Wednesday, 25 February 2015

Liberalism and the Mutually Exclusive Argument

I have found over the years that when I am speaking to someone on certain topics I'm waiting to see what direction they attack from. Not physically of course, but verbally. In any discussion you will hear arguments that are made to change your opinion and that is how it should be. But I have noticed that often Liberals or those pushing a Liberal agenda, sometimes in ignorance of that fact, will use two mutually exclusive arguments.

A mutually exclusive argument is where more than one idea is being pushed, but if one of them is true then it makes the other argument null and void. For example I might argue that the Moon is made of rock or I may argue that the Moon is made of cheese. The Moon may, at least theoretically, be made of either  rock or cheese, but it cannot be made of both. So when I argue that the Moon is both made of rock and cheese that is a mutually exclusive argument. One might be true, the other might be true but they cannot both be true.

But you will hear Liberals and others on the broad Left often argue their case with mutually exclusive arguments.

Feminists will be heard to argue that there is no real difference between men and women, in other words men and women are equal. But you are just as likely to hear them argue that men oppress women and women need to gain equality with men. These are mutually exclusive arguments. If men and women are equal then it is impossible for men to oppress women because such oppression would prove that men and women were not equal. If there is no difference between the sexes then there is no such thing as womens rights or womens issues because quite simply apart from biology there is no such thing as women, or men for that matter. It works in reverse as well, if men do oppress women then women cannot be equal to men, its that simple. Two completely contrary ideas being pushed to argue the for the same cause.

We hear it in arguments about Global Warming, the world is hotter than it was in the past and then half a minute later if we don't do something now the world will get hotter. They are mutually exclusive, one may be true or the other may be true but both cannot be true. We cannot be at war and going to be at war, we either are at war or we are not. We are either in the middle of an environmental catastrophe or we will be, but we cannot be in it now and about to be in it.

The Left Liberals are very good at this mutually exclusive argument, they like to argue that we shouldn't be held back by old fashioned outdated ideas and then to argue that there is nothing new about this, people have been doing this since Moses was a boy. If a couple aren't getting along then they should divorce, someone argues that marriage is sacred and the Left Liberal argues back that you shouldn't be so old fashioned. Then when someone argues that allowing anyone and everyone to divorce is a dangerous new idea, they argue that its a very old idea, Henry the VIII got divorced you know, its been going on for a long time.

They also like the obscure exception. Having sex with children is wrong most people would argue, but the Left Liberal will say "ohhh but this obscure tribe has sex with their children and they've been around for thousands of years!". Then that obscure exception is treated as if its not an exception, as if it is the accepted norm. As the late Lawrence Auster wrote "Christians say in the name of Christ, Muslims say in the name of Allah, Liberals say studies have shown.". When these studies are investigated you find out the tribe consisted of 30 people who no body knows how long they have really existed as a people for and that its nearly impossible to work out if the claim was true, embellished or a lie. But these obscure exceptions are used just as the mutually exclusive argument is, not as a tool of logic but as a tool of deception.

When you find yourself having one of these discussions remember to look out for the mutually exclusive argument. You might not win over the Liberal, but you might get the person next to them thinking and thats a win.

Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Creating Wealth


  1. You have to remember that as far as liberals are concerned this is a feature, not bug. Orwell understood that once you can persuade people to believe things that are clearly and obviously mutually exclusive you have broken their spirit.

    War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

    People know these things are mutually exclusive but they must pretend to believe them because they are afraid not to. They must be delighted that the chocolate ration has been increased from 20 grams to 25 grams even though they know full well that the ration has in fact been reduced from 30 grams to 25 grams. Once you have people believing these things they can no longer trust their own minds, their own memories, their own ability to reason. They simply believe what they are told to believe.

    The planet is cooling, which proves that the planet is warming. Rainfall is increasing, which proves that global warming is true. At the same time rainfall is declining, which proves that global warming is true. The ice caps are melting, which proves that global warming is true. The ice caps are expanding, which proves that global warming is true.

    Men and women are equal in every respect, but women must be given special dispensation because they cannot compete with men. All races are equal and can compete on a level footing, but some races must be given a head start in the race because they cannot compete on a level footing. Freedom must be preserved at all costs even if it means abolishing freedom in order to do it. Peace is our objective which is why we are going to war once again. Our enemies are barbarians and we are civilised. That’s why we have to rain death from the skies upon women and children. Russia is aggressive and expansionist which is evil. That’s why we need to be aggressive and expansionist towards them, which is good. Democracy is sacred. That’s why we have to overthrow democratically elected governments, in order to save democracy. We had to destroy the village to save it.

    All you have to remember is that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

  2. Mr.Doom

    Your quite correct it is a feature not a bug, I was going to use that phase but didn't. One small point of disagreement. I think people do get confused and bewildered by these types of arguments. Which is why its a good thing to point out.

    Mark Moncrieff