Lies to the ingroup are bad. Lies to your enemies are practically mandatory.
Problem: your enemies will doubt you, because they're your enemies. When Red America lies to Blue America, the DNC doesn't have a crisis of confidence, they just laugh at the lies. "You thought that was believable? lol"
Conclusion: if you lie and it works, 98.4% of the time it was a lie to one of your friends, thus a betrayal, thus literally the peak of evil.
Corollary: "Lies are bad, mmmkay."
Even if your opponent doesn’t believe you, a lie can deprive them of your exact intentions and plans and so stop them from harming you, or reduce the possibility.
I do believe that feminism+ is anti-natalist. In other words, it's systemic racism.
Staying silent also deprives your enemy of information, but is honourable instead of dishonourable.
That was a classic emotional response, reacting to the sociality/feelings of the post, rather than the facts or logic.
You saw the post as emotion: be nice to enemies. Your reaction: no, be mean to enemies. The first impression is wrong; I didn't say that. The second impression was so approximate it was wrong. "Lying to your enemies is mean, all I want to say is 'be mean', close enough." Your error was casting an emotional response as a logical one. This works fine with other illogical emotion-first folk, but if you don't want to sound ignorant and lazy you should cast emotional responses as emotion. "I feel we should be mean to our enemies." Of course, it still sounds rather, well, something...
Post a Comment