GobletIllusion_500

How do explain to people that most of what they think they know about the world is nothing but a very well conceived lie? Try to talk about history in any more depth than you will find on Fox news or MSNBC and you will be met with a range from a blank stare to an outright accusation of your insanity. A favorite of the ignorant masses is to call a person a conspiracy theorist. This is nothing more than a quick escape from any kind of logical intelligent debate over facts that a person refuses to admit may be true.

When the mainstream media comes up against a situation where people have thought outside of the box and placed their sovereignty or liberty over that of the state, this is the kind of response that is most often seen. That person is accused of being a “racist” , or a “terrorist”. Anyone not towing the line of the controlling elite can expect to be attacked in many ways that are generally not even applicable but which bestow a simply emotional response to a person meant to distract from the actual argument.

These attacks in classical liberalism (not what is today described as liberalism, it is more of a progressive fascism or Fabian socialism) are called by a few different names, but two come to mind. Both are classically know as “logical fallacies”. This means that in an argument or debate that is based on fact, these attacks are without any logical merit and therefore cannot be considered valid.

The “Ad Hominem” attack (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”) is simply attacking ones character, appearance or history irregardless of the facts of their argument. This takes the focus away from what they actually said pertaining to the current debate and focuses it on something completely unrelated. It is usually subtle, but again draws an emotional response to make the person look like a bad guy.

Another common fallacy is the “Tu Quoque” or Red Herring as it is often referred to. In this situation a person uses a ” you too” approach or the person turning your criticism on you. Instead of addressing a criticism, the other side criticizes you instead of addressing the original argument.

The issue with say a Cliven Bundy, can be seen to utilize one or a combination of these fallacies to subvert the legitimate argument of property rights in the ranchers standoff with the Bureau of Land Management last month. Instead of the media taking an objective look at his claims, they resort to calling him a racist over some comments made to a New York Times reporter that was neither recorded audibly or with video. The reporter took what he said out of context and in addition added complete fabrication to the observations that were made by Bundy and created an Ad Hominem attack in the press that led to a smothering of the original argument.

I’m not going to get into detail about the quotes though I side with Bundy in all respects. Any time anyone these days makes ANY comment about race, the intellectually devoid media deems this racist and the discussion is over. You can listen for yourself for his subsequent interviews explaining the facts of the matter and decide for yourself if he is indeed a bigot. I personally don’t think that making intelligent observations of fact makes one racist. I personally give equal time to all races that I encounter as sovereign people with their own rights, value and potential to positively affect society. Anyone who wants to discuss that, feel free to leave me a comment down below and I will address the specifics.

The point here is that too many people in this country take for granted what they are told to believe without first gathering enough information to make that decision for themselves. They jump on the bandwagon and parrot whatever the idiot box told them they should think without a second thought on the facts. There are so many examples of this in 2014 that the mainstream media is almost ALWAYS wrong in their supposition.

The prescription is simple. THINK FOR YOURSELF. If you don’t have the time/inclination to get your facts straight, then respectfully bow out of the argument or at least open your mind to the possibility that your belief could be wrong. It doesn’t make you look stupid, in fact just the opposite.

Advertisements