Have you ever examined the concept of talking points — a term usually used by the Left?
To the left, talking points are traditionally something to be complained about. In the Leftist's mind, the term is used as a sort of false shorthand, simple-minded repetition, something close to unserious and hypocritical, a sort of trickster's sleight of hand — in one word, something to be debunked by the Left.
This was one of the main "arguments" — obviously, actually a NON-argument — that Charlie Kirk had to fight against on college campuses; leftist students — proudly — declaring they wouldn't engage with the founder of TPUSA or ask him a question, accusing him basically of being a dishonest trickster using, yes, Republican or conservative "talking points".
(This brings up another question: when conservatives go to a leftist demonstration, why is there so often somebody looking semi-official who tells the participants not to engage with "the rightist troll" when he or she tries to interview them? If they want to win elections and influence people, shouldn't they, on the contrary, try to present their case, thereby attracting more followers? They might not win over the conservative himself — although: who knows? — or the majority of his followers, but couldn't it be possible for them — if they were to present their case in logical terms — to win over a not-insignificant proportion of said followers?)
However, the question arises: what is it about talking points that is allegedly wrong with them? Why need they be ridiculed or demonized? Talking points, for a conservative, are, to name a handful: basic rights, fewer taxes, strong defense, family unity, love of country, etc… Correct? Why should that change? Isn't using, isn't mentioning, isn't talking about, the same "points" being, y'know, sort of… consistent?
Think about it:
Isn't the logical conclusion that the use of the term "talking points", therefore, a Leftist tactic to avoid debate?
However, there is another question that deserves to be answered: have you noticed something? There are talking points that nobody ever seems to mention. And I mean never.
What are the talking points of the Left? Think about it: If any talking points are truly unserious, aren't they the Left's talking points?
So what are they? Are you ready?
The talking points of the left's drama queens is (drum roll)… that people on the right are (dramatic pause)… racists.
Isn't that the main one? Also, that they are hypocritical, that they are hate speech spewers, that they are trolls, and, yes, that they are dishonest tricksters — dishonest tricksters using… dishonest talking points (see paragraph above).
And let's not forget Nazis and (little) fascists. Indeed: the Left's talking points have little to no content; they are nothing but ad homonyms and insults and demonizations. Is it any wonder that I assert that The Leftist Worldview in a Nutshell can be summarized as A World of Deserving Dreamers Vs. Despicable Deplorables?
Update: Speaking about leftists over at Instapundit, Sarah Hoyt points out that THEY ALWAYS ACCUSE US OF WHAT THEY’RE DOING..jpeg)
2 comments:
I have yet to debate a Leftist beyond their talking points. They're good at the "topic sentence," but know little to nothing beyond that...except as you point out, epithets.
" If they want to win elections and influence people, shouldn't they, on the contrary, try to present their case?"
That's not the point of a leftist demonstration, which are two.
- intimidate others into going along with the leftists.
- get the demonstrators pumped up through mob action.
Dialogue doesn't enter into it. Which is another reason why they use "We want to open a dialogue" all the time. It means "We want to shut you up."
Post a Comment