Mike Cernovich talks bollocks (again)

Sorry, but this guy is so awful, he fascinates me. I won’t link to it this time, but in an older post, the Mikester is giving us the low-down on just how Neuro-Linguistic Programming has made him a master troll (which kind of gives the game away, I think).

“The key feature of my writing and rhetoric are pattern disrupts. A pattern disrupt, as the name suggests, disrupts a person’s normal mode of thinking.”

Well, that may be what NLP calls it, but from this post, I think it’s actually what TV Tropes (and Wikipedia, actually) call “The Chewbacca Defense” – a strategy of confusing the heck out of your opponent then declaring victory because they can’t respond, or just give up in disgust.

Basically, he talks bollocks in the hope of throwing people off their stride and hence “winning.” To be honest, though, I’m not convinced he’s even the master of that dubious technique he thinks. For instance, he recommends this as a line to throw at “a liberal friend”:

“Walls are for racists. Only racists in Israel put up borders around their countries.”

I think he considers that effective against “liberals” because the only ones he gets to debate with are Democratic Party hacks and as pro-Israel as the rest of the US political mainstream, but believe me, the world is full of left-wingers who hate Israel to the point of outright anti-Semitism, and that comment is probably something they would just agree with, not be confused by.

Here’s another zinger:

“Trump is pro-women. He stands up for moms, who recognise that their sons are more likely to be falsely accused of rape than their daughters are to be raped.”

Cernovich says the answer his (pretty much strawman) “liberal” would give would centre around it redefining “women” as “moms.” Actually, it’s a lot more obvious to ask him what evidence he has that mothers, in general, recognise that their sons are more likely to be falsely accused of rape than their daughters are to be raped. The answer, I think, would be “pretty much none, other than some things swivel-eyed right-wing women pundits said.” Nothing in what he writes suggests the Mikester is an evidence-based debater.

I could go on, but it’s pretty clear that Cernovich “wins” political debates only where he fights weak opponents, probably in front of highly partisan crowds who either don’t notice his clumsy tricks or are so committed to hating his opponents they don’t care. Whether he cares about any of it other than as a game is questionable, although I’d be amazed if he ever leaves that stupid book of his unplugged. Business is business, after all.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in News and politics, Republicans, United States. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s