Palouse whale sightings, pt. 2: a typical Intolerista smearbund

One of the hallmarks of an Intolerista is that key rules of argumentation, necessary for civilized discourse, are tossed out the window. There will be serious illogicality, hurling of abusive insults, lack of impartiality, resentment of those holding opposing views, egotism, ignoring (or downplaying) of areas of agreement or areas deserving approval, use of generalizations without substantiation, and failure to define key terms. Indeed, rather than making a sincere attempt to interact with someone's actual views, or indeed even to ascertain them, the Intolerista will frequently try to smear an opponent as crazy and/or evil so that he can be summarily dismissed. Any "sound bite" or any "factoid" that can cherry-picked and misconstrued without regard for context is gleefully presented as evidence that the opponent is a person whose views are beneath contempt.

We see all of the above in the recent posts attacking me (and Rev. Wilson, and by implication the other members of Christ Church) on Vision2020.

Andreas Shou kicked off the smearbund by saying that googling me would turn up a "gold-mine of racism." As evidence of this, and alleged "proof" that I am a Kinist, he offered:

"This is one white man who can do just fine without swastikas . . . I have to reject those symbols as somehow representative of me as a Christian white man because of their connections with the Nazis. Although the Nazis have gotten a bum rap there was far too much in Nazi ideology that is detestable for the Christian."

and

"I don't know if I'd call 'em "niggerisms" [i.e., the ridiculous, even sacrilegious things some Christians do in worship] but whatever they are I'm praying for a total meltdown of the electrical power grid in their part of the country every time they gather for "whoreship."

In other words, the "gold-mine of racism" offered as evidence that I'm a Kinist are the following:

1. The fact that I made comments at a Kinist blog
2. The fact that I said the Nazis got a bum rap (by which I meant they have been charged with doing things that they didn't do, such as the Katyn Forest Massacre)
3. The fact that I quoted, without approval, another person's use of the word "niggerism"

The fact that I explicitly rejected Nazi ideology as detestable to Christians is apparently not a mitigating factor in Mr. Shou's eyes. Even more serious than that, however, is Mr. Shou's decision to omit the following comment by me at the same blog:

"I'm still waiting for someone to invest the effort required to do an adequately nuanced critique of various "racist" perspectives. That's one reason I hang around here and ask questions . . . I should hate to think that I'm the only person in Christendom who is critical of Kinism and yet willing to take the trouble to actually identify my target before squeezing the trigger. "

What kind of a person ignores a statement like that in order to describe the target of his criticism as a Kinist? An Intolerista, that's who. It's a standard modus operandi of the Intoleristas: if there is any evidence that clearly contradicts your attempted smear of your opponent, simply ignore it.

I should add that Mr. Shou's statement "Wilson ended up disclaiming 'kinism' when it got politically inconvenient, but it looks like some kinists keep running around defending him" reveals more about Mr. Shou's lack of character than about either Rev. Wilson or myself. Doug Wilson has always had problems with Kinism and to suggest that he only distanced himself from Kinism as a matter of political expediency is to lie.