It's often claimed in academic circles that the moment your argument becomes personal is the moment you concede defeat. I've never abided by this philosophy. For me, a person with a defective personality is equally attracted to defective ideas. Anyway, on this occasion I was personally attacked and so it seems only proportionate and just to do the same back. Two wrongs don't make a right, but it feels satisfactory in the mean time.
Context:
On the night of Christmas Eve 2011, family member X launched an ideological assault upon his family associate...me...with the aid of a racist assailant who shall go unnamed (a for real racist, not one of these "they aren't as good at swimming" racists). X opportunistically created an alliance with the racist in order to boost his own inadequate defenses at the Christmas dinner table. This school playground-esk alliance (formed with a relative stranger) shall not go unpunished... It was an act of aggression...I was indeed pearl harbored at the dinner table (although there were no credible warnings before my attack, OHHHH CONTROVERSIAL).
Character Profile: X
X is a former bank manager for a parasitic oversized freeloading bank conglomerate, although was made redundant despite his indispensable financial skills... He is now a self employed low ranking financial advisor. Despite boasting intimate expert financial knowledge, he failed to provide me with information (as promised) on buying gold stocks (this was my olive branch moment...pretending to hold a modicum of respect for jesuses free stock market ). Despite my prediction 3 years ago (well...I stole other peoples predictions...stadard procedure) the price would increase "alot", due to his failure to provide the requested documentation my potential 3 fold increase in savings value has failed to occur...and instead was squandered on replica light sabers. Great success (two thumbs, up cheesey grin).
Mr X could only be described as Xceptionally Mr Normal. He is of course instinctively a Christian, not due to a subjective spiritual compulsion, but because it pleases his mother and makes him all so wholesomely British...like Hovis. Yet curiously his Christianity fails to extend to his fellow wo/man. He claims the class war of the working poor against an morbidly obese financial elite in a country with unparalleled rates of inequality in Western Europe (us...the UK), are simply the illegitimate ramblings of "jealous" "envious" "welfare free loaders" who of course have everything handed to them, whether in terms of employment opportunities or material necessities. Indeed, blessed are the poor for family member X.
Additionally, and all so predictably, X is of course naturally a conservative. He has sympathies for Jeremy Clarkson (who pollutes society with right wing poison one 'innocent' quip at a time) and he can of course talk at length about the finer attributes of his wide screen HD television, which I speculate would occupy the marital bed if it wasn't such a faux pas.
X also never fails to draw attention to his finely trained 6 year old daughter, who ostentatiously cleans up plates and cups to great adulation whilst Xhibit sits passively ass first in a chair, not so subtly remarking "isn't she good" with a conceited smerk on his face bribing praise from willing family enablers. It's almost as though her outdated, servile, traditional feminine actions some how are supposed to reflect positively on his misogynist parenting.
He is of course instinctively a climate change skeptic:
"X..." I wearily protested, "There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that mans actions are adversely effecting climate, my girl friends dad (I wanted everyone to know I have a girlfriend..high five) is a leading oceanographer (that's right..my GIRLFRIENDS dad is a leading oceanographer) and assures me this is a real phenomenon and there's an indisputable consensus. Further yet, it is acknowledged that rich corporate interests have set up pseudo scientific front organizations pumping out junk science propaganda, in order to create a false illusion of equal debate".
His response:
"yeh, well, that's all well and good, but I'd still say I fall in to the skeptic category" he utters, like he's Martin Luther King standing up for justice in fair Mississippi (not disgraceful oil companies or entrenched economic interests who hate the compeition they claim to ideologically hump). How interesting, that the apostles of normality like X find it so easy to suddenly become brave dissidents fighting against a newly forming (hardly fought for and now being rapidly destroyed) progressive consensus (one with the outrageous goal of saving humanity and the planet from climatic chaos) when it further safe guards their beloved status quo dependant on dino juice (by the way..what is it with normie males and a love of oil? Such a weird characterless sludge to defend, no doubt in the future instead of downing a pint to prove ones penistic metal a man shall simply see off a pint of casterol GTX magnatec...)
The dinner table exchange:
"While I might hate what he has to say, I would fight to the death for his right to say it".....
Actually...in the case of relative X I might temporarily suspend my belief in free speech...like... mostly I believe in the laws of physics, but sometimes I'll suspend that belief when circumstances intervene...like when watching a Michael Bay movie for example. Anyway, usually the minuet somebody claims to me "I have a right to an opinion" I immediately, from experience, switch off... because it usually translates as " I'm grossly unqualified to talk about this subject, I read tabloid garbage, I'm either overtly or covertly racist and have a general contempt for education with "people like you" "telling us how to live our lives" i.e. It is my right to physically beat my children half to death and not be advised otherwise by educated experts that believe beating childen is a bit naughty...
This argument occurred of course because my views fail to fall within the parameters of debate set by the British press...which currently is polraised between the radical Miliband who for example believes students should be screwed more...but screwed only half as much as the out right screwing proposed and legislated by Mr Cameron. Naturally, as we all know, my failure to consent to this false dichotomy automatically makes me a "crazy, weirdo, communist, weirdo".
Anyway, X (true identity ***** ***) had been pretending to show a polite interest in my current home country France, where I'm studying. I was suspicious of his apparent sincerity, but gave him the benefit of the doubt. At the table things changed as predictably as a republicans stance on abortion. The table racist had been spouting his beliefs that 'Blacks commit more crime, that's a FACT". My response that "it's also a fact that blacks are disproportionately poor and discriminated against systemically by the authorities, which not only consequently encourages crime, but distorts and falsely records statistics" was of course 'nonsense"...
I was subject to these reactionary diatribes throughout my dinner. However, to my dismay, my family members sat passively for the sake of Christmas cheer and let the racist continue his Mein Kampf speech unopposed...no doubt jesus would of approved during this time of his yearly commemoration. The Mein Kampf man is a buffoon...objectively...empirically....factually. But, X, a man who would have you believe he is an educated sensible member of the managerial elite of the nation, shamefully and opportunistically created a de facto alliance with the racist against me for his own petty point scoring operation to defend the interests of the rich and powerful against the poor and disadvantaged....surely an all time moral low at christmas...even by my own familys standards.
Predictably the usual tactics were deployed to smear my modest suggestion that we re-regulate the finance sector, that we invest long term post peek oil in green infrastructure, spend to create jobs and fundamentally address the divisive disease in the UK named by doctors as 'inequality'. In a world infected with right wing dogmas disguised as a moderating middle grounds, even the most mild opposition to the most self evidently damaging components of the market economy (even, unbelievably, in the midst of a deep recession and financial crisis caused by that existing system) seem outrageous to people like X.
Therefore naturally I was lambasted. Any criticism of the system ("oh it's the system man"...cliche or not..it's a fair one) of which X foolishly believes he is a beneficiary of is unacceptable to X, and can only be explained by petty individual human emotions: "you're jealous" of wealth, or "envy" bloated untaxed concentrations of wealth. This man, X, a man of finance, an educated middle class man who believes he is important and entitled to his "opinion" can only debate on the infantile level of a child... I frequnetly find our societies so called 'adult' population behave in a similar manor, which says a lot about the intellectual qualifications required to be considered an adult in the UK... with the inevitable 'license to an opinion'.
The revelation this minor domestic exchange provided me this Christmas is this; one I'm a bloody angry man, secondly; why do we put up with this bollocks? Why do we engage morons as though they are credible intelligent figures? How about we mock them for the deluded, fearful, selfish fools we know them to be? Who knows, maybe we can have a laugh along the way whilst pursuing the transformative fight for a just fulfilling society (would you like some cracker with that cheese?).
The left has for too long indulged itself with stony faced self righteous ideological purity. The ideas we are currently subjected to are a joke, like those of X, so why not just laugh at them and explain to everyone else why they are funny, because to do anything less is to gift them a credibility they do not deserve. From parliament, to crypto fascists at the Christmas dinner table showing off in front of their mother in laws, this fight should be fought. The shame should be felt by those who remain silent eating piggy in the blankets at the dinner table, not those who are vocal.
I concluded with Mr X in the only way I could "Look, "X", at the end of the day, some of us want humanity to evolve as a species...whilst others...such as yourself...rejoice in the regressive mentality of the caveman...I apologize, but I guess I just hold myself to a higher standard than you're willing to...sorry". If personal attacks in a debate are wrong, then why did that feel so good? Happy new year.