https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZ7xXDRMr02/?stkn=MXNhMGpna2V1a3Bucg==
I’m not defending the pride flag necessarily, although individuals flying it are protected by the first amendment. But watching ASPL being surprised by the results of their actions and having inclusion bite them in the ass, is hilarious. That the ASPL will not lear anything from this is a given.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1F7fnBRzoY/?mibextid=wwXIfr
If you spend any time discussing politics or culture with progressives online, you've probably noticed a frustrating pattern.
It usually doesn’t matter how much data you present, or how many facts, or how much evidence. You can walk through airtight logic step by step. But if any of that is irrefutable or uncomfortable to them, their feelings override it all.
They stop arguing the topic and start diagnosing you:
"You're not willing to listen."
"You need to educate yourself."
"You have a blind spot."
"You just want to prove your point."
Thomas Sowell explained this decades ago in The Vision of the Anointed.
He observed that progressives don't see political disagreements as debates between people weighing evidence and trade-offs differently. They see them as contests between the enlightened and the ignorant, the virtuous and the malevolent.
If you disagree, there are only two possible explanations in their framework: you don't understand, or you don't care. The possibility that you fully understood their argument and still concluded they were wrong simply doesn't exist in their mental model.
That's why the phrases are so predictable (and so common from topic to topic and even person to person).
They aren't arguments. They're diagnoses. You aren't someone who examined all the evidence and simply came to a different conclusion. No, you're a patient exhibiting symptoms of ignorance or hatred.
Jonathan Haidt (a progressive, himself) actually tested this. In his excellent book, The Righteous Mind, he surveyed thousands of Americans across the political spectrum and asked them to answer moral questions as if they were their political opponents.
Conservatives and moderates consistently predicted how liberals would answer. Liberals were the worst at predicting how conservatives think.
And the way they failed was pretty revealing. They overwhelmingly assumed conservative positions were driven by selfishness, cruelty, or ignorance rather than by genuinely different moral priorities.
In other words, conservatives understand the left's arguments.
The left usually cannot even accurately describe the right's arguments. And yet they're the ones telling us to "educate ourselves."
Once you understand this framework, their phrases start to translate themselves:
• "Educate yourself" means "Read the sources I agree with until you reach my conclusion."
• "You just want to prove your point" means "Your facts are dismantling my position and I need you to stop."
• "You're not willing to listen" means "How could anyone possibly disagree with me or see the world differently than I do?”
• "You have a blind spot" means "I can't find your error, but you must be wrong because you disagree with me."
• "You don't want to understand" means "In my framework, understanding and agreement are the same thing."
• "It's not my job to educate you" means "I don't have a counterargument but I need to exit without admitting that."
Notice what every single one of these phrases has in common. Not one of them is an argument. Not one presents evidence. Not one identifies a specific factual error. They all treat your disagreement as a symptom to be explained rather than a position to be engaged.
Which is why I’ve found the fastest way to cut through this is to simply ask one short question that forces them to apply their own standard consistently.
For example, when someone called me a bigot yesterday for criticizing Islamic ideology, all I had to ask was: "Is it also bigotry to criticize Christian nationalism?" And he disappeared.
He had no other choice…
He either had to apply his own definition of bigotry consistently and say yes (which means he and everyone he agrees with needs to stop doing it). Or he has to say no, which means his standard is selectively applied, or go silent, which tells the audience everything they need to know.
Now I want to be clear. I'm not saying every progressive engages this way.
I’ve engaged with plenty of people on the left who can engage honestly and substantively. But this pattern is common enough, and predictable enough, that two of the most respected social scientists in the country (Haidt, being a progressive himself) wrote entire books about it.
So if you find yourself frustrated by these kinds of responses, just recognize, they’re designed to frustrate you.
These phrases don't exist to advance a conversation. They exist to end one. They give the person using them permission to walk away feeling morally superior without ever having to address the substance of what you said.
Listen, I'm 100% open to having my mind changed. Bring me evidence I haven't seen. Show me data that contradicts what I've presented. Point out a logical flaw I missed. I'll engage it seriously.
But telling me I need to "educate myself" as your mic drop moment before you exit (all because I weighed your argument against the evidence and found it wanting) isn't a counterargument.
It's just a way for you to pretend to be superior as you surrender.
https://www.instagram.com/p/DcyYpfsOH9U/?stkn=YzM1Z2V2MjJkdzd3
More notes from the InJustice system.
https://x.com/ianmsc/status/2097692944824414348?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
One more thing that they said wasn't happening, and now Newsome is bragging about doing what they said didn't/couldn't happen.
https://x.com/thrillarilla369/status/2097438529030631548?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
" This should make you angry. This is Bonnie Pierce, a 38-year-old mother of three from St. Paul, Minnesota. Her house caught fire. She and two of her children escaped, then realized her toddler was still inside. Bonnie went back in, found the child, but could not get out. She shielded the child with her body. She died from her burns. The child survived. A GoFundMe for her family raised about $42,000. By comparison, more than $1,000,000 was raised on GoFundMe for Lindsay Clancy, who was charged with killing her children. It is a sad reflection of the society we have become. RIP Bonnie."
How messed up is the ASPL that they cheer and fund raise for murderer, and ignore a hero?
https://x.com/jonathanhatami/status/2097699298414674257?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
" Regarding some of the Clancy juror interviews: -Good, normal, reasonable people need to stop trying to get out of jury service. Please. -The CW needs more training on jury selection in child homicide cases. -In child homicide cases, the most important thing is the facts & evidence surrounding the homicide. It’s not an afterthought. And, I’ll be professional, like I always am, but I’m showing compassion and empathy for the child victim, NOT the murderer. This is getting ridiculous. -If you strangle your three children to death you are not a “good” mom and clearly don’t “love” your children. I don’t care about past acts - good or bad. And, just so we are all clear, child abuse usually happens behind closed doors, not in public. Just because we don’t have witnesses to say you are a “bad” mom doesn’t mean you are a “good” mom. -Our society is not in a good place when people are getting “excited,” smiling, cheering, taking videos & selfies and rallying and cheering around a person who strangled her three children to death. The victims & the crime have become an afterthought to some people. That is incredibly sad. -This isn’t about gender. My wife is my best friend. She’s an awesome mom, wife and detective. I work with so many awesome female child abuse and homicide detectives. This is about humanity. It’s not okay, understandable, allowed, excused, justified or relatable to kill your children no matter what you are going through. The government has the responsibility to keep us safe. But a parent’s duty to protect their child is the highest duty. They are ultimately responsible and accountable if they kill their child. -Can people just stop hurting children!"
https://x.com/mabbe_8/status/2097662738436640954?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
" It may be time to have a serious conversation about professional jurors. Listening to the three female boomers from the Lindsay Clancy jury explain their reasoning after the mistrial is disturbing, not because they reached a conclusion I disagree with, but because of how they say they got there. “She loved her children, so she had to have snapped.” “There were no witnesses saying Lindsay was a bad mother.” “The prosecution didn’t show enough compassion.” The prosecution was “harsh.” Reddington was “funny” and “entertaining.” None of that is the legal standard they were instructed to apply. Nobody disputed that Lindsay loved her children or that she suffered from mental illness. Nobody was asking the jury to decide if she was a good mother, whether the prosecutors were compassionate enough, or which lawyer they enjoyed watching more. The question was criminal responsibility: Did her mental illness leave her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct or conform her conduct to the requirements of law? That question had to be decided from the evidence, including her behavior before, during and after the killings, the medical evidence, and the expert testimony. Instead, we're now hearing the female boomer jurors describe reasoning rooted in compassion, motherhood, likability and emotion. "She was a loving mother, therefore she must have snapped" isn't a legal standard. It's an emotional inference. Jurors are absolutely entitled to find reasonable doubt, but they're not entitled to replace the judge's instructions with their own definition of justice. If jurors can't separate what feels right from what the law requires, maybe it's time to seriously debate professional juries. Because three children deserved a verdict based on the evidence and the law, not which side made the jury feel better."
https://x.com/joeconchatv/status/2097367093192618420?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
