Leftist Vocabulary

Do you realize that if the following words — racism, sexism, homophobia, hate, islamophobia, and a few others — didn’t exist, the left would have no arguments?

None. Zip, zilch, nada, bupkus … zero.

There’d be no protesters in the streets, because today’s protesters would have no idea what they’d be protesting about.

Without those words, people who today run to them at the first sign of a counter-argument, would have to put up a substantive argument … or shut up.

In other words, they’d have to shut up, because there are no substantive arguments on the left.

Oh, don’t get me wrong — there are substantive ideas on the left. There’s even substantive thinking on the left. Not much of either, but some.

The problem is that lefty ideas and thinking have been so thoroughly rebutted that the left gave up and went straight to, you guessed it, “racism, sexism, homophobe … etc.,  etc.”

The other problem is that the left gave up so quickly and easily. For us on the right, there was no option. We beat the substantive arguments, then had to defend our thinking and our ideas from every which ridiculous way, and from every ludicrous angle. And, of course, from the “racist, sexist, homophobe … etc., etc.” angle.

We on the right can back up our thinking without having to resort, ever, to “racist, sexist, homophobia … etc., etc.” or any other nonsensical flapdoodle. Because we’ve had to, so we’ve done it.

Think of the places where the left have had free reign to re-make society completely: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Eastern Europe, Africa, many countries in South America, and more. Not one successful country. Every one a failed country, in which basic human rights were non-existent, and death, poverty, despair were rampant. Where random brutality was a 24/7/365 menace in everyone’s life.

We on the right didn’t have to do too much more than point to history, and contemporary times to rebut the thinking of the left. And the left had, and still has, nothing to say, except, of course, “racist, sexist, homophobe … etc., etc.

We on the right should challenge leftists to argue with us, but tell them that no one can use any of the stupid words. It would be a funny argument, as we watch and listen to them hem and haw, and fumble for words, and struggle to put together something, anything, coherent.

Actually, the inability to use any of the stupid words would handicap us too. It’s easy, after all, to prove that, really, the left has the “isms” problem.

For example: Racism? Say the following: “Detroit.” And, abortion disproportionately kills black babies. By the thousands. By the millions.

Sexism? Leftist policies have impoverished tens of millions of women … economically, spiritually, morally.

Homophobia? The support on the left for homosexuality as an “alternative lifestyle,” rather than the death style that it is, has killed millions of gay people.

Say something like, “Every time the left takes a position on a moral argument, someone dies. A baby, black people, gays, women, old people…” Wait for them to pick up their jaws.

The left have never had to defend their “thinking” against such accusations, because the press don’t allow those arguments even to take place. Not surprising; those charges have no substantive retort. Or at least none that the left have ever made the effort to formulate. The above accusations eviscerate leftist arguments, so they don’t even bother to argue against them.

And what if the press were to allow such arguments to take place? What would happen next? Well, as mentioned above, the left would be forced either (1) to counter the arguments with other arguments, or (2) to bail out, covering their ears and yammering “racist, sexist, homophobe … etc., etc.” over their shoulders as they slither away.

The left do only #2 now. Lots and lots and lots of #2’s.

— xPraetorius






3 thoughts on “Leftist Vocabulary

  1. For example, the recently completed Democrat campaign for President. She had been in the White House for 8 years, for goodness sake! Sec of State, Senator…All that experience and accomplishment under her belt and of what does her campaign consist? ” He’s a misogynist. He’s a racist.”

    There was no way that she could argue issues or philosophies because (a.) there isn’t much substance there, and (b.) the American people, even most on the left, would find the philosophies and agendas reprehensible and unacceptable.

    1. Great point, MB! And one that I left out of my post, sadly!

      An objective truth is that whenever the American people hear about lefty ideas, thoughts, policy prescriptions, they reject them.

      This is probably the root of the contempt the left, and the Democrats, have for “the people,” even though they fulminate constantly about how they’re the “people’s party.”

      If they were really the people’s party, then they’d call themselves “Conservative.”

      Really, though, the left are convinced that they know what’s best for everyone, and are willing to impose that vision, whether the recipients of that vision want it or not.

      The result? We started the list: The Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba, death, despair, poverty on so many levels.


      — x

Please 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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s