How To Defeat The Left

Boxer lying in the ring knocked out

Firstly, a word of warning.

Because I can hear you all getting your hopes up.

You will have all noticed how across the USA and Europe there is a real problem with the Left, as their ideology has all but taken over governments, institutions and organisations, and appears to be the standard and prevailing ideology that is expected of the average person.

All the tactics and strategies being used so far to stop the Left are doing little to impede their progress. In fact things are actually getting worse. There are many examples but I’ll just remind you of the fact that in Great (!) Britain you can be arrested for calling a transwoman a man and have a judge issue an injunction banning you from doing so again!

I’ll say that again. In Great (!) Britain you can be arrested for calling a transwoman a man and have a judge issue an injunction banning you from doing so again!

I’ll say it one more time and this time put it in bold because I just don’t think you’re taking this seriously enough. In Great (!) Britain you can be arrested for calling a transwoman a man and have a judge issue an injunction banning you from doing so again!

Unbelievable. This is really where we are. And you’re still sitting there reading this nonsense and not jumping out of your skin in an urgent rush to form another chapter of the Bring-Back-Sanity-Society (BBSS – yes twice the amount of BS).

Some on our side are relying on Donald Trump to save us. Yes, since that fateful day in November 2016 when Trump was elected President of America, many people on the sane side thought that the tide had turned. This followed closely on the heels of a Brexit result in the UK, so of course many people thought that sanity had prevailed and that in the end we were all going to be okay.

Trump has indeed achieved much already and will hopefully achieve even more. But if you think the fight is over then you are as deluded as the Left – apologies, I know that’s the most offensive insult possible.

You see the Democrats retook the House in the 2018 midterm elections, and although some experts say it’s not an unusual occurrence and that in fact Trump did better than others in his position, this should still concern us. Because the fact that the Democratic Party could get so much support after their downright despicable treatment of Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation process and the fact that a new breed of progressive Democratic-Socialist won Democratic primaries and were then elected to the House, tells us that this if far from over.

In fact the fight has not even begun.

It will begin when Trump ends.

And when that happens the blowback will be immense.

Because Democrats aren’t democratic. They’re not saying, we lost they won, it’s democratic that the winners should have their way. No! They’re saying, wicked, evil people have power and when we get it back we’ll ensure that never happens again. This is the pressure that is building up inside Democrats during the Trump era, a fury and a rage that their precious Hillary lost and that they’re not getting their way, and no I’m not being childish, you shouldn’t have power because you’re evil and I will ensure that never happens again.

Being arrested for using the wrong gender pronoun will just be the tip of the iceberg.

You will have all therefore reacted with tremendous excitement to the title of this article, not just because you are all big fans of the author, but because you will finally learn how to defeat the Left. With methods that this time, will actually work.

But here’s the catch. Although the methods presented will work – probably, they will certainly work far better than the present sit-about-moaning-and-groaning-but-not-actually-doing-anything-for-forty-years-while-the-Left-takes-over-the-Media-Education-Politics-and-everything-else method, since they will in all likelihood never be implemented, we can all be assured that there was a way to defeat the Left but we didn’t use it.

Never mind.

But I will present the methods anyway, so that in the future, long after humanity will have rebuilt from the ruins of our society that occurred either due to a war of rebellion against the authoritarianism of the Left or far more likely due to self destruction as insanity can’t sustain itself – if men can be women and women can be men then 1 + 1 can be something other than 2 and the end is merely a matter of time – and when finally in this utopia, being a Leftist will be recognised for the mental disease it is and reason and sanity will be the litmus test for whether to allow a person to live with the other adults, let alone be placed in a position of power, influence or any importance, to prevent the whole thing happening again, someone may look up this article and make use of the methods found herein and think to themselves, yes that Sam Taylor – if indeed that was his actual name and not a pseudonym, had a point. If only they had listened to him in the first place, humanity could have saved itself years of suffering caused by living in an insane asylum under an authoritarian regime, and jumped straight to the living sane and normal lives sooner.

Before I do that though, I’d like to talk about the method you are using and why it’s not working. Not only will this save you hours of time, but it should help us better understand the methods I am about to present and why they will be effective.

At the moment, most of you are trying to debate the Left. A life-draining exercise that leaves you bereft of all your energy and with the knowledge that you would have wasted less time had you been counting the number of M&Ms in a 10lb bulk bag to make sure it actually contains all 4800 that are meant to be inside.

You mean well. You think that in a civilised society, differences of opinion should be decided by debate. All sides should put up their points of view for critical analysis by the other side and neutral third parties, and after a process of questioning and examining assumptions, sources and conclusions, all the ideas that successfully make it through this process of rigorous scrutiny and therefore seem to be correct, should be accepted.

And you’d be right about that. The mistake you’re making is that we’re not living in that society yet.

Not even close.

This is the fantasy of the right. They think that just because in an ideal world the way to change people’s minds is by grown up discussion and rational debate that we should take that approach even now when the people who’s minds you’re trying to change are not working in that way.

To explain this with a fraction more precision, we need to remind ourselves of the hypotheses mentioned in those three great articles, The Insanity Of The Left, The Hypocrisy Of The Left and Why Sam Taylor Or Whatever His Real Name Might Actually Be Is Nowhere Near As Clever As He Thinks He Is. For those of you who studied those articles with a fine-tooth comb, apologies for boring you. For those of you who read the articles but can’t remember what they said, you will be the proof that forms the basis of that third mentioned article. For those of you who can’t seem to find the third article, don’t worry, you’ve just read it.

The Main Hypothesis of The Insanity Of The Left

There are two ways to arrive at a conclusion. The first way is by using reason and logic. The second way is by deciding what you want to be true and believing it. Leftists often use the first way but reserve the right to use the second way when it comes to their (more important) ideology. This ideology is a bizarre version of equality, which, for reasons explained in yet another long and boring article but apparently fascinating to one Matt Westbrook, titled The Mistake In Logic, has become king of the virtues and in an emergency or whenever a Leftist doesn’t know what they’re talking about, they can bypass reason and logic to support it.

The Main Hypothesis of The Hypocrisy of the Left

There are two ways to determine when to apply a principle to support your point. The first way is by using reason and logic to tell you whether or not a principle applies to your case and then accepting any conclusion it now tells you. The second way is to decide what you want to conclude first and then, if there is a principle that supports your point, pretend it’s the basis for your opinion, without thinking or caring about what you would also have to believe if that principle were applied to other comparable cases. If the principle disproves your desired belief, you can safely ignore it and pretend it doesn’t exist. It’s all for a good cause after all.

Leftists often use the first way but reserve the right to use the second way when it comes to their (more important) ideology of … well I don’t want to make you read it all a third time, but I started the sentence so you’d at least see the pattern.

In  a nutshell: A Leftist turns off their brain when reason and logic would otherwise lead them to something that contradicts whatever they want to believe.

The Main Hypothesis of Why Sam Taylor Or Whatever His Real Name Might Actually Be Is Nowhere Near As Clever As He Thinks He Is

Well I think you could all work this one out for yourselves.

Therefore, if all the above hypotheses are true there is no point in rationally debating a Leftist. No point at all. You’ll be working with the first approach of reason and logic and they, because this is about their more important ideology, will be working with the second approach of this is what I want to believe. You’ll provide evidence, reasoning, analysis and the like which forms the basis of your conclusions and they will have to resort to the endless repeating of their beliefs like a mantra on a continuous loop, because once you’ve thrown your brains out of the window, it’s no surprise that you suddenly believe that with every reiteration, especially if each time it’s done in a louder, firmer and more passionate voice, your belief becomes more true.

And there are two elements to a conclusion or belief. There’s the conclusion itself and there’s the basis for that conclusion. Debate and discussion does not revolve around the conclusion but rather takes place at the basis level where everyone considers all the points that form… well the basis for any conclusion. You look at the other person’s basis and critically analyse it by seeing if they have all the information and if they have evaluated everything correctly. They can then, in response, answer any questions and explain why they think any flaws may be irrelevant or not flaws at all.

Now, if there is no basis to a conclusion because that stage has been skipped, and the only thing that can be provided is the conclusion itself, how can there be any debate? There can be repetition of what they want to be true, there can be rebuke for not believing as they do, but no debate, no discussion. The part that lends itself to that is missing.

Since the Left have no rational basis for their beliefs, rather they are merely obeying their more fundamental ideology to fall over themselves in trying to be morally virtuous when it comes to anything to do with equality, there is nothing to debate. You cannot examine the points that form the basis of their beliefs when they don’t exist. So they will simply either repeat their conclusion or because they cannot understand how you have made the wrong choice, berate and rebuke you for not choosing the opinions that, as dictated by their more fundamental ideology, show greater moral virtue. Just watch any episode of The View with Anne Coulter. They haven’t invited her on for a discussion. They’ve invited her on to tell her off. That’s why so many of their questions start with the phrase, “How can you say such and such when it will lead to something that is so mean and nasty?” and not “How can you say such and such when it is wrong and here are the five reasons why?”

This means that all of you who are trying to debate them are wasting your time. You wouldn’t try and reason with a child. All they know is that sweets and chocolates taste good, it’s what they want so why on earth should they eat anything else. That’s their conclusion. There’s no basis to that (apart from the ‘it’s what I want’ point) for there to be any debate or discussion about it. I can’t say for sure because I don’t have access to all the relevant information, but something tells me that it’s never happened in the history of mankind that a parent has said to their child, “because too many sweets ruin your teeth and can have many negative health effects like weight gain, blood sugar problems and an increased risk of heart disease,” and the child has replied with, “Oh wow. I didn’t know that. Not surprising as I’m only a child. Thank you so much mother / father, or however you identify, for providing me with this new and alarming information. By the way, why on earth would you be buying such dangerous food and bringing it into the house. And if we can put a man on the moon, surely we can ensure that even our treats are healthy. It’s 2018 for goodness sake!”

The more likely response is some kind of tantrum. You know the kind of thing a sulking, petulant and furious Left constantly accuse Donald Trump of having.

You can’t reason with a five year old to convince them that a diet of only sweets and chocolates is unhealthy and you can’t reason with a Leftist.

Only an idiot would debate a child, and only an idiot would … goodness is that the time!

Yes, it would be fantastic if we lived in that utopia where everything was done on the basis of reason and logic. Where differences of opinion were worked out on the intellectual battlefield of critical analysis. But we don’t. And no one is more disappointed about that than I. That utopia needs everyone on board with the idea that we only use the reason and logic approach, but there are still plenty of people who, when it suits them, substitute sanity in order to believe whatever they want. Using the first approach to convince someone who is using the second approach, cannot possibly work, as explained, and is therefore an exercise in futility.

Stop doing it.

I know you think I’m exaggerating and are going to continue anyway, but I mean it. Stop doing it and seek help for your addiction to useless activities, such as trying to convince the unconvincible, and stop debating them.

So if debating them is out what should we do?

Yes, I would also be frustrated being two thousand words into an article where none of them have been telling us what to actually do, but are instead some kind of set up to pave the way for the coming explanations!

And who needs that paragraph either! It’s a miracle that this guy has any readers left at all – making the huge assumption that he had any in the first place!

Well the clue is in their ideology.

You see, the Left need to be able to think of themselves as being moral people by having all the appropriate beliefs and opinions, and saying and doing all the right things. That’s why the Left spend their day virtue signalling and take every opportunity they can to do so. You’ll have noticed when talking to a Leftist that if asked a difficult question, their first instinct is to claim the moral high ground. Morality is the basis of everything on the Left.

And that’s the key we can use against them.

The Left think that they are moral and, if you don’t agree with all their beliefs and opinions that they are morally superior to you. But, as explained elsewhere, their morality is merely superficial. On closer examination their so called morality will prove to be baseless and empty. Now let’s think for a second what that means. It means that in reality they do not possess the special morality they think they do. And they are certainly not morally superior to you. It also means they are doing something quite immoral by presenting their superficial morality as real morality, and using that as a basis for assuming they are morally superior to you. How do you think a Leftist would react when they discover they are not moral but immoral? How do you think a Leftist would react when they discover that not only are they immoral, but worse, they are less moral than someone who they had previously thought of as being their moral inferior?

Oh yeah.

Any anger, crying, screaming and shouting you’ve seen so far will be nothing compared to what you will experience when you prove to one of these dimwits that they are in fact far less moral than you.

Let’s take an example. When a Leftist tries to convince you that there are more than two genders, ask them to explain. People typically don’t want to hear what others have to say, they want to tell you what they think. Show interest, genuinely and try to understand. Ask questions, clarify as much as possible and you will soon expose the nonsense for what it is. You must, for as we have already explained there is no basis for any of it apart from the fact that they really really want it to be true!

Normal Person (spoken in an understanding tone after having received a twenty minute ‘explanation’): So you’re a man if you feel like a man.

Leftist: Yes, I’m so glad you understand.

Normal Person: But what is the definition of a man that you are one if you feel like it? If it’s the biological definition then it doesn’t matter how you feel, you either are a man or not. If the definition of man is nebulous and ill-defined then what you’re saying is impossible because how can you feel like something that has not been properly defined. And if the definition of man is whatever you feel like, then all you’re saying is that you feel like something you feel should be called a man, which while one hundred percent true is completely and utterly irrelevent to a society that likes to create common meanings for words to maintain ease of communication and avoid the breakdown of civilisation.

Leftist: Er …

Normal Person (in a more stern tone of voice): How can you think of yourself as morally virtuous for believing people can change genders, when it doesn’t make any sense at all?

Or something along those lines. The point is to expose the lack of basis to their moral positions, which due to their method of arrival at said position is assured, and to note that a person is not moral for accepting a position that makes no sense, rather they are immoral. And an imbecile.

A bit further.

Leftist: It doesn’t have to make sense!

Normal Person (with fervour): It had better make sense. Because if you’re denouncing people who disagree with you as transphobes which may ruin their lives, based on something you don’t really understand yourself, that would make you sick, twisted and despicably evil.

Now it’s being pointed out that the Left are worse than the people they denounce as bigots. This is because they use their baseless morality to allow themselves to ruin the lives of anyone who disagrees with them. You need to emphasise and stress in the strongest possible terms that destroying someone else’s life based on nothing, makes them morally inferior at best, downright wicked at the middle, and something unspeakably hideous at worst.

So that’s the first thing we can do.

But it doesn’t stop there. It gets even sweeter.

All because the Left are hypocrites. At least from one point of view, as explained.

You see, the Left don’t look at what principles apply in a given case and then accept whatever conclusions they lead to, rather they conclude first and accept a principle if it supports the point they want to prove. This means they only accepted this principle because it supports their ideological belief but not because they believe in this principle in … well principle and would apply it in all appropriate situations. This leads to them being hypocritical from the point of view of only applying their principles selectively and not across the board, but since the real reason they apply principles is to support their ideology, from that point of view they’re not hypocritical at all.

Here is where we come to another key. The Left don’t know what they’re doing!

Well of course they don’t know what they’re doing, I hear you say. They’re idiots.

No, I mean specifically here. We know that they’re deciding what they want to conclude first and then applying a principle if it supports their point and hence they may well be hypocritical, but they think that they’re using the reason and logic approach! They are totally unaware that it’s their more fundamental ideology that has made them conclude the way they have and selectively apply the principle they think is the basis for their ‘moral’ position.

Therefore, all we have to do is find the hypocrisy that will almost invariably exist in everything a Leftist says. We can find it by taking their principles and doing what they should have done in the first place and apply them across the board. More often than not, you will find an application that will lead to a conclusion that goes against one or more of their beliefs.

When you point this out, don’t just say they are being hypocritical, emphasise that they obviously do not believe in the very principle that they claim leads them to the morally superior position they take. Because the additional beauty when you expose their lack of morals via demonstrating their hypocrisy, is that you’re not just showing them to be immoral, no, you are proving to them that they have condemned themselves. They took a position and denounced everyone who disagreed. Now that they are exposed as not truly believing in that position in the first place, they join the group they initially condemned! They judged other people as evil for having a certain point of view, and now must take that title for themselves, once they have been shown to have that belief too.

So, to bring an example you’ve heard before, when Chuck Schumer told President Trump “Elections have consequences,” all Schumer had in his mind was the 2018 midterm election. He applied the principle selectively because he was interested in the results of that election in particular, as it would help him achieve his overriding ideology. All we have to do is point out that if he wasn’t busy building a wall because of the consequence of the 2016 presidential election, then he is a bad person in his own eyes. Either that, or he doesn’t actually believe in this principle at all. And telling others off for not believing something you don’t either, is an even lower moral standard than just believing in a superficial type of morality.

I like to present it as a question. Once I have pointed out their hypocrisy, I ask them whether they are espousing principles they don’t actually believe or whether they have just condemned themselves as being just as bad as everyone else. Making them decide which type of evil person they are, makes them very uncomfortable and winds them up no end.

They won’t choose. They’ll just squirm. Trust me.

I mean obviously they’ll also descend into screaming, shouting and general incivility and show themselves to be the furious, wild, and vicious cry-babies that they really are. But this will only help prove your point – that they were the immoral ones after all.

Some will try to reason their way out. Being that this is being attempted by someone on the Left, they won’t have much success. They will either say something totally unintelligible, or better still invent some absurd distinction to explain why they conveniently don’t apply their principle in any other place apart from the one they want. A distinction they will forever have to pretend to believe. Or worse, actually make themselves believe. Because those people exist too.

So these are the two things we can do. We are basically using their need to be morally virtuous if not morally superior, against them, because it is simply devastating to someone who thinks they are morally virtuous when you prove to them that they are actually immoral. And it is devastating to someone who thinks they are morally virtuous when you show them how they have condemned themselves or are so bad as to be telling people off for what they are also culpable for.

But, I hear you ask, how is this any better than debating them? They will respond to any demonstration of being immoral or hypocritical with the same screaming that meets any attempt at intelligent conversation? To that I answer that the effects of pointing out their lack of morals are twofold.

First, by showing how the Left are immoral and that we are more moral, we can bring on board all those people who need to use morality as a way of deciding what to believe. Yes we would prefer people thought carefully about their positions first and made decisions based on reason and logic, but if they can’t or they refuse to, it’s infinitely better that they support us rather than the Left. We need them to help vote for the right politicians and policies. If we wait until everyone on our side only uses the reason and logic approach, we will not see any success for about two hundred and fifty years.

Yes, in the end, after all the gloom and doom in my writings, I’m quite an optimistic person. I think that we will have our previously mentioned utopia where everyone only uses reason and logic to make decisions and we try to change each other’s mind via adult discussion, by 2268. Of course that may not be achieved by convincing everyone that reason and logic is the way to go, but by inventing interstellar travel and terraforming. If you don’t know how that would help, then you should know that you’re missing out on a once in a life time (one-way) trip, that had you been living two hundred and fifty years in the future, you would be taking.

The second and maybe more important effect is that it will silence the idiots of the Left.

You see, for the last few decades now, though it has been much worse recently, we were the ones who have been shamed into silence. We have been called names for having the wrong opinions, and been told we are immoral white men who because of those three reasons are not allowed to have an opinion on certain matters. The minority has bullied the majority and instead of standing up for ourselves and fighting back, we have slinked away in embarrassment and fear and let the madmen / madwomen / madtransmen / madtranswomen take control of … well everything.

But there’s no use in crying over spilt milk. Unless your tears have some sort of time reversing effect.

Now we have to stop insane and monumentally stupid ideas from becoming the accepted norm.

We can’t convince them that we’re right because most Leftists have the well-known disease of being-an-imbecile-itus. The most effective thing we can do is to show them how even though they look like they have the moral high ground, they are in fact as immoral as … I’m just no good at metaphors or similes am I. I don’t know why I put myself through the ordeal of having to think of one.

They will scream and shout at first, but since they believe that being moral is of supreme importance, if we continuously challenge their assumption of moral superiority on a regular basis, they will quickly become far more cautious about expressing their opinions, as they will not want to have discussions that question their morality or even to deal with the possibility of being proven morally inferior. It’s just too frightening for them.

This tactic will encourage the Left, as it once did the right, to crawl away into their holes and to never have the temerity to utter their stupid ideas ever again. They can keep their opinions – it’s impossible to change their minds, we just have to ensure that they don’t infect others with their insanely ridiculous ideas. This will leave normal people in charge of the world and instead of worrying about idiotic things like gender pronouns and whether transwomen can use the girl’s loo, we can go back to worrying about normal things like corruption and sleaze.

The goal is to make their beliefs and pseudo morality as taboo as they have made ours.

This is achieved by pointing out their immorality and hypocrisy.

By the way, proving to those who think they are morally superior that they are in fact morally inferior, is a delicious moment.

I invite you to try it.

You’ll love it, I promise.

Sam Taylor

I'm Sam Taylor. I don't really like pointing out stupidity when I see it, but I'm going to. It's my way of reaching out to those who can actually think.

Recent Posts