Liberal Logic

It started out as a literary movement within the academic world of Joe Collidge, the idea that any text can only mean what the reader thinks it means. So, like, if you think Moby Dick is actually 1001 Recipes for Water-Bugs, that’s what it is, as far as you’re concerned.

In the damp hot-house of the university, this soon crept out into every other field of study, morphing into that whole “your truth, my truth” business. Let us for the moment ignore the hypocrisy involved in punishing students who have a “truth” other than that endorsed by the professor: although they’ve sort of covered themselves by saying that the more powerful party always gets to decide what’s true and what isn’t. That’s how “social constructs” get made–social constructs being substitutes for facts.

So now we arrive at social constructs, and the assertion, by those who are powerful enough to make their opinion binding on others, that “everything is only a social construct” and there are no such things as facts, and no such thing as truth.

Are you with me so far? Our sages in the universities teach, and have been teaching for some years now, that there is no truth: no objective truth, only social constructs.

From “There is no truth,” we inevitably proceed to this: “All statements are untrue.”

Uh… including that one? (Gears start grinding inside the leftist’s skull…)

There is no escaping the conclusion that the liberal, academic position, in every case, is poppycock. This is only to be expected: their entire worldview is satanic in origin, and Satan is the author of confusion.

And so, if you find you can’t understand them when they talk, don’t be surprised.

They don’t understand themselves. Any kind of understanding is ruled out, once you’ve ruled out truth itself.