of engaging in self-delusion is that one must accept that there is an objective reality, external and independent to one's self; one's beliefs or one's emotions or feelings. Without such a fundamental epistemological foundation, it is completely meaningless to accuse anyone of self-delusion, although postmodern intellectuals do it all the time".

"As they wallow in their preferred form of social subjectivism, it is perfectly "reasonable" (if that is the word) from their perspective to impute delusion to others--even if every time they do so, they effectively demonstrate the invalidity of their own philosophy. That is why it is so amusing to observe their appropriation of the term "reality-based community" -- when they don't believe in any reality except for their own emotions!"

She's spot on, as usual! Serves you right, Pomo! It's not entirely all roses when you flush reality down the water works! Or is this just another mythical manifestation that comes with the Pomo territory? After the paradoxymoron now perhaps a realivorus, or an objectiraptor, who's to say?

As far as the tactics in the language and attitude department are concerned we have identified: fibs and lies (technically don't exist for Subjectivists: no truth, no lie - very practical), gross exaggeration and hyperbole, genuine or functional hatred and hysterics (rage, rage, rage), emotional blackmail, incitement to violence, sentimental whining, false analogy, (reversed) sophistry, manipulation, incivility and ad hominem attacks, deliberate para-exegese (angry is being unreasonable, doubt is denial, aversion is hatred, etc.), another fallacy as a result of massive imprecision - the lack of orthologics - and the unremitting (and sometimes deliberate) confusion of terms: very often the tactical mixing of facts with opinion.

One such curious example I found in my Inbox yesterday, in an unsolicited acquisition letter from, proudly announcing the establishment of yet another virtual paradise of subjectivity: the virtual community, "a fun place to meet other people with similar interests, share your knowledge, or learn new things in topics you love!"

"To get a taste of
Askville, one of our more popular topic communities: The History Topic Community. Below are some actual questions asked by real people (my emphasis) in the History topic:

- "Where can I find a good book about Henry IV of France?"
- "Who were the five greatest American presidents since Lincoln?"
- "Does the presence of US troops in Iraq fuel terrorism?"

That last question shot me seething, straight into a virtual realm of fun, play and knowledge sharing. It proved to be almost entirely inhibited by autonomous Pomos. I'll spare you the details, but it was a surreal experience. The person responsible for the text of that mail is of course a Head Marketing Communication, a live person hiding behind a customer repellent defense system, made up of a barricade of technology - bots and automatons - combined with the corporate policy, known in jargon as the "customer peeping system": the motte and bailey of the new media.

I don't want to waste more time and energy on the matter than it warrants: from this particular soap box I'll have's Head Marcom know that "the opinion of a vast number of Americans" is not to be confused with fact. Fact is something for objective people, who know the sun will rise tomorrow, even if they're not watching it in person!

The next instalment will take us to the Postmodern tactic of moving the goal posts in mid-play, and as discovered by Stephen Hicks as early as 2002, Pomo's war on free speech.

~ To be continued in Part 9: Why the Mayor of Brussels Gags Free Speech, "The Leftist policy now comes back to haunt us, as Pomo is using the principle to suppress free speech, and turn the Western world in an intellectual graveyard as the individual freedom to pursue knowledge throught debate, critique and free enquiry, is being suppressed". ~

No comments: