Whether in person or online, it is inevitable that our ideas and values will clash with their ideas and values. It matters not who constitutes us versus who constitutes them, just that neither side intends to lose or otherwise have their position discredited. To do so not only scrambles one’s own worldview but could result in the worse outcome of your ideas losing adherents in the audience and the other gaining.
If you have made it this far in the debate, you have likely left the audience at this point. You have your narrative, and while it need not be set in stone, any movement you make is likely to be slight. As such, you must argue from a position of strength and certainty about your beliefs if you intend to sway anyone. This is precisely what the enemy does.
There are, at the most basic level, two ways of grappling with new ideas or information. These are the the sympathetic and the critical. A sympathetic view seeks to understand the idea on its own terms and give it a fair shake; does it work or make sense? The critical view already assumes the new or rival information is wrong, and that there is nothing to be incorporated from it.
The latter should sound familiar. It is both highly anti-intellectual and a hallmark of the left. Conservatives are always wrong. And when they’re not it’s because they’re following the line drawn by the left. Even then, they remain tainted by their affiliation with others on the right. This is the role filled by the #cuckservative, a golem in the service of his own enemies.
As a general rule then, those to the left us are critical. No amount of hatefacts or history we supply them with will move their worldview. They are confident ideologues and their livelihood as politicians depends on it; it is their audience for whom this is not universal. And it is the audience that we who engage in metapolitical work want to reach.
We cannot do so from arguing that we might not have the answers and that our enemies have good points. That is the sympathetic view and we have no reason to cede ground to those engineering our dispossession. We must hold the assumption that they are wrong at all times and never give them an ounce of legitimacy. We don’t have legitimacy to dole out anyway: we are seeking to capture it for ourselves.
This isn’t so much a deep or narrative-building post but just a reminder. Our enemies don’t believe we make any good points or are capable of such. Or if they do, they will try to suppress them and attack from the flank. Sure, those racists say some provocative things, but they’re racist.
While I’m sure we already reject a lot if not all of the left’s leading narratives, we must remember not to engage them fairly either. They are a priori wrong and we should treat their beliefs as superstition, exactly what they do to ours. The gentleman is spat upon in a postmodern discourse. Don’t get covered in spit.