The Links and Ties Method of Vilification Part 1

So, Aye believes such-and-such about thus-and-so issue. Bee believes the same way about the same issue. That does not mean Bee and Aye believe the same thing about every issue, or many, or even a few.

To get an accurate view of someone, the prudent person will see how many issues Aye and Bee agree on and -- just as important -- on how many issues they differ.

But not floggers and floggerettes. As political and cultural leftists, they embrace moral relativism. (Yes, rightists also accept it to a degree --  it permeates our culture -- but the left positively embraces it.)

I'll not go into a philosophical discussion of moral relativism. I will simply express my observations about moral relativism in the current culture, including pop culture, of the US. I will discuss the conclusions I've drawn and beliefs I've formed based on my observations, including some of the ways moral relativism manifests in the criticism of Confederate heritage.

The left has fundamentally transformed the standard of right and wrong. In their view, there is nothing wrong with drug use, shacking up without commitment, killing the unborn for the sake of the "mother's" convenience, etc., so long as nobody gets hurt. It's okay to lie about somebody if you disagree with their beliefs. Rioting, arson, beatings, looting, even murdering cops -- these are, if not acceptable, then understandable, when committed by members of an oppressed group.

This is why the leftist press focused so much on Muslim "alienation" in Europe rather than Muslim terrorism, following the Charlie Hebdo murders.

Of course, people do get hurt, but depending on who they are, it's not a big deal in leftist thought. That is why the horrific murder of Emmett Till in Mississippi is still an outrage six decades later, but the horrific burning-alive death of Jessica Chambers by unknown assailant(s), an hour from where Till was murdered, has fallen out of the news in less than six weeks.

Lying, cheating, stealing, property destruction, character assassination and other "old timey" wrongs -- these aren't serious cultural sins. Not like they used to be, and only if they are related, somehow, to today's sins. What's considered egregiously wrong today: racism, sexism, "homophobia," hate speech, etc., -- in short, anything that violates diversity, multiculturalism and inclusion.

Today, in some circles, accusation of racism or race-hate is the same thing as proof of it. It is probably the worst cultural sin in the leftist handbook.

But there's the problem. It's how racism is defined. The definition is so broad, so fluid, so elastic, it can be stretched to cover whatever beliefs or behavior the accuser wishes.  Disapprove of the Islamization of our culture? You're a racist (though Islam is not a race). Disapprove of the violation of immigration law? You're a racist.

One aspect of human nature defined as racism is the individual's affinity for those who are similar to him. It appears to be natural and present in infancy. (Google "racist babies".) I have observed over my lifetime, that when the human attribute is race, there are a relative few who prefer to associate with those who are different, but the majority of people prefer to be with those like themselves.

When leftists detect in themselves this natural affinity, interpreted as an egregious wrong, they are so pained and guilt-ridden, they HAVE to obtain relief. One of the most common ways to do this is to find or fabricate those who are even guiltier (or are perceived to be so) and focus attention and vilification upon them. This creates the greatly desired warm fuzzies of moral superiority. It also serves to remove the spotlight from the accuser's life which will show telltale signs of his forbidden feelings in things like choice of career, choice of neighborhoods, who he associates with, etc.

So Aye believes in honoring his Confederate ancestors, but does not hold white supremacist beliefs. Bee also believes in honoring his Confederate ancestors, and does hold white supremacist beliefs.

Anti-Confederate Cee, a left-leaning white person guilt-ridden over a deep personal secret --his natural affinity for those like himself -- dehumanizes Bee, strips him of all his human traits, accomplishments, thoughts, beliefs, relationships, and totally defines him as a white supremacist and nothing more, and then throws verbal rocks at him on the Internet.

It feels good. It generates those warm fuzzies. But not enough. In fact, the fuzzies are addicting, and it takes more and more to appease his need. So, based on the fact that Aye, just like Bee, honors Confederate ancestors, Cee puts forth the notion that Aye is a white supremacist, as well, even though Aye as never said or done anything to indicate that. Nevertheless, Cee accuses Aye of being a white supremacist because he honors his Confederate heritage, just like that evil, racist Bee does --  and the fuzzy-generating vilification begins.

This is known as the "links and ties" method of trashing somebody's reputation, honed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, but not invented by them. It's also known as Guilt by Association, and it is a logical fallacy. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/guiltbya.html

It is also glaringly overused by floggers and floggerettes in their rock-throwing at the VaFlaggers and other Confederate heritage advocates and activists. Since it generates such powerful, pleasurable (if bogus) feelings of moral superiority, it seems unlikely that they will develop an appreciation for intellectual honesty and drop the guilt by association accusations and vilification anytime soon.