The progressive use of public panic is readily observable because it is built upon pure emotional threats and reasoning and exhibits something in logic called “Non Sequitur”.
Non Sequitur is a Latin term that simply means “it does not follow”, that the conclusion of an argument does not logically follow from the evidence, assertions or statements that lead to it.
Here’s how they do it:
- Find a commonly or cyclically occurring event, situation or condition that is helpful to your agenda.
- Loudly and constantly claim that event, situation, or condition is extraordinary, unexpected, or unique.
- Link to that event, situation or condition other things that are unpleasant, disastrous, or catastrophic, even though those things have no logical or scientific ties to the primary thing.
- Dismiss any evidence that the event, situation, or condition is unpleasant, disastrous, or catastrophic and will pass on its own or has a natural origin that mankind cannot influence.
- Inject fear and emotion about the consequences of not doing something about that event, situation, or condition, even if those somethings have no logical, scientific, or proven effect.
- Claim that something must be done even if that something will have little or no effect on the event, situation or condition that is the target of the action.
- Ignore any potential solution that does not serve the desired agenda and outcome.
From climate change to racism to the covid pandemic, to illegal immigration, to politics in general, almost all, if not all, progressive agendas follow this pattern.
None of this is logically or scientifically based, it is all emotional reasoning designed to support a particular desired outcome, that being the accumulation of power and control.
Climate change is but one of the long running scams the Democrats and their friends in the globalist World Economic Forum depend upon, but it also applies specifically to America’s foundational ideals. I was reminded of this by none other than Democrat Election Denier Jamie Raskin and his renewed attack on the Constitution. Here’s his attack inserted into the pattern:
- The Constitution has routinely functioned as the basis for American government for 235 years.
- Over the past few elections, the Electoral College has become a problem.
- The Electoral College has allowed recent presidents to be elected who didn’t win the popular vote and that is a bad thing.
- Never mind that it has happened before in American history (and didn’t destroy our Republic or harm the nation).
- If we don’t do something, such as abolishing the Electoral College in favor of a direct democracy, the nation will descend into chaos and pestilence will come upon the land (even though none of that has happened when this situation occurred before).
- The Electoral College must go to ensure fairness (even though the opposite is the case – a few highly populated states will erase voices from the lesser populated states).
- We must do something to change the threat to the Constitution the Electoral College process represents (even though the EC is the Constitution, and it was designed to protect the fairness the Democrats claim is at risk).
See what I mean?
The outcome of Raskin’s argument is based on the Electoral College being unfair but given what he proposes to do results in exactly the opposite conclusion. It would make New York and California and other highly populated progressive states the kingmakers of each election – and that is their true agenda, to give those states more power than the lesser populated conservative states.
Same with the Democrats’ calls to eliminate the Senate, claiming that Montana shouldn’t have two Senators when New York only has two, even though there is a logical reason the authors of the Constitution decreed it to be that way.
Their arguments are always rooted in some claim of unfairness and always end in setting unfairness in concrete. They want direct democracy on a national level because it allows tyranny of the majority and history has proven direct democracies to be some of the most unfair modes of national government there is this side of pure tyrannical, technocratic authoritarianism.
None of their arguments make any more sense than does eliminating fossil fuels and ignoring nuclear power in favor of simply spending untold amounts of money on technologies too immature to work while lowering standards of living and ceding even more power to government to combat “climate change”.
All of it, every inch, is non sequitur.
And as such is a fallacy.
If we had a truly free press, they would be attacking this fallacy while doing their constitutional duty – but 99.9% of them know nothing about logic or reason.
That leaves it to us to remove the scales from the eyes of our fellow citizens and expose the Democrat Party for what it is – a political party based on lies, falsehoods and non sequitur.
Because a party based on nothing, is nothing.
One thought on “A Party Based on Nothing Is Nothing”
#1-7 is what the gOP is doing right now (and for years) with immigration.
Projection is all you people have.