The Age Of Irrationality

at

trumpfarage

dan

From top: Donald Trump and former UKIP leader Nigel Farage; Dan Boyle

While irrationality throughout the Globe may present itself in different forms, its consequences are universal.

Dan Boyle writes:

Some years ago when the scale of economic collapse was becoming apparent, John Gormley (as leader of The Greens), made a statement that appealed for a greater sense of fair play from the electorate.

In making the statement he was outlining his own sense of frustration. What he said then was that he was aware of the growing sense of anger, that much of the anger was justified, but in how some of it was being applied was ‘irrational’.

The shorthand version of this was presented as “the voters are irrational”. This wasn’t exactly the nuance he was trying to get across. He was though wrong to say it. When making a negative observation the connotation will always be developed. However he wasn’t wrong in what he said.

Since his making that comment the practice of irrationality has moved beyond our shores, and has become very much part of the international experience.

We live in a dark age. Argument and debate have been deemed superfluous. Facts don’t need to be proven. When cited their existence is intrinsic. The right to be right is instinctive. It is others who are wrong. Always wrong. Wrong about everything.

While irrationality throughout the Globe may present itself in different forms, its consequences are universal. It seeks to bring about the easy answer, the obvious target, the convenient Messiah.

It can be found in an obsession with issues, which in more normal times, would barely be given such consideration. It exists by shying away from any sense of collective responsibility. It creates the pretence that there is equivalence amid many shades of grey. It mythologises the perceived Outsider as being the ultimate in purity.

It is convenience thought for those of us who would prefer not to have to think. We now deal with the wider World through the comfort of self contained boxes of absoluteness. The need or requirement to change only applies to others. Those of us fixed in opinion live with the delusion that we no longer need to challenge ourselves, much less be challenged by others.

Future historians are to be pitied in trying to understand this context. In our time logic has become a luxury; tolerance is seen as a mark of weakness, and acceptance is portrayed as being the actions of a fool.

Not that we can be without hope. History, our story, is a cycle where bleakness sometimes holds sway. As someone who sips from a half full glass, I am seeing some signs that the glass might be replenished.

To achieve that we need an intellectual equivalent of the three hundred Spartans holding thousands at bay at Thermopylae. A vanguard that protects free and open thinking. There is a battle ahead to bring back the light.

This battle between the thoughtful and the unthinking may linger longer and may yet take us into darker recesses, but it has to be fought. It has to be won. There can be no thinking about this.

Dan Boyle is a former Green Party TD and Senator. Follow Dan on Twitter: @sendboyle

Pics: Getty

182 thoughts on “The Age Of Irrationality

  1. Gearóid

    “Some years ago when the scale of economic collapse was becoming apparent, John Gormley (as leader of The Greens), made a statement that appealed for a greater sense of fair play from the electorate.”

    – D’yremember when Gormley gave that speech about Bertie-land? That was great gas, so it was.

    Then he, yourself and the rest all went and propped up that Fianna Fáil government so it could continue to wreck the state. Great gas altogether.

  2. Ray O'Connor

    Greens are consistent in their absolutes attack those that prove them wrong and cowardly hide when attack fails.

    Interestingly keeping with trading of not holding senior officials accountable there’s no official statement from the Greens on allegations regarding the guards

      1. Ray O'Connor

        jaysus that’s gas, it wasn’t put on twitter.

        if he thinks loosing 2 commissioners is bad, he lost three in the CER Reeves, Tutty and Nolan.
        Questions are now being asked about his last political appointee Blaney..

        So speaking as a Green, if somebody brings info to a green minister TD senator in relation to illegal activity what is the party policy.
        What are your Ministers supposed to do?

      2. Ray O'Connor

        Funny when he was in office he wouldn’t investigate.
        And before you say it was, how come the investigator in the department never contacted me, and i have never seen an investigation report.
        Contrary to his statement this is the only correspondence i have received from him or his department, charged with ensuring compliance with government guidelines regarding corporate governance.
        subsequently the northern Irieland regulator found that laws were broken and that the consumer was ripped off by the illegal activity of Ervia supplying false info to the CER
        which has always been central to my allegations

        https://1drv.ms/i/s!Anr6sJk6rdaolEWKmpbSDX7PZurD

  3. rotide

    Good stuff again Dan.

    Comments like the one above are going to prove this articles point of course. Did you do that on purpose?:)

      1. Coppélia

        Divide and conquer.Dan is also suspiciously quiet . I suspect he is busy penning his message of thanks to those who chose to engage with the issue itself.

  4. Steve

    Yer man moyest yesterday on a question of opinion.

    “Oh I’m right. You aren’t though”

    Lol

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            Come on now, Harold. We both know this is down to us kissing in Quinn’s on Saturday.

          1. Coppélia

            Agree. Not a chance. No woman would be deluded enough to compete for lead role of town crier on BS.

          2. Kieran NYC

            +1

            The testosterone-fulled desire to be the best at trolling is blatant

            Must have always been picked last for PE or something

  5. Coppélia

    Hitler was the ultimate flag bearer of die große Lüge . Post truth politics /dark age of irrationality is not a recent phenomenon.

  6. Daisy Chainsaw

    “It is others who are wrong. Always wrong. Wrong about everything.”

    Like Promissory Notes magically changing banker’s gambling debts into sovereign debt? That kind of wrong?

  7. Joe Small

    There’s a handful of posters on here who live in a world of black and white, completing ignoring the fact that life is mostly lived in shades of gray and who clearly have no concept of how government actually functions. I just can’t fathom some people’s intolerance for anyone’s view but theirs. or maybe internet comments sections bring out the worst in people.

    1. Deluded

      I have found that people like to indulge in their emotions. Staid analysis takes second place to gnashing at phantoms.

        1. OhRowShayDoVahaWaile

          You’re a basket case. You shouldn’t be on here explaining your psychosis but actually getting help.

    2. Ray O'Connor

      you can have shades of grey on policy, when two parties form a collation each side has to give.

      But when parties turn a blind eye to the law, ethical standards and obligations of office, to achieve political objectives, that is not a shade of grey, it’s abuse of position, when it relates to abuse of individuals it is vile, evil and sick.

      We have had many scandals involving the state and it’s agents, curiously no civil servant has ever been held accountable.

      As it currently stands that would appear to be the policy of the Greens and other former government parties going forward, so in my opinion the future doesn’t look bright for the next generation as mistakes of the past are built into the decision making processes of the future.

      1. Clampers Outside!

        “But when parties turn a blind eye to the law, ethical standards and obligations of office, to achieve political objectives, that is not a shade of grey, it’s abuse of position, when it relates to abuse of individuals it is vile, evil and sick.”

        Kinda like when the Minister for Justice a few weeks back said about domestic violence during the NWCI AGM… “ideally, all decision making should have a feminist lens”.
        I’ve written to the justice department about this declared bias and how a Minister for Justice can justify such a claim when the feminist lens approach to domestic violence explicitly ignores female perpetrators and ignores male victims….

        I have acknowledgement of my mail and it’s content from the Justice Dept. Still waiting for a response though.

        1. Nigel

          That’s a pity. I blame the torrent of alt-right anti-feminist MRA red pill Gamergate types who target women in various positions of influence and power for abuse and harassment, much of it vile, violent and sexual in nature, but often using the issues you raise here as thin veneers of legitimate complaint, thereby making genuine inquiries such as yours difficult to distinguish from the mass of attack trolling. It really is an awful pity that these important issues have been hijacked and redirected, harming the real victims and the people who care about them. I would go so far as to say these misogynistic harassers are dangerous, destructive, hell-bent on silencing people with differing views, and should be opposed wherever possible.

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          SJW is a term invented by precious far right flowers. They don’t like being labelled for their insane opinions so they think labelling their detractors levels the playing field. Also far right folks engage in anti semitism, racism and co-ordinated abuse of singular people for the crimes of being black or being a woman or being Jewish. “SJWs” call out people for abusing blacks/women/Jews. Trying to equate the two is just wrong.

          1. Lorcan Nagle

            SJW is originally a left-wing term that was co-opted by the right. It meant somebody who spent a lot of time attacking others online for not being ideologically pure enough, or for not being 100% on-message or whatever in their activism, while doing nothing themselves bar lambasting people on the internet.

            Ironically, most of the right-ring types who use the term SJW as a perjoritaive fit the actual definition to a tee.

          2. Clampers Outside!

            SJWs are the most hypocrtical bunch ever seen on this planet, in all fairness. Shutting down freespeech in campuses all over the western world from the UK to Australia. They are a regressive bunch. The SJW term was used as a positive at first too, by supporters.

            Alt-right would include sites like Breitbart, I thought… but yer man Milo has a go at discussing it here and says he’s not. The short discussion starts with a Wall Street Journal definition, and goes from there… worth a look…

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lgl53EXInPc

          3. MoyestWithExcitement

            “SJWs are the most hypocrtical bunch ever seen on this planet, in all fairness. Shutting down freespeech in campuses all over the western world”

            Yes, Clampers. Stopping a crazy racist from saying crazy racist things is just as bad as saying crazy racist things.

          4. Daisy Chainsaw

            I find the ones that use SJW as some kind of insult are Beta cucks who want to be playas in the MRA circlejerk. Frustrated little men throwing a tantrum.

          5. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yeah, the fact they use ‘beta’ and ‘cuck’ frequently says a lot about them. Clearly it’s what they think they really are themselves.

          6. Clampers Outside!

            Don… you can laugh all you like, and call it a nonsense. But it is gender-feminism that has ruined any hope of feminism ever being seen as an equality movement.
            And if you think the term is just something to be laughed at, fine, I do wish it was a benign grouping of people, but it’s not, it’s full of hate…

            Don’t take my word for it. Take it from this woman, an ex-feminist worked in DV for decades, and with more recognition for her great work than any human being could ever hope to accomplish in a chosen career. Go on, LOL at her if you wish….

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALvVJjSCdoQ

          7. Don Pidgeoni

            First Milo and now someone who opposes gay marriage because what would Jesus do?? What a treat! Post an Alex Jones video next. Lol :)

          8. Don Pidgeoni

            Dan’s point wasn’t that racists, homophobes and sexists should be unchallenged. If you want people to listen to your point, it would help to not cite them as great thinkers.

          9. Don Pidgeoni

            Whoever you learned “gender feminist” from for one – Hoff Sommers I imagine? Have you read anything about her, hey dismissal of doxxing by gamer gaters and who she works for? A veritable fest of the alt-right. I’m not sure why you would post a video by Milo, truly one of the world’s total geebags, a man who is outrageous for money and fame like a more rabid Katie Hopkins, unless you supported what he said. And anyone who would support him after all he had done while claiming innocence of who and what he is, is being naive at the very least. I mean listen to that excuse “his ex is black”. So was Lesley Jones when he set his Twitter followers on her to call her a ugly monkey and other racial slurs. You’re judged by the company you keep and whose words you choose to support your opinions. And all i see is you repeating the words of some of the nastiest, hate driven people there are so angry point you may have, even if valid, is completely redundant when you post crap from idiots like Milo and people who are against gay marriage because a sky fairy told them so. If anyone else had posted that, you would have challenged them and rightly so. And all that before getting into your recent forays into critical analysis and statistics which have been expertly demolished by LW and others.

            So there , that’s my piece. I will leave you to it.

          10. Clampers Outside!

            Hoff Sommers ” Have you read anything about her” …. I have, brave woman. Do I agree with everything she says… nope.

            Milo “unless you supported what he said* …for once you qualify your remarks. Look at what I posted, thanks. It was to get a definition, of a phrase and explained that it is preceded by a WSJ version… so, the rest of most of that post is just a rant at nothing more than an assumption in your head.

            Lesley Jones is a walking double standard – https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/564965558408327168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw There’s plenty more tweets from her like that. Maybe you too should watch your company, if that’s the company you keep. Me, nah, I don’t keep Milo for anything but if he has knowledge on a subject, I’ll have a listen and make up my own mind.

            “And all that before getting into your recent forays into critical analysis and statistics which have been expertly demolished by LW and others.” LOL :) if you think so, sound.

          11. LW

            Out of morbid curiosity curiosity Clampers, are you justifying the abuse received by Leslie Jones on twitter by linking that tweet of hers?

          12. Nigel

            Okay, this is NOT aimed at Clampers, it is just interesting to me, and I thought I’d provide a bit of context.

            Leslie Jones’ tweet is a rhetorical question as to whether guys wearing a particular style of curly hair are trying to look Jewish. Now, barring a history of anti-semitic remarks or other information I’ve missed, this seems a fairly harmless remark – oh, those curly braids remind me of the style worn by Hassidic Jews. Nothing particularly negative, except that it comes across as mildly critical and/or mildly mocking, and it’s possible to read it as critical/mocking of the guys wearing the new style, or of the Jewish people whose style it resembles, or of both.

            You could argue that it was thoughtless, or inartfully phrased, or you could go ‘eww’ and worry that it hints at some hidden bigotry, or, since she was the subject of a rabid mob of racist abuse, you could use it to attack her again and paint her as bad as or worse than the people who attacked her. Clampers is saying this shows ‘she’s no saint’ and he may be right, but then again who is?

            However, Milo Yiannopoulos, largely seen as somewhat responsible for the racist mob, and for other mobs, and for all sorts of abuse and harassment mostly aimed at women, once openly and personally mocked a woman, who was, at the time, subject to vicious attack by one of his mobs or a mob he was associated with, which are truly horrific things, when her dog died. He mocked her for grieving for her beloved pet. Whether Leslie Jones has done anything to rise to being ‘as nasty as’ that, I’ll leave as an exercise in judgement to the silent readers out there, if any.

          13. LW

            Clampers, unlike Nigel’s rather more measured response, this is aimed at you. I am literally stunned that you feel a non specific, although certainly tasteless, tweet about (presumably) hasidic jews, is on a par in terms of ‘nastiness’ with a sustained campaign of personal abuse, including retweeting fake statements.

            You definitely have not shown that she can be “just as nasty”. Refer to Dan’s article above for commentary facts not needing to be proven, and think again whether the article refers to everyone except you, or everyone including you.

        2. rotide

          I always assumed alt-right was a perjorative used by the left to describe a certain type of right wing type.

          Do people actually ‘identify’ as alt-right?

          1. LW

            They certainly do. From their subreddit:
            “The Alt-Right, unlike the dominant ideology of the 20th Century (Liberalism/Conservatism), examines the world through a lens of realism. Rather than continue to look at the world through the ideological blinders that Liberalism imposes in its dogmatic evangelism of the Equalitarian religion, we prefer to look & examine social relations & demographics from a perspective of what’s real. Thus, racial & sexual realism is a key component of the Alt-Right – perhaps the key component that ties the diverse factions within it together.”

          2. Bob

            Sadly, there’s many who proudly call themselves alt-right. But they also support Trump, so their judgement can’t really be trusted.

          3. Daisy Chainsaw

            White men who resent that they’re not the alphas they think they deserve to be simply because they’re white men.

  8. rob

    Some years ago when the scale of economic collapse was becoming apparent, John Gormley (as leader of The Greens), made a statement that appealed for a greater sense of fair play from the electorate.

    And what did John do when given the chance to be fair to the electorate and the Irish public? He slept his way through the bank bailout. Great work.

    1. OhRowShayDoVahaWaile

      He’s always come across to me as a long suffering kindly but bewildered primary school principal

  9. Clampers Outside!

    ” We live in a dark age. Argument and debate have been deemed superfluous. Facts don’t need to be proven. When cited their existence is intrinsic. The right to be right is instinctive. It is others who are wrong. Always wrong. Wrong about everything. ”

    Most of it (sadly) from politics of the left and ultra-PC nonsense spoiling efforts to speak rationally on sensitive topics…. which is very saddening…. as it gives room for the far right to speak in absolutes that sound convincing to growing numbers all over Europe… which is even sadder….

    1. MoyestWithExcitement

      God damn PC Police, reducing instances of public bigotry and aiding the self esteem of people from oppressed social groups. We should be able to say vile things about innocent people without feeling shame, amiright?

      1. Tony

        Bigotry, self esteem, oppressed, vile, innocent,shame- all in one post! Just proving the point that sentiment beats facts any day in the SJW world.

          1. Tony

            And a gratuitous insult to top it off. You really are the cliche aren’t you? The tyrannically compassionate Moyest.

        1. Coppélia

          Add purging, cleansing and homogenisation to that list and you have got yourself the perfect marriage between a SJW and a right wing fascist.

    2. LW

      Is this the same Clampers who said that it was women holding back abortion while men were all for it? And didn’t feel the need to prove that fact?

      1. MoyestWithExcitement

        Yes. And it’s the same guy who evidently has positive feelings for uber racist, Milo, as evidenced by that video above. The same guy who has expressed negative opinions about Muslims coming to Europe. The same one that constantly gives out about “SJWs”. Seems like Clamps is *in* the alt right.

        1. Clampers Outside!

          Point proven again!

          Brilliant! You think that just because I post a vid of Milo I must believe in everything he says. Clearly you think that, you even cite “evidence”…. this is comedy gold Moyest…..

          This is EXACTLY what Dan is talking about. thank you again for proving the point.

          Thanks, that gave me a chuckle for sure.

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            “Brilliant! You think that just because I post a vid of Milo I must believe in everything he says.”

            Well, that and the other stuff I said, yes.

          2. Nigel

            ‘Point proven again! ‘

            Pretty much cast iron guaranteed that you can not and will not be able to cogently explain

            a) your point
            b0 how it was proven, quoting directly and relating the quotes to your point in a clear and logical manner.

            Because you fizzle out like asprin when challenged.

          3. OhRowShayDoVahaWaile

            I don’t really concur with your assessment of it as “comedy gold” Mr Calipers

          4. Nigel

            Is you shutting down further debate every time someone disagrees with you by going LOL or ‘point proven’ or retreating into patronising sneering supposed to be the proof of this point?

        2. Caroline™

          I have feelings for the racist Milo that I don’t like to admit to either. When he uses his words and pushes up his glasses. Mmf.

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            Sure I’ve found myself wondering what Breda O’Brien looked like 15/20 years ago more than once.

      2. Clampers Outside!

        LOL! …point proven again.

        First, I never said anything in such absolutes. And explicitly pointed out the small variation, and pointed to an overall trend, which is reflected through out western democracies that men are slightly more (sometimes, a lot more) in favour of abortion than women. Here’s just one example of info on that… loads more if you could be bothered to look it up – https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2014/apr/30/why-are-women-more-opposed-to-abortion

        Thanks for the chuckles LW !

        1. LW

          LOL! Simples!

          “Em… look it up dear, it’s the women folk that are staunchly more anti-choice than men.”

          That’s fairly absolute darling. And you didn’t point out the small variation, you had it pointed out to you. :)

    3. Nigel

      ‘Most of it (sadly) from politics of the left and ultra-PC nonsense spoiling efforts to speak rationally on sensitive topics’

      The sheer volume of online harassment and abuse from alt-right types you have to turn a blind eye to in order to make this statement unironically would block out the sun, and you’d still blame SJWs for standing in your light, because you’re ‘and it gives room’ is essentially victim blaming. You’ve staked out a claim that feminism etc is worse than the likes of Gamergate, Breittbart, Stromfront, MRAs, Red Pill weirdoes, National Front, Brexiteers, Trumperism, the KKK and any number of other scary right-wing groups, including Islamist extremist, all rolled in together, except inasmuch as feminism etc caused and/or enabled them. Ell Oh Ell.

      1. Clampers Outside!

        The grand analogy, the last throw of the dice before insults…..

        “….because you’re ‘and it gives room’ is essentially victim blaming.” ….You’re accusing me of victim blaming? Fupp You Nigel.

        This is your lowest yet Nigel… never mind the pure unadulterated clap trap that follows that accusation.

        I’ll leave the personal insults and assumptions to your good self, and your delusions.

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          “Most of it (sadly) from politics of the left and ultra-PC nonsense spoiling efforts to speak rationally on sensitive topics…..it gives room for the far right to speak in absolutes”

          There you are blaming the left, who are made up of victims of the right, for the actions of the right

        2. Nigel

          The hell with you Clamps. You explicitly say this:
          ‘as it gives room for the far right to speak in absolutes that sound convincing to growing numbers all over Europe…’
          You’re blaming feminism, the SJWs, the Left, whatever, for the rise and normalisation of the right wing feckers that target women and gays and non-white races? It’s people like you, focused on sneering and deriding and hyper-criticism of feminists and anti-racists and whatever, while ignoring or dismissing or tacitly approving the, oh let’s call them the alt-right. You have your reasons to criticise, maybe even good reasons. You use the rhetoric and tactics of the alt-right? Your criticisms just become part of the wall of hate.

          My lowest yet? You have never once, ever refuted a single thing I have ever said to you.Instead you pretend to take offence and fade off into handwaving about personal insults and delusions like you do here, You never stick it out, you never follow through, you don’t have the courage of your convictions to face what it is you’re saying. ‘Claptrap?’ That claptrap was YOUR POINT. You said feminism was the worst. Your pal Tiny below says it’s ‘the only fascism in sight.’ I gave a list of things I think are way worse and, for that matter, are the real outriders of fascism. Unless you agree with me that they are worse, in which case you are wrong, then own it.

          Now, prove Dan’s point again. Fail to mount a coherent defence of your position and your statements Tell me to fupp off again. Points proven all round lol.

          1. Clampers Outside!

            WOW!

            “You’re blaming feminism, the SJWs, the Left, whatever, for the rise and normalisation of the right wing feckers that target women and gays and non-white races?”

            It’s got ‘whatever’ in it, how can i refute that? The rest is accusation, bar “Left”.
            And I stand by that. the left has lost it’s way, and I am not happy about it.

            “It’s people like you, focused on sneering and deriding and hyper-criticism of feminists and anti-racists and whatever” …is this like a point or whatever?
            No, i think is the answer, and the rest is accusation. “…while ignoring or dismissing or tacitly approving the, oh let’s call them the alt-right. ” …another accusation.

            “Your criticisms just become part of the wall of hate.” …what?

            “You have never once, ever refuted a single thing I have ever said to you.Instead you pretend to take offence and fade off into handwaving about personal insults and delusions like you do here,” I’ve done that a few times in this thread as it was appropriate, but I don’t do it all the time. That’s a refutation.

            “You never stick it out, you never follow through, you don’t have the courage of your convictions to face what it is you’re saying.” …eh?

            ‘Claptrap?’ yes, it’s a word, I use it to say something is nonsense. Last I checked, that’s appropriate use.

            “That claptrap was YOUR POINT. ” ..OK

            “You said feminism was the worst.” – worse than what? Am i supposed to refute that?

            “I gave a list of things I think are way worse and, for that matter, are the real outriders of fascism. Unless you agree with me that they are worse, in which case you are wrong, then own it.” …this makes very little sense to me.

            That list….
            “You’ve staked out a claim that feminism etc is worse than the likes of Gamergate, Breittbart, Stromfront, MRAs, Red Pill weirdoes, National Front, Brexiteers, Trumperism, the KKK and any number of other scary right-wing groups, including Islamist extremist, all rolled in together, except inasmuch as feminism etc caused and/or enabled them. Ell Oh Ell.”

            Are you that deluded that I should answer such ridiculous nonsense with a coherent answer? It’s a list that makes up an accusation. It’s like driving a bus through a barn and it’s a bleedin’ mess.

            “Unless you agree with me that they are worse, in which case you are wrong, then own it.” …is this like a puzzle or something? Is everything so black and white with you…
            .
            .
            .
            “My lowest yet?” – your accusation of victim blaming. Yeah, your lowest yet.

          2. Nigel

            Yeah, it is. This is always the point where you affect incomprehension.

            Thanks, Clamps. Point proven. Again. L. O. L.

            (I still like ya, ya know. In most other regards you’re generally a good ‘un. Whatever point you’re making here, you need to tighten it up, express it properly, defend it. You can blame others all you want for exchanges like this constantly going down the same path, and for people reacting badly to the rhetoric you use, but you choose to use it, and you know the effect it has, and you know it all ends up being a distraction and a waste of time. The left has lost its way? Possibly! But: SJWs! Special snowflakes! Safe spaces! That’s the sneering of trolls. It isn’t as if feminism is above criticism, or anyone particularly likes SJWs as originally defined, or that your stance on domestic abuse isn’t an incredibly powerful one. Too many of your responses are mocking others for apparently misunderstanding you. You accuse them of being stupid or willful. At no point does it seem to occur to you that you might not explaining yourself very well, or that if you clarified what you were saying instead of LOLing, you might make more headway. Your points about domestic abuse NEED to be heard. Your experience humbles me, as any such experience does.

            I would prefer to stop getting into pointless arguments like this with you and hear what you have to say. That’s as much on me as it is on you, though, so I’m sorry. You’re no Tony or Moyest, but you always end up arguing like them and I guess it’s easier to go hammer and tongs at that level than to really engage.. I will try to be better in future and refrain from the stupid stuff. I’ll leave the stupid two lines I wrote at the start of this up there as a warning to my future self.

            I will say that if you insist on constantly turning your well-founded critique of feminism’s relationship to male DMV victims and female abusers into broad MRA-style anti-feminism, I’ll just have to bow out. I can always tear strips off Tony for a while if I’m the mood for that kind of argument.)

          3. Clampers Outside!

            I hear ya fella, fair play to you, and I take on board what you have said.

            I have been told to watch my emotional involvement when trying to stress a point and that I can come off as some angry loon. I promise to make an effort to temper that in future and not come across as needlessly provocative.

            I do thank you for coming back, with all the genuine honesty that I have. I look forward to… shall I say, our possible disagreements, and I hope that I’ll come across as more patient and measured.
            To add… I am aware of how OTT I can appear sometimes, and I thank Broadsheet for allowing me that space to burn that off. I do imagine if I went public with my argument and I was attempting to convince people of my point… while practically frothing at the mouth :) …no one would listen.
            BS has allowed me to get a lot of this initial frustration with the state of DV and the inequities in it exorcised to some degree, where I can recall without great upset…. I’m getting there, and when done, I might even campaign publicly, but only when I know I can speak on the subject without being overtly agitated, for want of a better word….

            Hope the head is good on ya this morning boss :) …sincerely
            * Hugs *

          4. Nigel

            Thanks, Clamps. I’m always more reasonable in the mornings. I guess I’m glad you get something positive out of the argy-bargy, as i do sometimes myself. If I had some advice, it would be to refrain from either falling for or thoughtlessly deploying stuff like, eg, that Leslie Jones stuff above. It’s a red rag to a bull. However, in future I’ll let other people call you on it if they feel the need, I haven’t the heart for it.

            Anyway, you have every right to get agitated and emotional and burn off steam, and also HUGS. *hugs*

  10. Niamh

    Levinas on ‘Hitlerism’, in a nutshell, and shortly before the Holocaust: a politics of identity which starts from a position of humility at one’s inherent capacity for badness as a human being is better, and more ethical, than a politics of ‘feels right’ – of instant-gratification emotions, the logic of blood-and-soil, these days known as ‘common sense’ or ‘anti-PC’ etc. etc.

    The latter was what Levinas saw coming in Fascism: the politics of ‘I feel like…’ followed by sweeping generalizations. I feel like this is the Jews’ fault, etc. etc. Feels nice to scapegoat, etc. etc. As opposed to an intellectual response which accepts mankind’s capacity to be bad and wrong extends to me, so I should take care to live well, and interrogate my knee-jerk responses, and be humble (but not weak).

    Clampers’ increasingly rabid anti-‘SJW’ turn Feels Right to him, but it isn’t actually right.

    I increasingly suspect Clampers simply cannot get laid.

      1. Tony

        I agree. Its only when you see a bunch of the SJW’s together that you realise how odious, bigoted and ideologically demented they all are. The only fascism in sight is their need for everyone to conform to their version of freedom totally and immediately. All driven by emoji’s feelings and retweets.

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          Awww, you guys are cute together. Thanks also for giving a micro demonstration about how you misogynerds think. Polite society soundly rejects you so you group together, create a bubble for yourselves, call it ‘alt right’, and spend your time telling each other how it’s everyone *else* who’s wrong.

          You guys hate women so you both probably habe stock images and ideas about what they do taken from tv shows. You know that one when a woman gets dumped by a man and she geys together with her friends to cry, eat ice cream and bitch about how all man are terrible? That’s how you two look right now and how the alt right looks in general. Except it’s all of society that dumped you.

          1. Clampers Outside!

            It’s like you forgot to write ‘we’ when you were speaking on behalf of society Ted.
            Getting all bitchy, and personal Moyest. And the assumptions, and accusations are just brilliant.

            Moyest…. you just keep digging yourself a hole there. I’ll make myself a cup of tea :)

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            No bother. I’m assuming I’m going to have to dig a large hole to fit you in. Your hate of women and evidently large amount of time spent on the computer makes me think you’re probably a big lad.

          3. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yes, Dan was saying we should be taking on feelings based bluster (as in your literally insane obsession with feminism) with reason and fact (pretty much everyone who argues with you). You’re welcome.

          4. Clampers Outside!

            It’s easy to look insane when one challenges the status quo – not challenging gender-feminism IS part of the status quo.
            This is especially true in the area of domestic violence.and gender-feminism’s support for inequitable systems while claiming to be an equality movement. The heuristics inherent in domestic violence thinking, teaching, research and methodology have been informed by an ideology for too long, fifty or sixty years, and yes, the more I read on it, the more it does feel quite frightening. I dodged a bullet for sure that evening I didn’t call the Gardai to protect myself. Thanks Duluth.

    1. Kieran NYC

      +1

      This is why the comments section has gone down the toilet. Drivel, personal attacks, trolling and vitriol.

      Still. Clicks, though.

      1. MoyestWithExcitement

        Yeah and you have contributed quite a lot if that. Seriously. And you’re getting on your high horse now? Clown.

        1. Kieran NYC

          “Clown” is a fairly mild term of abuse. You’re usually much more of a bully.

          All worn out from trolling today?

          1. Kieran NYC

            You are absolutely an abusive, trolling bully and you contribute nothing other than the coarsening of debate. You and whatever other usernames you use.

            “Comments and questions are welcome.

            Racism, sexism, homophobia, misogyny, misandry, libel, abuse, bullying, incitement to hatred and hijacking the usernames of other commenters are not. In fairness.”

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            And you’re a fragile, vacuous no mark that tries to attack and belittle anyone who speaks out against established societal order because you’re clearly not confident enough to inspire respect from people in your real life and thus you try to live vicariously through authority figures and throw tantrums like the above when someone stands up to your slimy bullying tactics. Horrible little scrote of a man.

          1. OhRowShayDoVahaWaile

            Probably had a “natural” childbirth
            By the side of a big road
            Or down a urine-slaked alley
            As junkies covered in scabs and sores
            Self-medicated, before ejaculating in his Ma’s
            Bottom hole

  11. dan

    “Argument and debate have been deemed superfluous.” A self fulfilling prophecy from Dan.
    Now this made ME laugh!

          1. Faecal Matters

            There’s nothing mean about it.

            The grouping, the alt-right to whom Secretary Clinton referred, are in the age of social media and frankly nonsensical blog sites like this, an actual organised political force. You ‘conscientious’ guys on this don’t even have the brains or wherewithal to organise yourselves into a group, you’re the ultimate one-eyed, single issue cretin warriors, peering into your iPhones while stirring your flat white and tut-tutting about the state of everything like retired nuns (but not as holy).

          2. Faecal Matters

            Nigel you’re a boring translucent bitch.
            Find someone else you ‘care’ about and ‘like’ to flame.
            Thanks.

          1. OhRowShayDoVahaWaile

            Nah the important thing is taking a sneering moralistic tone that implies that those without the tools or wherewithal to argue solely from “our” kind of reason are somehow at odds with the proverbial community. I mean this guy cites John Gormley as a benchmark – an elitist, gormless twit who took to increasing government power in planning while his own party argued at the same time for decentralisation of local governance.

            Those screaming and howling at the moon now are not irrational, quite the opposite, they yearn mostly for a semblance of civic governance and an antidote to feudal tribalism.

          2. Dan Boyle

            That’s not the person I know. Not knowing him as allowed you to form
            that opinion. They do say you should never meet your gate figures…

  12. spudnick

    I’ve rarely seen such a foam-flecked comments section. The funniest comments are the ones saying ‘I’m not angry, you are’. What an appalling waste of time and energy.

    You’d swear people actually spent most of their day totally preoccupied by misogyny and racism, and day to day work/college/life was just incidental.

Comments are closed.