Some of the semi-literate Neocons have a technique that they used to create a 'straw man' opponent out of various groups, for instance, Environmentalists. Whenever refering to the group, certain adjectives are always or in most cases used, some of the most common include "extremist" and "radical". This first sets up the group as being monolithic, much as the 1960's early Neocons referred to Communism as monolithic, when in fact, for instance, there may be various groups running across the entire political spectrum. For instance, the Sierra Club has little in common with the Earth First! radicals. However, by creating the illusion that all groups which take a particular, non-Neocon correct, stand are radical, the Neocons can dismiss all claims, facts and studies by 'tarring the group with one brush'. In addition, the creation of a straw man as indicative of all the groups allows using misinformation about one group's stand by bringing in the stance of a more radical group and presenting it as the view of all groups.
For those 'debating' Neocons, feel free to be creative in insults, but you should wait until the Neocon begins namecalling, but since most initial email messages from Neocons is composed of a mininmum of fifty percent insults, that's not usually much of a problem. The funniest attacks you can do are ones that you know will be beyond the knowledge of your Neocon opponent (funniest? Might as well enjoy yourself!) Various medical references, cultural and historical references (especially anything refering to pre-Neocon ages such as the 1940's), and similarly 'in jokes' can be used to truly frustrate the typical Neocon.
Don't be afraid of pretty much any kind of insult, one of the favorites I have used in the past is: "on the bright side, if your mother and father divorce, they will still be brother and sister!". Family, jobs, education and intelligence are the primary ways to anger your opponent. One example of a Neocon who stayed in the battle for several months allowed me to attack by referring to the school that the Neocon was attending as " a janitor college". Misinformation presented by Neocons can also lead to some humorous message threads (if working on a group project, where the emails are forwarded to friends or other DittoBusters) by attacking the errors, not unlike the Dittohead email ettiquette and general rules[link]. Again, an example was the claim that Abraham Lincoln owned slaves. This is probably more of an example of the confused history of Neocons, mistaking Thomas Jefferson and Lincoln. However, it led to being able to use a short-lived, and extremely bad TV series " The Secret Diary Of Desmond Pfeiffer" as ammunition.
Remember, in most cases, Neocons will not present data, references or other Primary Sources of information. This means the more effective way to handle argumentation is to use emotional appeals or attacks. The most effective technique was one I used on BBSes, where two of us would take on all comers with one using an emotional/attack technique, and the other presented information and data, often including Primary Sources. When a Neocon is facing both an emotional attack and facts that dispute their claims, they are beyond their mental capacity and often will become totally unintelligible (assuming they were intelligible in the first place). This can be extremely funny.
|
|