[Hot Air] The other day I wrote a piece about how the Left can’t argue anymore. My thesis was pretty simple: because they have owned the cultural means of production so long they have lost the need for or ability to argue things logically.
I still believe that. Having rarely been exposed to a conservative argument that haven’t been able to dismiss merely through repeated ridicule the Left pretty much only engages in ad hominem attacks. Even very smart prominent Lefties like James Surowieki, Tom Nichols, or Malcolm Gladwell seem incapable of doing much more than insulting their opponents any more. It all boils down to Bad Orange Man or MAGA simps.
It’s sad, really. I kinda enjoyed reading those guys to get a different perspective. It’s not like living in a conservative bubble is any healthier than living in a liberal one.
But I ran into a slightly different perspective on the matter while cruising Twitter, and I think it deserves consideration: sometimes, at least, the person throwing out an absurd take isn’t actually hoping to convince you of anything. They are, rather, trying to discredit the source and do nothing more. The ad hominem attack is the only point—to destroy the credibility of their opponent, without actually convincing you of any particular argument.
My new Twitter friend laid the argument first in a series of tweets, and at my request on his Substack blog. I implore you to click the link and read his take because he could use the clicks. |