You're absolutely right, and I started to realize this about a year ago. I was trying to come up with actions I could take to influence the local narrative where I live, so I started being a little more intentional about testing ideas and seeing if predictions held up.
I was surprised when some of them I was confident about didn't. I think as a whole we need to be more rigorous in our dialectic ideas, although I also think it's equally important to remember this shouldn't limit our rhetoric, which is a completely different tool.
Some issues are hard to quantify and thus prove
Like we all knew that importing niggers would increase rape and destroy social trust, but if nobody successfully prosecutes for rape, or avoids doing it because waycism (the 2,000 rapes in Rochdale by muslims), or blames it on something else, then it's hard to say "look, I was right and so was Hitler, (again)"
liberals just move the goalposts
True, but I'm talking about things that are a little more verifiable. Some of my expectations of the stock market after the election for example. I also had to revise some of my thoughts around covid after having it and knowing someone else who had a bad case. I'm also in the depths of a liberal hive and while most of them are dumb as rocks I occasionally have to really consider things I take for granted as true after hearing well thought out points.
Don't worry about me turning blue though, being here mostly makes me feel saintly.
(post is archived)