Categories
BW Member Blog

Barking At Our Own Reflections

When I was still young enough to use hair gel, my family had a dog that was…eh…special. The poor pooch was confused in many ways. He would bite his tail when the offending member walloped him as it wagged. He would hide from the clock when it chimed on the hour, and he was noted for wetting his food before dining (don’t ask).
Above all of this the dog would bark hysterically at his reflection in just about any mirror. It was sad but frequently drew a laugh.
What does this have to do with us, you ask? Happy to oblige.
When I arrived at BW.com I commented that this was the most polite platform that I had ever seen. It was a place of decorum and polite discourse. I was so impressed that I bragged about it to my extremist, Marxist-Leninist younger brother.
Today that might be in danger. The left has managed to steal an election, they are lining up the country for major changes in the wrong direction, and they are looking to do damage to individuals and organizations that supported Donald Trump. Scary, right?
Not as frightening as the real problem. That problem is that we (yep, I’m guilty of it, too) are all too ready to circle up the firing squad and let loose the volley.
Just like that confused canine I mentioned, we might be barking at our own reflections, lately. The quick and severe comments, counter posts, and insults are a sign that we are turning on each other when our real opponents seem immune to our reasoning and rebukes.
This may seem silly. It may appear inconsequential. It is not. It is a stress fracture formed by the impact of these last few weeks. If it continues we will find cracks in the foundation of Conservative resistance. We will see open fault lines in the ground that we maintain after all of our losses.
We are on the same team. We are the reinforcements. None other will arrive to help us. We are in terrible danger of losing more than we already have if we keep dividing ourselves while they conquer. 
Scoring verbal points against that lady or gentleman that wrote words that we do not understand might seem witty. It might also be missing some very good points.
Please, put the anger to work in constructive ways. The era of Twitter and Facebook style venting is over. It got us to this very unpleasant point. Please, play the long game. Put your words and actions into a beneficial focus.

Bark less and be well, my friends.

75 replies on “Barking At Our Own Reflections”

I’m lost. Are we supposed to censor our thoughts? Or it’s still okay to think whatever, just should keep it to ourselves?
And use the built-in cancel culture as a preemptive measure?
IMHO there is more than enough safe spaces for those require them, why turn the few remaining spots of actual conversation to those too?
Of course we want to be “constructive” but who is the arbitrator what counts as that? What if some people think different tracks? You may call it verbal points, but isn’t discussing the differences is the construction, rather than lining up behind some random action without knowing what makes it a good idea? I thought mostly that is the left’s realm of operation.

You are lost… if you are operating under the misunderstanding that I am trying to control speech. I’m not talking about controlling anyone’s speech. I’m not an authority figure nor have I implied that I am. I haven’t sent the police to your home. I did not call for a boycott. No one is gathering on your lawn.
“Censor our thoughts”? I’m not certain you read anything that I wrote. Free thought is fundamental to the idea of freedom. I do not advocate for censorship. I do advocate for keeping civility. This is for practical reasons. When insults fly, tempers rise and the subject matter becomes secondary. We have a tremendous amount of work to do on our side of the philosophical/political spectrum and it won’t get done with insults and antagonism aimed at Conservatives who are trying to have real discussions. You know, the people trying to find out “what makes a good idea.”
The left are emotional. That is how they operate. They held on to the Fascist idea of Actualization. In essence Actualization says ” follow your emotional outrage and ignore all of that constructive, thoughtful, reasoned debate.” I do not think that we would benefit from taking on this failed and self destructive tactic.
I believe that reason, thought, calculation, deliberation all build better discussion. Insults simply do not. Personal attacks don’t put us on the moon, design better cars, make air travel safer and more efficient. Disagreement can and does. The difference between insults and disagreements is not even slightly ambiguous. It is extremely obvious.
What I said was nothing, at all, in any way, to any degree like cancel culture. Nothing. Not even a little.
Cancel culture demands that all people agree. I did not.
Cancel culture ostracizes, I spoke against such actions among Conservatives.
Cancel culture demonizes individuals. I have disagreed with the efficacy of that behavior.
Cancel culture seeks to remove validity from philosophies by smearing the person or persons speaking. I merely asked that civility be used among our ranks to discuss differences in philosophy.
Cancel culture does not want discussion, at all. I do. I would love to see more discussion rather than trolling, smearing and acting like the leftist preadolescents that inhabit so much of the internet.
My quoted terms “scoring verbal points” was not discouraging intellectual points of fact but silly, ineffectual ad hominem attacks based on nothing more than ego and temper. When these elements enter a discussion, it ceases to be an intelligent debate or discussion and becomes an infantile tantrum…Such as has been on every other social media platform.
No, my friend, I am not saying what you presume that I said. A cautious reexamination of my post might yield a different perspective. If it is my writing and lack of clarity, I apologize. I cannot see where I implied anything close to what you read into my post. I’m happy to discuss it, though.

By Post Author

This second approach looks much better. 🙂
Maybe it’s not /what/ you wrote but where… I look at most posts here and didn’t see any attacks worth noting or sparring just for the sake of it. Maybe you talk about other forums without providing that context. If it applies here, maybe some example would help, otherwise it looks you find attacks where people just discuss and treat fair discussion as a bad thing. While not even wanting to do that.

I won’t name names but I have seen the attacks. A scroll through the comments of this very post will show you some examples. Prior to this post they existed, as well.
The sad fact is that no web address is safe from trolls. My words will likely make no impact on them. I was simply making a statement. The issue is that these things have consequences.

By Post Author

Are you talking about Edward Smith? If so, just ignore him like most of people with reason do. I suggested that in one of my first posts here. Also that the infrastructure here unfortunately lacks the convenient measure of just clicking “block” as would be natural, and make easy to starve out the trolls. I think I have one more on my virtual twit list. out of hundreds. Generalizing from the small sample is not fair.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wRYjtvIYK0

Perceptive. Hahaha!
I agree that a block function could serve a purpose. Then again, when I was on Facebook and Twitter I seldom blocked anyone. I wanted the trolls to present their non-arguments in contrast to those that spoke from a place of honest interest in ideas and facts. It could be a defective sentiment but I think it served a purpose for a while. I dropped Facebook some years ago.
This post was not meant to generalize the commenters and bloggers on here. No, I would say that the majority are wonderful people.The vast majority I would gladly talk with over a drink. That is grievously rare these days. I miss that.
In any event, I appreciate your comments, Pal.

By Post Author

It helps to be having to take on something that is of the utmost importance: the future of this country of ours.

On our own. Entirely on our own. No Saint Ronaldus or Base Human Donald to shift the burden onto.

I suggest that that “barking” you describe is a symptom of the conservative community’s greatest weakness, which also happens to be its greatest strength. Conservative individuals usually wish to be “left alone” to their own devices and tend to be self reliant and independent of thought (strength). Unfortunately, this seemingly-isolationist behavior does not lend itself to graciousness (weakness) — especially in the form of faux politeness (strength?).
I support the notion of politeness and courtesy, but Gallstones has succinctly implied below that too often the “scolds” across the entire political spectrum need to be called out and discredited. There is no room for politeness and courtesy when doing so. The important thing to remember when pondering an attack upon the scolds, is picking one’s battles is important for efficient time management.

I concur. Even the devil can be polite, so I see it more of a tool with its proper utility, rather than a virtue. Some people simply need a stern reality check from time to time. Any harsh or derisive comments I make, despite how fiery they might seem, are very cold and calculated. Though I do try to offer solutions to those I’m chastising.

Consider that “some people” might include yourself. Taking a wild guess, I’d venture that you would prefer an honest but moderate response over an armor piercing verbal round to the midline.
I really do believe that decency works. I’ve seen it happen.

By Post Author

It helps to know when you’re in the kitchen.

If you lack the mettle to defend your best ideas from the worse barbs maybe your best ideas are not as good as you think, or you are not the one to advance them.

That said, if you cannot criticize in a way that is not always hurtful, it is time to question why you are there.

But it is always possible that the people who say you’ve hurt them do not realize they are in fact Intellectual or Emotional Hemophiliacs.

Warren Zevon wrote a song about the boxer Ray “Boom Boom Mancini:

When Alex Arguello gave Boom Boom a beating
Seven weeks later he was back in the ring
Some have the speed and the right combinations
If you can’t take the punches it don’t mean a thing

Intelligent discourse seldom needs the element of aggression to find its mark. If a point is worth making it is worth crafting to convey accurately and with little clutter.
When a person hears an insult they do change the way that they perceive the message, itself. Once that happens you have intellectual/emotional clutter. It may not cause a nervous breakdown but it very often causes a communication breakdown. I understand that some will disagree with that. I do not believe them but I understand that they disagree with it.

By Post Author

I agree. There is a problem, though, with those who can’t distinguish between aggression and passion or determination. I have often been accused of aggression because I sometimes argue passionately. Even merely expressing myself confidently has been taken to be aggression.

None of that is the fault of the speaker.

I disagree with that. To say that the speaker is never in error leaves no room for self examination and self improvement.

By Post Author

Now I disagree. What I described happens all the time. Speakers can’t be held responsible for erroneous interpretations of their words because they have no control over and no way to know the content of people’s minds. You’re not responsible for the way others react – if others can do that to you, we get Jiggly Puff, cancel culture, speech codes, censorship and now overt oppression of thought.

There used to be pretty strict criteria for what constitutes incitement. That’s gone now. Look at how our new tyrants are looking for any excuse, or no excuse, to twist into treason every syllable Trump, and each of the rest of us, says. Trump didn’t incite anything on the 6th but nearly no one is admitting that. It’s all insurrection this and treason that.

Unless a speaker is a mind-reader or commits one of the very few exceptions to free speech (like actual incitement), he is not responsible for reactions to his words.

Clarity is a great device for making known a sentiment. Civility follows as a means of keeping the focus on the meaning rather than the emotion.
Yes, people can willfully take things out of context. One such person has messaged and commented quite a bit on this very post. I do not think that is a good or honorable thing to do.
The truth is that we Conservatives have a foundation of responsibility Not for the feelings of others but for our words and actions.
There are predictable outcomes to certain actions. A casual observer can, if that observer is honest, understand that trolling will bring about divides. It happens. You do not have to agree. The truth stands whether or not we agree with it.
When Conservatives (on this platform) attack one another, we bring about division. That is the last thing we need at this time.
I do not see how that is seen as controversial and dictatorial. In fact, I have not told anyone what or how to do anything.
I am literally laughing at the irony of some of the comments.

By Post Author

I would like to live in the world you have created with your mind.

You and Scott Adams are two peas in a pod.

This country can be restored. You will no doubt claim credit for helping to do so. At the celebration of this country’s restoration, your presence will be tolerated by those who actually accomplished that restoration.

Because we will be Gracious.

I think, perhaps, you feel that you know me. I’m afraid that you do not.
My call for civility among Conservatives is for the preservation and growth of our ideas. I do not and have not stifled ideas. I simply call for what Benjamin Franklin called for; Civil discourse.
I am glad that you tolerate me, Edward. I will happily return the favor.

By Post Author

I suppose one such as you are could be useful at the celebration of the Restoration of these United States by people who bring more fight that you do.

You could do the Floral Arrangements.

Think what you want to, Edward.
Whatever has hurt your feelings in my post seems truly to have broken you badly.
I hope you recover.

By Post Author

I would like to live in the world you have created with your mind.

I would not. You are a braver man than I am. Or perhaps you’re more masochistic. 😉

Well, my life would be so simpler if I could live a lie and that lie would never burst like the bubble all lies are.

But it is always possible that the people who say you’ve hurt them do not realize they are in fact Intellectual or Emotional Hemophiliacs.

This is exactly correct. Political correctness is the term used for the past 30+ years to define what is acceptable speech in an attempt to protect the “hemophiliacs” from emotional pain. I continue to say, “To hell with those who bleed so easily. I will not suppress my language to meet some undefinable safe-space-defined threshold.”

No. Political correctness was a means of the Marxist to steer thought toward the left. The brittle hearts came with the application of a pseudo ethical structure that said that “we are right no matter what we call you but you must always address us with respect and courtesy.”
The difference there is titanic.

By Post Author

That sounds like a good policy, Edward. I recommend you listen to that instinct.

By Post Author

That may be your experience with Political Correctness, but it is not mine throughout the late 80’s and onward. Therefore, contradicting my assertion above is rather arrogant.

David, that wasn’t a personal attack. I was stating history. I was not trying to attack your statement. Literally, the purpose behind the creation of political correctness was to rewrite what is acceptable to say, even as the Marxists say outlandish things.
I was speaking of the historical phenomenon, not your experience.
Bill has a video on this that explains it really well.

By Post Author

My intent was not to claim it was an attack. Rather, my comment was merely based upon my own historical observations, which, at at the outset, did not include Marxists — just the naivete of good intentions that, in my experience, always lead to hell. It seems my comment was the typically poorly-worded internet response. The written word is not conversational, regardless of my intent.
All that being said (written? typed?), I remain unconvinced that political correctness in our society has been the contrivance of Marxists. Contrarily, I submit that those Marxists and other powerful groups have leveraged an opportunity provided by the ignorant, intellectually-lazy people who live in wealthy, western countries.

Thanks. I suppose I let my own history dissuade me from investigating this longer history. The old dog can be taught as “they” say. It seems that the term “politcally correct” was originally used disparagingly but socialists to indicate someone whose loyalty to the Communist Party line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. Since then it has obviously evolved into a term that protects the feelings of thin-skinned people who generally-oppose individual liberty.
Needless to say, I care not for the “titanic differences” that you described above. All motivations for political correctness are reprehensible, and I will not comply with such B.S.

It is difficult to see political correctness and civility as the same things. One is impressed upon us by political and social forces that seek to silence disagreement.
The other is an agent of greater discussion and exchange of ideas in a functional manner.
I have heard the two used interchangeably but have never seen this as a defensible idea.
The Socratic Method allows us to poke holes in an idea while reasonably discussing that idea with its earnest holder. It has been used by a great many Conservatives (to include Bill Whittle) when speaking to the most ardent leftists. I cannot see anyone calling Bill politically correct. He persuades. He doesn’t lodge a proverbial claw hammer in their think box. If he can do that for the left, why would it be politically correct to employ (at least) that kind of respect for other patriots?

By Post Author

I do consider that. Even today, there have been times I’ve berated chewed out, to a humiliating degree. Instead of getting defensive, I’ll reflect upon the reason for the persons reaction, and there are plenty of times were they were justified in doing so. Even I’ve needed a proper slap in the face from time to time.

You have a very mild response, then. It is not typical. There is a predictable outcome to most aggressive behavior. It is not greater civility.

By Post Author

Fair enough. But much of that comes from experience, humility, and self reflection; or as the generations before me called it: having a thick skin. I used to be very typical in my younger years. The last decade in particular has not been very kind to me, yet I’m still here and still fighting, having gone through much of it alone. However, it’s not lost on me that there are people who have had it far far worse than I have. My heart and respect goes out to them.

So seeing people who are used to the best living conditions humanity has ever seen, seemingly do little, and then complain when things go wrong is infuriating. But I guess it’s all relative. You know, it’s funny, some people are wondering where our Washington or Patton is right now, and these same people think I’m harsh. What do they think these beloved leaders would do if they were their armies?

The good news is that Ive never made the assumption that you are harsh.
The bad news is that the last decade was far from kind to me, too. I lost a business, sold my home for far less than I should have, and worse, lost my wife to cancer. Still, I think it’s a good idea to use reason rather than rage.
A thick skin is a great resource. It allows us to not take things personally and answer with reason rather than the emotional steam that powers the left.
Patton got himself in a world of trouble in his day with those “thick skinned” soldiers and citizens of the era. Tough guy, Patton. I respect him. I wish he had acted differently at times but am inspired by the great acts of valor he and the men that served with him were capable of.

By Post Author

Oh, no. I can be very harsh at times. Sorry for your loss. As a cancer survivor myself, I know how scary it can be.

I have not noticed harshness in your comments. I don’t lose sleep over comments. I have been around too long to take it personally. The worry comes from seeing Conservatives rip one another to pieces and then wonder why we always lose political battles…and the culture.
There are certainly times to get stern with people. Everyone agrees with that. The problem is that a lot of comments are really unnecessary. They start divisions that have real and lasting consequences.
As I just wrote to someone else, we quote the words “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” We also recall the words “We must all hang together or we shall surely hang separately.”

Thanks, Danny. I am inspired every time I meet a cancer crusher. I hope and pray the best for you.

By Post Author

Because you shout your farts out loud everywhere you go. You don’t listen to the jackass who is loud and deadly, you cannot help but hear and smell them.

Take you Fartistic Act someplace people want to hear and smell it.

You seem like the sort of Humbugger who likes to Hum while He Buggers.

Ought you not do that in private?

I just described your favorite hobby, outside of being a Pompous Ass.

Now toddle off somewhere and be a Prick to people more like you.

You spend a lot of time imaging things about me, Ed. Some might call that a psychological issue. I hope that you get help.
Also, this is my post. Feel free to toddle off and be ridiculous somewhere else.

By Post Author

You are the Sick Bastard who is obsessed with me.

I should put a Restraining Order on you.

But you are the kind of Asshole who ignores Restraining Orders.

Still, I can restrain you from bothering other Good & Decent folk.

I shall bear the cross that is having you as an unwanted pet.

Again, you are on my post. You just cannot let go of this obsession.
By all means, swear out a restraining order.
You need help.

By Post Author

You go under two names, then?

I meant the Very Top.

The Originating Post.

I clarify, lest you be Too Dense.

Ladies and gentlemen of BWDC.

I have proposed to this … Fool … that we continue this Most Unpleasant Exchange on the PM.

He does seem to be the sort who has no qualms about ruining someone else’s party, though.

So you are Two-Faced.

So one of them can be deleted by the administrators but you can continue to Troll?

Neither of them is your real name either, I daresay.

This is my one account and my actual name.

I dislike being Dishonest. And I despise Liars.

Are you on blood pressure meds? It seems like you might need them, about now.
You poor little man.
Listen, why don’t you just calm down, talk to someone that can help you.

By Post Author

I should have just offered you up into God’s hands from the get-go.

Have a nice life.

You need Prayer, so I shall Pray for you.

And your family. I have every reason to think you are as much trouble to them as you have made yourself to people here.

I’m glad you did. GOD has been kind to me. I’ll pray for you as well, Ed.
My life is nice. Thanks, Ed.

By Post Author

Thank you for your prayers. Even when I am being prickly, it’s never out of malice. I at least attempt to channel my asshole-ish behavior for the forces of good.

To your point, I think it has less to do with Conservatives ripping one another to pieces than it does with our desire to want to be left alone coupled with squishy leadership. Well, it’s more complicated than that. The Left relies upon simple, emotional rhetoric, and most of us aren’t prepared for the nuances and historical and scientific facts of how they are wrong; and rather than look like a fool for making a poor case, we just want to carry on our way, so we just back down. After all, Upton, do you really want this single mother and her 13 children to starve? Are you really that heartless? I believe that is why we lose, because it is so much more difficult to make the proper case.

Infighting certainly seems to be built into our DNA; not just humans, but animals generally. Stop me if you’ve heard this one: “There is growing division in the Tea Party!” “Antifa is tearing itself apart!” It’s on every level: family, community, political party, country, etc. Much like Capitalism is a mechanism to harness self-interest to the benefit of more than just the individual, infighting seeks to organize a group against a larger threat. Now, I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, but even within this small community under BillWhittle.com we see it.

While we do need to come together, it needs to be under the right ideas. We’ve already followed the Mitch McConnells and George Bushes of the Right for too long, and that has been just as devastating as having a divided Right. What’s more, as individuals, we react to situations differently. Some need soft words of encouragement, others a swift kick in the ass; yet more still are beyond a reasonable or timely approach, and should be ignored (unless you’re bored). Sometimes it takes trial and error to figure out which approach works best.

Truly, infighting seems preprogrammed into every society. It is discouraging to those that want to have real discussions. That is where the termite takes the townhouse. The trolls breaks down communication. It might not be immediate. It may not be obvious in the beginning…But it happens.
I would not encourage homogeneity. That is a pointless venture. I encourage the exact opposite. The confluence of ideas in a functional way. Trolling is not functional.
Who has any stomach for George Bush and McConnell? Much like you, I witnessed them take up the torch and march…Right up until Frankenstein stepped out to meet us. These turncoats are not representative of us. We do not believe in weakness…But civility is not weak. Not at all. Civility is why family units stay together. It’s why we distinguish ourselves from the ANTIFA and BLM criminals that sought to harm innocent people. It is why our kids can go to school or play outside in most of this country without worrying about reckless violence.

By Post Author

Having read from some of our early statesmen, I think it entirely possible…Even artful.

By Post Author

Ah, but many of those statesmen were experts at word smithing the perfectly-artful riposte that would cause much angst and ire.
That said, being nasty and distasteful with the intent to bolster one’s own ego is best avoided.

I’ve seen some of those, too. Andrew Jackson, Alexander Hamilton, and Aaron Burr were some of these. Good thing they did not escalate out of proportion.

By Post Author

Certainly, there are concerns. Rifts in the Conservative movement would be a large one. I mean no regulation of thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. I simply point out that our side is troubled enough without massive internal conflict.

By Post Author

I appreciate your words, and agree that generally the commenters are gracious, well-spoken (i.e.written) in their opinions, and mindful of the differences we all bring to the group. Obviously, we wouldn’t be members if we didn’t share a love of America as it was originally founded, and want to keep the traditions and core concepts that have allowed America to reach the pinnacle of success. Our success is under attack, and it’s accelerating.
Nerves are raw, but let’s all remember we are on the same side, and many who are against us have been deluded by non-stop indoctrination from every part of our culture. Many of us here are older and we weren’t 1984’d to the degree our children have been. Let us be quick to listen and slow to speak.

Leave a Reply