I think it’s either lying (intellectual dishonesty), rallying useful idiots around a lie to obtain power (ideology), or socially constructing a mythology for useful idiots to obtain power (theology). It’s not intellectually coherent enough to be a philosophy, and there is nothing scientific about it.
The positive feedback loop for lying to satisfy intellectual dishonesty (self image), ideology (status by offense), theology(status by defense), is intense, which is why it works.
It could be that like all the rest of the left he is incapable of producing a solution to prosperous evolution by cooperative competition in market meritocratic eugenics and so his only possible technique to mask the big lie of parasitism, is that
I mean, his technique is to:
(a) recite a common falsehood quickly and with authority despite it’s falsehood, and move on.
(b) state a falsehood and move on to another before the counter argument can be made, and move on.
(c) state a falsification is irrelevant to him, unbelievable, or undesirable, as if approval or preference has any bearing on truth or falsehood.
(d) rapidly spew unrelated emotionally satisfying sophisms so that it’s impossible to construct a coherent argument falsifying an argument that isn’t coherent.
(e) shouting down or talking over counter arguments, to take advantage of the fact that emotive, incoherent, false, and dishonest arguments are more expensive and time consuming to correct with truth.
I’m going to be charitable and assume he’s a genetically predetermined leftist(dysgenic, herd) expressing genetically determined female conflict strategy (undermining undesirable truths), but with male dominance, and male tolerance for disagreement, and is only subtly aware that what he’s saying and how he’s arguing is good enough to achieve his ends.
I mean, you can look at him and see that he certainly has low sexual, social, cooperative, political, and military market value, but he definitely demonstrates disagreeableness and dominance expression, on top of the female cognitive strategy of undermining. And that is how females reward dominance expression in other females who engage in conflict on their behalf – with attention and undue praise.
I mean, Ryan and Stefan have done their work. I think what I’d like to discover is which of those things he’s doing.
But given y’all have asked me to debate him I guess I’m wiling even though it conflicts with my rule of ‘Don’t argue with the cognitively female, they aren’t capable of intellectual honesty so it’s pointless”.