This was found as a response in a discussion being waged elsewhere oh, and it was obviously copied from quora so I will simply box it up and ship it along.

It is more than worth the read…indeed, it speaks directly to points I’ve been making the last week or two and is too good not to share.

I found this response to a Liberal Open Society cartoon about why the “tolerant must be intolerant of the intolerant”, as if that makes any sense, but the response seems to be spot on.

“Chris Josse says there is a difference between tolerance and argument and he is correct but then he heads down the sophist rabbit hole. Academically speaking, liberals belong to the category of Sophist. The Free Dictionary defines Sophism as:

A plausible but fallacious argument.
Deceptive or fallacious argumentation.
Allow me to opine on the argument. Now read the responses here in Quora to the question. Can you pick out the Sophists? I sure can.

First and foremost, they do not argue in the traditional sense of an argument. The essence of argumentation lies in the agreed upon definition terms and the use of logic backed by facts (empiricism) to support conclusions. The intellectually mature sophist (the ones that are educated beyond their intelligence) employ deceptive or ambiguous terms while the immature sophist reverts to emotional outbursts, expletives and insults. It is easier to do that because you don’t need to think and or study or collect facts to define your terms. You also get the instant gratification of self-righteousness – intellectual masturbation. A couple classic examples of a fallacious and deceptive attempts at definition:

Bill Clinton’s infamous Sophist definition statement: It depends on what your definition of “is” is.
The definition of “disruptive innovation”. The accepted definition is the introduction of a better service or product into the free market. Google uses their own definition to justify their criminal violation of copyrights, trade marks and patents to make money.
Most sophists (liberals) do not create or respond to arguments that require agreement on definitions. Instead, they are quite happy to destroy those types of arguments by using categories of exclusion. “You’re a F*^#ing white supremacist” without even attempting to define white supremacy? They throw around terms like racist, capitalist, Nazi and the popular fill in the blank ‘phobists’. Rejection instead of analysis and debate. Hate and ostracism rather than informed thought. Rage rather than tolerance in the form of an informed argument or debate. Why do they do this?

Liberal philosophy is based on the fantasy of egalitarianism and they sell it to others in the form of resentment. Here is the liberal dog whistle template: “You deserve (fill in what you don’t have but want without having to work for it) because you are a (repressed category) and the (oppressive category) are keeping you from having what you deserve”. Be sure to conclude with a few choice expletives aimed at the oppressive category for effect. Ex: You’re black and deserve to have more money but the white racist republican Nazis still want to enslave you and keep you in poverty (never mind that is was Democrats who supported slavery). Or, you’re a poor exploited worker who toils all day but your rich bosses don’t pay you what you think you’re worth so they can get rich on your labor. Or, you could be something but some other class of people have singled you out and are preventing you from achieving your greatness. Liberals define success as exploitation while celebrating failure as a virtue and badge of honor. If working hard and becoming rich is bad, then not working hard or failing must be good. No wonder they want the government to take care of everybody.

The great tragedy here is the sophist tactics actually rob the average person of their capacity for achieving true greatness. When this is pointed out to them, they revert to their intolerant responses. Liberals, by stimulating resentment and hatred, kill advancement and innovation. Yet they call themselves progressives. Resentment breeds failure which breeds more resentment. Does that sound like progress? But if you can brainwash people into emotionally investing into that negative mindset, then the confirmation bias generated by the sophist controlled media will keep them trapped.

The longer they remain trapped the harder it is to realize their beliefs actually caused their lives to become increasingly disastrous. They cannot look in the mirror and admit that their actions and decisions based on their beliefs have destroyed their lives when it is much easier (and less painful) to blame others. When confronted with that truth, they cannot accept responsibility. They double down on their failure and act with intolerance against those who hold up the truth mirror that exposes their failures.”

Arthur Nimz
Answered Jul 2, 2018 · Author has 120 answers and 364k answer views