Words like "racist" and "fascist" end arguments before they start. Learn why these terms work like spells, and how to stay calm when they're cast at you.
Anti-wokeness is increasingly engaging in all the tactics of wokeness. Think Zionism is a woke victimhood ideology that made outrageous demands on third parties because of group victimhood irrespective of the actual individuals making the demands being victims? Antisemite! Believe in single payer healthcare? Marxist! Doubt the evidence for Christianity? Anti-Christian! Its all the same stuff.
When someone starts throwing those words at you, say "Thank you for that non-cognitive utterance", treat it as if he or she simply sneezed or farted, and carry on with your argument.
I could have used this post a few days ago; When my left leaning friend and his equally left leaning family came for a visit. But I kept my cool (because I kept telling myself that I love my friend and by extension his family). The most helpful thing was that I didn’t use any jargon or attack words like woke or even socialism.
PS—At one point our conversation addressed drug addiction. I am a hard libertarian so I thought it would be safe to offer that I am a proponent of legalizing and decriminalizing all drugs. Little did I know that my friend’s adult child was blaming addiction on “systemic injustices”. I sidestepped their claim and emphasized that normalization of drug use may not have the desired effect of ending addiction, but that it would certainly be a positive change in the overall scheme of things, which would help improve “systemic injustices” (I can’t believe I spoke those words!).
PPS—Needless to say, it was a challenging but positive visit. My good friend should definitely read your list of “don’ts”. His body language and chortles were a clear demonstration of his frustration with my firm libertarian position; including my unwillingness to assent to any regulation at all (but I did offer him a compromise of keeping all environmental regulations if he would dropped the remaining regulations).
My postmortem of my conversation (after reading your post) proved that my performance was solid. But I would have used your post as a checklist and source of guidance when (and this did happen) the conversation strayed into dangerous territory (e.g., “harm is subjective”, “consent is subjective”). I learned from my friend that his side advocates for a “society” that dictates community standards.
I think it was both good and bad for me to disclose to my friend (and his family) that I am a hard libertarian. My purpose was to ease any concerns that I was “on the wrong side of things” while I also wanted them to know that I was not on their side either. Maybe this was a bigger mistake than I originally thought. It quickly provoked more questions that were met with looks of disbelief.
The term "Systemic" is the modern equivalent of blaming evil spirits. Non-specific, nebulous, all-pervasive and impossible to pin down in order to analyse it. The Devil made me do it!
"keeping all environmental regulations" is not exactly a hard libertarian position.
In any compromise between two people who hold different basic principles, as you and your friend and his family do, it is the more evil or irrational one who prevails because the one who holds inconsistent principles by "me-tooing", as you did with your compromise, surrenders the moral high ground to the evil or irrational one.
I suggest you read Ayn Rand's "Anatomy of Compromise", and take a close, objective look at your reasons for choosing to maintain your friendship with those people, rather than continuing to kid yourself by telling yourself that you love them.
Nobody on the Left/establishment fears being called “woke,” “groomer,” “Marxist,” “deep stater,” “RINO,” “cuck,” and “globalist.” Those words are only used to signal to your tribe that you are engaging with an enemy.
Peter, you seem to have moved into a different stratosphere. You seem to be saying things in a different manner for lack of a better description. I listened to your recent interview with an Englishman (I can't remember his name) about Jason Arday and the failure of Muslim immigration in Europe. It was much more intense and urgent than your other interviews.
It was quite powerful. At all times, you remained intellectual, but it was much more visceral and powerful than you have been in the past. It was most poignant when you said that you hope that you were wrong about what will happen with regard to the failure of Muslims to assimilate in Europe. I hope so much that you are wrong, I fear that you are not.
I’m glad you’re liking it! For some context, I tweeted this about a few weeks ago:
I miscalculated. I thought that soft balling leftists would make more leftists come on the show. That did not happen. Consequently, I am wholly abandoning that ambition.
Moving forward, all of my future in-person interviews on Conversations with Peter Boghossian will be hardball interviews.
Your upcoming tour looks “amazing”! Is that a magic word? Seriously- I hope it is wildly successful! More people need to be exposed to your methodologies.
I've gotten "racist" before - it's the most common, and I get called a lot of things. Problem is, if I am a racist, I am a terrible one. I've married a Brazilian and currently live in her country. But that isn't what you should say, because you're explaining yourself to someone who doesn't deserve it. What does work wonders is "I'm not intimidated by you, and you probably don't even know what the word means." That way of saying it somehow drives these people insane, because, as you say, these people think words and phrases have magical power. I suspect they believe it literally. I also suspect they may not be very bright.
I heard that you're coming to Canada in the near future. If you're going to be in Toronto, I would love to potentially attend any events you're going to be at.
The Golden Bough by james frasier explains magical thinking as simple association between an ob ject or person, and something else. This includes parts of persons ie hair clippings; things that might resemble a person ie kewpie dolls and even words naming someone.
I live in woke Davis, California. My friend, a university instructor of 35 year old PhD chemists recently told me he mispronounced "annuities" as "innuities."
He then made a humorous quip about the Inuit after that. Sure enough, he got a call from headquarters warning about sensitivity.
...thought that the secular, rational left would become even more primitive than the backwards bible thumpers they deride. They are leftists but their values are not classic liberal.
Love this framing. Modern day wizards casting spells...
Thank you, Peter, this is gold.
Great article. In the UK, at least, you might have added 'misogynist'.
You should add Marxist and antisemitic to that list.
Lots of words to be added. These are just a few of the most potent.
Anti-wokeness is increasingly engaging in all the tactics of wokeness. Think Zionism is a woke victimhood ideology that made outrageous demands on third parties because of group victimhood irrespective of the actual individuals making the demands being victims? Antisemite! Believe in single payer healthcare? Marxist! Doubt the evidence for Christianity? Anti-Christian! Its all the same stuff.
When someone starts throwing those words at you, say "Thank you for that non-cognitive utterance", treat it as if he or she simply sneezed or farted, and carry on with your argument.
Peter,
I could have used this post a few days ago; When my left leaning friend and his equally left leaning family came for a visit. But I kept my cool (because I kept telling myself that I love my friend and by extension his family). The most helpful thing was that I didn’t use any jargon or attack words like woke or even socialism.
PS—At one point our conversation addressed drug addiction. I am a hard libertarian so I thought it would be safe to offer that I am a proponent of legalizing and decriminalizing all drugs. Little did I know that my friend’s adult child was blaming addiction on “systemic injustices”. I sidestepped their claim and emphasized that normalization of drug use may not have the desired effect of ending addiction, but that it would certainly be a positive change in the overall scheme of things, which would help improve “systemic injustices” (I can’t believe I spoke those words!).
PPS—Needless to say, it was a challenging but positive visit. My good friend should definitely read your list of “don’ts”. His body language and chortles were a clear demonstration of his frustration with my firm libertarian position; including my unwillingness to assent to any regulation at all (but I did offer him a compromise of keeping all environmental regulations if he would dropped the remaining regulations).
Boy, I can’t wait to see them all again!
What would you have done differently if you’d have read the substack earlier?
And yeah, sometimes you have to make your points in other people’s language. They won’t let themselves understand you if they don’t.
My postmortem of my conversation (after reading your post) proved that my performance was solid. But I would have used your post as a checklist and source of guidance when (and this did happen) the conversation strayed into dangerous territory (e.g., “harm is subjective”, “consent is subjective”). I learned from my friend that his side advocates for a “society” that dictates community standards.
I think it was both good and bad for me to disclose to my friend (and his family) that I am a hard libertarian. My purpose was to ease any concerns that I was “on the wrong side of things” while I also wanted them to know that I was not on their side either. Maybe this was a bigger mistake than I originally thought. It quickly provoked more questions that were met with looks of disbelief.
The term "Systemic" is the modern equivalent of blaming evil spirits. Non-specific, nebulous, all-pervasive and impossible to pin down in order to analyse it. The Devil made me do it!
I might use your definition the next time an actual enemy uses that anti-concept. Rest assured that I will give you full credit.
"keeping all environmental regulations" is not exactly a hard libertarian position.
In any compromise between two people who hold different basic principles, as you and your friend and his family do, it is the more evil or irrational one who prevails because the one who holds inconsistent principles by "me-tooing", as you did with your compromise, surrenders the moral high ground to the evil or irrational one.
I suggest you read Ayn Rand's "Anatomy of Compromise", and take a close, objective look at your reasons for choosing to maintain your friendship with those people, rather than continuing to kid yourself by telling yourself that you love them.
I have read literally everything thing she has ever written.
do you think systemic injustices don’t exist?
Nobody on the Left/establishment fears being called “woke,” “groomer,” “Marxist,” “deep stater,” “RINO,” “cuck,” and “globalist.” Those words are only used to signal to your tribe that you are engaging with an enemy.
True. They shut down in-tribe conversation only.
Great stuff.
Thank you!
Peter, you seem to have moved into a different stratosphere. You seem to be saying things in a different manner for lack of a better description. I listened to your recent interview with an Englishman (I can't remember his name) about Jason Arday and the failure of Muslim immigration in Europe. It was much more intense and urgent than your other interviews.
It was quite powerful. At all times, you remained intellectual, but it was much more visceral and powerful than you have been in the past. It was most poignant when you said that you hope that you were wrong about what will happen with regard to the failure of Muslims to assimilate in Europe. I hope so much that you are wrong, I fear that you are not.
I’m glad you’re liking it! For some context, I tweeted this about a few weeks ago:
I miscalculated. I thought that soft balling leftists would make more leftists come on the show. That did not happen. Consequently, I am wholly abandoning that ambition.
Moving forward, all of my future in-person interviews on Conversations with Peter Boghossian will be hardball interviews.
Peter, the good guys owe you a great debt in your service to reason and virtues.
Your upcoming tour looks “amazing”! Is that a magic word? Seriously- I hope it is wildly successful! More people need to be exposed to your methodologies.
Thank you! If any are near you come visit!
I've gotten "racist" before - it's the most common, and I get called a lot of things. Problem is, if I am a racist, I am a terrible one. I've married a Brazilian and currently live in her country. But that isn't what you should say, because you're explaining yourself to someone who doesn't deserve it. What does work wonders is "I'm not intimidated by you, and you probably don't even know what the word means." That way of saying it somehow drives these people insane, because, as you say, these people think words and phrases have magical power. I suspect they believe it literally. I also suspect they may not be very bright.
Sample Flyer:
—————
Islam is not a Race, It’s a Religion!
Freedom of Speech Works Both Ways
I heard that you're coming to Canada in the near future. If you're going to be in Toronto, I would love to potentially attend any events you're going to be at.
The Golden Bough by james frasier explains magical thinking as simple association between an ob ject or person, and something else. This includes parts of persons ie hair clippings; things that might resemble a person ie kewpie dolls and even words naming someone.
I live in woke Davis, California. My friend, a university instructor of 35 year old PhD chemists recently told me he mispronounced "annuities" as "innuities."
He then made a humorous quip about the Inuit after that. Sure enough, he got a call from headquarters warning about sensitivity.
Who'd have suspected that
Oops..need to finish.
...thought that the secular, rational left would become even more primitive than the backwards bible thumpers they deride. They are leftists but their values are not classic liberal.
Words can never harm me