The Left’s Use of Name Calling as a Means of Getting Their Way

I often get reduced to a homophobe, bigot, or transphobe because I oppose agenda driven manipulation of the LGBTQ lifestyle for political gain. There is a quote from Frederic Bastiat, in his pamphlet “The Law” that pertains to this reductionist strawmanning of nuanced thinkers, where he states that:

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

When I get attacked for this, their reasoning goes that since I am opposed to the use of LGBTQ people for political gain (in the way that the mainstream narrative is painting them as giant victims of heterosexual white men as a means to compel speech and actions), then I must be against LGBTQ people. Of course, the “being used for political gain” part is the aspect that social justice advocates think is reasonable, because they want to compel behaviors and speech of anybody that disagrees with them, and to use the force of law to make the world more like them. This is getting the government involved in matters of preference, and because I’m against government intervention in matters of preference, they reason that I’m therefore against the rights of LGBTQ people. That’s patently ridiculous, because I’m a proponent of individual rights, and the LGBTQ collective is comprised of individuals that have the same access to the rights that I have access to. Such reductionist strawmanning is also used against me because I think that wide open immigration is unhealthy, therefore I must be “bigoted and against any immigration whatsoever.”

Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. ~Saul Alinsky, mentor to both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, from the book “Rules for Radicals”

We must not allow ourselves to be suckered into defending ourselves against such reductionist claims of being a bigot or “phobe” of any sort, as it is just irrational ridicule to get their way, but rather we must stand our ground with our nuanced and principled understanding of the role of law and government. There is nothing to feel guilty or ashamed of when we stand up for healthy individual or collective boundaries; name calling is just a childish means of getting their way. They can try to make us feel shame or guilt for our nuanced viewpoints and principled stand, but that still isn’t going to get them free access to the candy jar they so desperately want into.

About Nathan