Liberal Logic: ‘Quit thinking’

As most of the people who follow my blog know, I don’t often write editorials, but when I do, it’s because I found something considerably significant.

This morning, I happened to quickly glance at my Facebook feed, and I saw a post from someone on my friend’s list, who happens to be left-leaning. The content of the post wasn’t really surprising, it’s just your typical tired Democrat narrative regarding their fetish for face masks. It was the reply to a comment which I found to be absolutely appalling and disgusting, but at the same time, I thought it worth bringing to attention as it really epitomizes this flawed way of thinking, devoid of all logic and rationality.

I won’t spoil the reply, I’ll let you read it and decide for yourself what you think about it first;

As much as the replying ‘individual’ deserves to be publicly shamed and ostracized for making this statement along with others that I’ve seen in the past, in the interest of privacy I blocked out all identifying information.

To the point, though, it’s clear that the information just doesn’t add up. Flu infections are down astronomically due to mask-wearing but COVID-19 infections are at the highest they’ve ever been? From that, one could only make one of two reasonable conclusions; either masks are relatively ineffective (as Dr. Anthony Fauci, the guy who also admitted to estimating COVID-19 data, initially stated) or that somehow the numbers are over-inflated.

11,500 people in Catawba County didn’t wear masks? That number doesn’t add up either. Firstly, that’s for sure a rounded number, there wouldn’t be an even number of cases. More significantly, when I’ve been shopping in Catawba County, I saw significantly few people not wearing masks, in many cases, I was the only one without a mask. By that logic, one would assume that no one who is in public wears masks in Catawba County, but nothing could be further from the truth. This once again points back to the first conclusion presented above. It is clear that many mask-wearing individuals have contracted infections of COVID-19 regardless.

With that considered, this guy wants everyone to “quit thinking and simply follow the guidelines”. These guidelines have been created by people who have repeatedly lied and misled the public, as well as controversial political figures. It’s also worth mentioning, that here in North Carolina, our DHHS secretary Mandy Cohen only practiced medicine for about 2 years and no longer holds a medical license.

What’s disturbing though, is that the person replying to that comment, and the others like him who think with this collectivist mindset don’t care about these facts and obvious logical fallacies.

What happens when you question them? Apparently you’re a “denier”, presumably of “science” and “fact”, but really it’s just a narrative with no basis. Let’s be clear, in order to believe in any of this, you really would have to stop thinking.

Blind trust and blind faith is a dangerous thing, and you would think, given that I know the person who wrote that reply is an atheist, that he would jump up and down in agreement with that statement.

Such trust in authority figures is what leads to the legitimization of oppressive authoritarian regimes such as Nazi Germany, The Soviet Union, and Communist China. People trusted Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. They followed their guidelines, and, well, we see where that got them; thought crime, silence of dissent, genocide, and complete government control of all information.

The United States and the belief in a free society was founded by individuals who questioned authority figures, and so they aimed to give the authority of self-government to the people. Elected officials aren’t chosen to have authority over the citizens, but rather are chosen by the citizens to carry out their will. This is a very important distinction, and as such, no appointed or un-elected individual should have the authority to create any guideline, mandate, or law, without the consent of the citizen.

Individuals who comply with tyrannical mandates and guidelines are legitimizing the abuse of power within our system of government and therefore complicit in the prevalence of fascism. To clear up some basic elementary school social studies, the executive branch (governor) does not have the authority to create laws. If governor-issued mandates were simply ignored, the state of North Carolina and the entire country would not be in the state which it is currently.

Questioning authority is healthy and ensures that individual freedoms are not violated. Freedom of thought is what makes the United States the exceptional and innovative country that it has always been. Freedom of thought is what makes you an individual. We must eradicate this dangerous collectivist mindset before the state of North Carolina and the United States befall the same fates as much of Asia and Eastern Europe.

2 comments

As the person responsible for reply, I have no issue with being identified. I stand by what I post.

Logan, you seem like an intelligent young man, so I feel compelled to address some of , what seems to be, the misconceptions or faulty presumptions in your blog. Firstly, I am not a liberal in the general sense as most who know me will contest, I am fiscally conservative with liberal social leanings. Secondly, I do not desire “everyone to quit thinking”. Much like I’d prefer bad drivers to not drive at all but to ride to their destinations, I would also encourage those who think based solely on their biases, their upbringing, and/or their cognitive dissonance, to not think but to follow the guidelines set forth by the experts in their fields. The poster to which I was replying seems to fit these criteria. I welcome thoughtful discussions based on an objective analysis of the evidence and critical thinking, but the poster doesn’t seem to have that capability; therefore, I’d prefer he defer to the experts in this matter. I hope you read my explanation about the effects of masks on the number of regular flu cases vs. the number of COVID cases, and I hope you understand it better than the other poster. If not, I’ll answer any reasonable questions you might have.

Questioning is healthy, but refusing to accept empirical data against preconceived notions and biases is not, and is by definition denial, and is unhealthy. This brings us to another common misconception that’s being spread by those who deny the science behind mask-wearing and the medical guidelines, that these experts have “repeatedly lied and misled the public”, insinuating an intentional systemic and methodical effort to control the public toward some authoritarian State. This only continues the narrative set forth by Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 50’s, commonly known as McCarthyism, where American citizens were frightened by disseminating reckless, unsubstantiated accusations, and demagogic attacks on the character or patriotism of political adversaries. Certainly, as the experts have studied and have learned more, our methods for combating the virus have changed and the recommendations altered, but these in themselves do not suggest any nefarious attempt at misinformation. I would therefore ask for any objective evidence of any of these medical professionals intentionally providing misleading or faulty information because, to date, I have seen none, though the same cannot be said for the Administration. BTW, linking to others’ opinion pieces and providing anecdotal stories of seeing everyone wearing masks is not evidence. So, yes, I do believe that blind trust and faith are dangerous, thus the reason I advocate for an objective analysis of the best available evidence, with as few biases playing a part as possible.

I would direct you to the N.C. Constitution for a description of the list of powers afforded to the Governor and the Executive Branch during a State of Emergency. This enumerates the Executive Branch’s rights and responsibilities to protect its citizens. I would also ask you to provide names of the logical fallacies you claim I engaged in and explain how what I posted fits with these fallacies.

I hope this clears some things up and I look forward to more reasonable, constructive conversations with you in the future. I put this together quickly and sloppily, so please forgive any unclear wording and let me know if I can further clarify anything.

Most authors and websites wouldn’t allow your comment, but this isn’t the case here. CYGO Network is a place for everyone and I respect that you have a differing viewpoint, although clearly I disagree with it. Here we don’t aim to silence or censor any individual, and I personally appreciate an open dialogue as well as an argument based upon logic, reason, and fact.

To assert that individuals who have biases and pre-concieved notions should ‘not think’ simply due to their own close-mindedness is certainly not helpful for anyone. Rather, said individuals should be encouraged to listen to alternate viewpoints, objective data, and then make their own conclusions based upon the information which they have been presented with in addition to their own personal logic and reasoning. One cannot and should not expect everyone to think and act in the same way. I have been occupied with various things and have not had the time to read through your additional replies in a thoughtful manner and so I cannot comment on them.

I will note that I do not disagree with your second point, verifiable scientific data should most certainly be considered in this situation, but it is also important to note that such data is not always correct. I’m not asserting that I think the data is indeed incorrect, my point, very simply put, is that everyone makes mistakes, and there are always select individuals with malicious intent. Without extensive insight and transparency into how said data is first collected, aggregated, and then published, it is not verifiable. Of course, for the purpose of my piece, the numbers aren’t the main focus; if you feel that my numbers presented within the piece are off, I encourage you to do your own independent research and draw your own conclusions based upon that.

To your third assertion, I am not saying that all individuals, elected leaders and public health officials alike, are ‘intentionally’ lying with the goal of controlling the public. Once again, you can read the other websites which I linked to, and if you feel they aren’t sufficient, I welcome you to do your own independent research to affirm the truth. I suppose firstly I should clarify your misunderstanding; public health officials have lied, but there is only one specific instance in which I assert that this was intentional. For the most part, public health officials who have presented false information have done so out of ignorance, not out of intention. Regardless of intention, a lie is still a lie. If you are wondering about the specific instance which I mentioned previously, I am referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci in a CNN interview, admitting to changing his position on the optimal percentage of the population which must be vaccinated in order to achieve herd immunity (He states that he altered the percentages based upon public approval polls for the vaccine, meaning the percentages are not based upon any medical science.). In the interest of time, I have not searched for and provided the raw interview here, but as you seem to be unaware of it, I would highly recommend you watch the clip.

Of course, while it may not be the intention of everyone, elected leaders who create mandates without the consulatation of the legislature are arguably acting without the consent of the governed. I am not a lawyer or constitutional scholar; so I may do further research into the topic, but it is important to note that the position of the executive branch is still, at least traditionally, not to create laws. I would also argue that a single individual should not, in any circumstance, have the ability to create a law or mandate, as this is not indicative of our democratic system of government. All political leanings aside, I would certainly hope you can agree with that last statement.

I’m not entirely certain where McCarthyism comes into this, it seems largely irrelevant to the topic at hand, but I will at least say that both sides of the aisle have engaged in similar behaviors since the red scare in the 50s, such as the many high profile individuals targeted during the 1960s for their vocal opposition of the Vietnam war, as well as the most recent (and controversial) instance of the Russia investigation, in which many individuals were targeted without basis simply due to their political affiliations. Both of the instances I noted involved falsified CIA dossiers. Again, regardless of your feelings on both of these issues, I’m sure it goes without saying that we need reforms to protect against this happening, time after time in the future.

Another thing I feel the need to briefly touch on would be your opposition to my anecdotal evidence. While this blog isn’t strictly an opinion column, it’s also not a news source. If I were running a news website, I most certainly wouldn’t include anecdotal evidence. For the purpose of this piece, which as I assume you know, is an opinion piece, I feel that my anecdotal evidence is sufficient to establish my point. If you do not trust my anecdotal evidence, that is entirely acceptable, I understand why it’s questionable. I encourage you to go shopping in Catawba County and to support our local retailers and restaurants, and whilst doing so I’m sure you can come to your own conclusion regarding whether or not my anectodal evidence was credible.

Thanks for reaching out.

Leave a Reply