Catch 22s: The Debate Tactics of Tyrants

If you pay attention to a lot of the current arguments being spat out by post-modernist social justice warriors you’ll find plenty of emotion, plenty of erratic rhetoric, and plenty of whim-driven arguments. This is on the assumption that they’re being civil and not assaulting you or tipping over your car for disagreeing with them.

Focusing primarily on the aim of whim-driven arguments, you may come to realize that a lot of them are catch 22s. A catch 22 is when you have no refuge in disproving your opponent’s point since they’ll always move the goal posts to suit their argument.

A recent catch 22 was postulated to me by a feminist who was addressed with the fact that celebrity women with substance abuse get more media coverage than male celebrities.

Any person of reason would conclude on the surface that this is a good thing (obviously there are sleazy tabloids who do as much of a disrespectful job as they possibly can). Yet how evil! Female addiction is being brought to the spotlight and awareness is being created around whatever the respective condition is.

Being that feminists fetishize about being oppressed and victimized, this astute soldier of the imperial vagina hat forces retorted something along the lines of, “Well that just goes to show you how women get more attention in society due to the demanding oppressive standards society sets for them.” Absolutely beautiful.

Who would’ve thought that bringing terrible conditions pertaining to women and pushing men to the side is an act of the patriarchy.

Of course, going by the catch 22 logic, had the study found that men with addiction received more media attention the accusation would’ve been the same. “Well, that just goes to show you how women’s issues are pushed to the side due to male favoritism.” Actually men do deserve more media coverage since they’re more likely to foster addictions. See? I can play too.

To give you awareness of the catch 22 syndrome, here’s several examples of how this idiotic tactic is coming to the foreground.

A college professor accused an Israeli soldier of not raping Palestinian women because they’re so racist and sexist toward them. I’m assuming if they did, she’d say the same thing.

A Canadian college girl (I’m seeing a trend) accused fellow students of trying to hide their islamophobic bigotry by treating her nicely, if not nicer, when she wore a hijab around her campus. Had they not done so, the conclusion would’ve remained the same most likely.

If you don’t have interest in dating people of color you’re a racist, yet if you are interested in dating them you are “fetishizing” them (aka “you’re a racist”)). This list is a real doozy, but see #14. Here’s the second ‘2’ of the catch 22.

If you’re a man and you hold doors open for women you are sexist. Yet, if you don’t you’ll most likely be accused of sexism.

If you “deny white fragility” (the idea of whites being “uncomfortable” when talking about racism) you have it and if you admit to it you have it.

Here’s a stock one:

If you deny white privilege you are privileged enough to not see it and have it, yet if you admit to having it you have it.

These few examples show nothing more than how ludicrous the current intellectual movement has become. When you reject evidence and play to emotional subjective inwardly defined arguments and wish nothing more to find a way to come out on top and control others you are on your way to becoming a tyrant.

If you are also prone to wanting to predispose to viewing yourself as a victim you’ll probably find compliments as insults and crimes against humanity.

It reminds me of the scene in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, when Brian is accused of being the messiah.

Brian: I am not the messiah! Will you please listen?!? I am not the messiah! Do you understand?!?! Honestly!!

Woman in crowd: Only the true messiah denies his divinity.

Brian: What?!? Well what sort of chance does that give me?!? All right, I am the messiah!

Crowd: He is! He is the messiah!