This is how the Left does debate

This, ladies and gents, is a great example, in a nutshell, of how the Left conduct debate and argument with their opponents. You will not find these traits in any other political sphere. It is a unique trait, applicable to the far left and the centre 'progressive' Fabian left.

I'm not the first person to notice this. I've spoken to countless non-leftists over the years, from elsewhere across the political spectrum, and they say the same thing. 'Liberals' and extremist leftists use ad hominem tactics, abuse, smears, accusations of insanity and low brow idiocy and most of all, astonishing rudeness and sneers to sideline political opponents.

Quite often, left wingers refuse to let their opponents speak, or to respond. And they won't even countenance challenging the logic and arguments of their opponents, because they automatically think they are in the right, without having the need or obligation to think and articulate.

The article is a piece written in today's 'CIF' (Comment is Free), which is the discussion and blog writer's page on the Guardian Unlimited Website. The article is called 'Boycott Copenhagen' and it is written by Sarah Palin, the Republican former Vice Presidential candidate and former Alaskan governess.

Now, before you throw a wobbly, I might like to remind you of a past Boaty & D article on this woman. We also note that we are prominently on the blog roll of a website called 'Sarah Palin is an Idiot!"

The reason why we are on 'Sarah Palin is an Idiot!' is because we think Sarah Palin is an idiot, hence the articles we wrote on her policies and her behaviour during the '08 US Pres. election.

So we are no fans. I do not write this out of support for Sarah Palin. But this piece is important. Because if you care to scan through the 848 (at the time of writing this) comments on the CIF piece by Palin, you will notice that barely a dozen of the posts out of the mountain submitted actually address, in any meaningful way, anything that Sarah Palin wrote in the piece.

Instead, the hoards of hand-wringing Climate Change obsessive leftists who have laid siege to the article's comment page splutter wise cracks and gleeful exclamations in this sort of weird, writhing fest of left wing pious ecstasy. It's one of the most unseemly displays of arrogance and belittling I have ever read on the net. And that's saying something.

Here are 7 random examples, from the many hundreds...

WTF!!!!!!!

Even I could tear that article apart.
And I'm not even that clever.

But I'm not even going to bother.......

Have fun guys!!!!

- - - -

(from a Guardian contributor...)

With the publication of damaging emails from a climate research center in Britain, the radical environmental movement....

Wow. Wrong before you'd finished your first sentence. The legends are true.

Its not the "radical environmental movement" that says man-made climate change is happening and needs to be averted. Its not a few scientists who acted inappropriately either. Its the entire science of climatology.

There you go. Done in four paragraphs. One of which was yours, and two of which were me just mucking about. I can see why Obama had such an easy time last autumn.

- - - -

So there it was on the Guardian web-site, an article entitled "Boycott Copenhagen" by someone called Sarah Palin. And yes, it is THAT Sarah Palin, writing for the Guardian (kind of).

I'm looking forward to "Bring back Apartheid" by Nick Griffin.

I have to admit I'm a bit of a climate sceptic but with Palin on the sceptical side I'm inclined towards believing.

- - - -

Sarah, you're in no position to pronounce like this.

Your grasp of the science of climate change is even worse than your grasp of US politics, where your prominence is both deplorable and embarrassing.

Retreat to the homespun stables you came from and let your Warhol-like fame extinguish as it should: without recognition.

- - - -

Sarah please let it go. Do what John Mcain did after the campaign, and just go back to being a financial supporter of the Republican party. Even I support Obama going to this conference and see the need for climate change. Have a good day.

- - - -

The revelation of appalling actions by so-called climate change experts allows the American public to finally understand the concerns so many of us have articulated on this issue.

You've never articulated anything in your life, dear.

Advocating the boycott a climate conference is a new low...

- - - -

(this piece is a cracking example, written by one smug, pointless left winger in response to another poster...)

I want to dissociate myself from the majority of posters on this thread, the ones who are so tolerant in their outlook that, rather than consider the content of the article, they prefer to rely on personal insult.

You have already proved yourself quite dissociated, Weaselmeister.

Of course, Sarah Palin annoys you because:

(she amuses me, but let's ignore that for now):

a) She is American

Lol

b) She is a Christian

LOL

c) She is proud to be both

LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

d) She is a conservative

ROFLMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

e) She did not attend an Ivy League College

Whassat? Eh?

f) But had the gall to stand for high office

Brazen Gall. Brazen

g) She is more practical than the majority of posters here

HAHAHAHAHA. I can shoot with the best of them, buddy boy.

h) Is more popular than any of the posters here

And prettier, no doubt.

i) And generally is more successful in her life than the majority of the posters here

She knows more wealthy Republicans than we do?

j) Despite not whining about how difficult it all is for her as a woman

Are you serious?

I would also like to point out that the abusive posts do not seem to have been removed at all, although on most "Climate Change" threads a very large number are censored for actually believing that comment is free and that they can dissent from the Guardian's view.

Even I get random posts removed from Monbiot's threads. But I don't whinge about it quite as much as the Deniers do.

And considering that they frequently write so much drivel, over and over again, until the thread becomes utterly impossible to read, then a few more deletions might well be in order.

- - - -

And so it goes on, and on, and on. The whole sorry 'discussion' is utterly unedifying and unseemly. As I said before, we don't agree with Palin. In fact, I am probably about as far away politically from Palin as most people could get. She is an authoritarian, social and moral conservative who believes in protectionism and a fierce defence of religion and patriotism. I am none of those things. I think she is an idiot, but this is based on words she has used and answers she has given to questions. It is based on fact and evidence, and on her policies.

The article she has written on climate change is not exactly Oscar Wilde in motion. It's not a great or particularly lucid piece. But the base points she makes are valid and they are based on a position that exists on climate change and a position held, not just by conservatives like her, but by many other people across the spectrum. Many of whom are very intelligent and in respectable professions.

Infuriatingly, not only are the few people who try to engage with her piece on CIF rude, insulting and bumptious in doing so, they make outrageous and arrogant claims that no-one relevant and no decent or sane expert agrees with the sceptic camp. Anyone who raises an objection, according to their logic, is either a madman, a freak or a right wing piece of shit.

Let me quote from a contribution by a long-standing CIF poster called 'Beautiful Burnout':

"...So what you are saying is that, after all these years, all the scientific research, all these scientists, even some oil companies who agree that climate change has to be addressed, they have all been duped by two guys in Norfolk, on the basis of some emails sent years and years ago. Damn, they must all be really thick, eh? Particularly as the information they were trying to suppress was actually published...

...

President Obama's proposal calls for serious cuts in our own long-term carbon emissions.

Aww bless. All those poor Mercans not able to drive around in their gas-guzzling 4 x 4s any more. Such a pity. It will be so hard for some people to have to travel in a vehicle that is smaller than their ego.

But lastly, and more importantly, you believe in The Rapture, Sarah. You believe that the Messiah will come again and the world will end. You are also one of the evangelicals who believe that, as a result of that, it doesn't matter if Man brings about the end of the world because, perversely, that means that you will force the Messiah to come and you will all be zapped up into heaven safe and sound before Armageddon. You also believe that the world is only 6,000 years old, and you have had a Nigerian witch-doctor/evangelical pastor who "casts out demons" lay his hands on you and bless you.

Which is why I just point and laugh."

Nice, eh? Lovely bit of bigotry and anti-Americanism chucked in there, for all those tolerant lefty readers of course.

I ask you, how much of that is argument and debate, and how much of it is ad hominem attack, laden with sneers and smears and condescension?

I'm not saying climate change advocates are wrong and that their points are invalid. I am saying that people who advocate different views should be heard. Palin is a prominent political person. Whatever you think of her and her other views and campaigns, she has written an article, and it expounds a position that is out there.

Why can't left leaning people engage with her arguments, without resorting to this kind of rampant abuse?

If you disagree with me, go ahead and read the comments. I dare you to find me a comment from someone that meaningfully addresses what Palin actually says, without resorting to some sort of underhand tactic.

I also dare you to challenge my view that this is a left wing phenomenon. Sure, centrists, libertarians, nationalists and conservatives, amongst others, are far from perfect in debate. But debate with non 'liberals' tends to be far more constructive, meaningful and polite.