Piers Morgan learned in February that insults don’t win arguments. So what happened?

When Piers Morgan was interviewing Tommy Robinson earlier this week it was reminiscent of when he was in the US losing gun control debates, consistently ending up frustratingly talking over and yelling at his guests. But Morgan has even found himself in Tommy’s position last February on Real Time With Bill Maher when Jim Jefferies hurled insults at him much in the same way that happened now.

While yelling at Robinson, Morgan committed a standard sin for politically correct leftists by accusing Robinson of being “deliberately inflammatory”. Yeah, I would say that he probably was. And with good reason. Progress is founded on challenging people and challenging ideas. Sacredly held ideas. If you’re only nice to everybody all of the time, nothing will change.

A lot of people on the left at least agree that Islam could stand to be reformed to a degree, but their refusal to criticize – or even allow anyone else to criticize – Islam is an enormous obstacle in the way of any such Islamic reformation. They are perfectly happy to challenge just about every sacredly held belief in the world, except when it might make immigrants, and specifically Muslims, uncomfortable.

He had no arguments to counter Robinson when he said “There is no such [thing] as Islamophobia”. He had no arguments to counter Robinson when he pointed out “there are a hundred verses in this book that incite violence and murder against us”. So instead of offering some insight on the subject matter at hand, Morgan went on an ad hominem rant at Robinson calling him a bigot, a lunatic, and an islamophobe (clearly, leftists are not very good listeners).

Or, in other words: I’m sorry, you are right, but these facts don’t fit in with my personal fantasy about how I want the world to work.

 

Interestingly, Piers Morgan was on the other side of this time-tested leftist tactic earlier this year, after he dared to challenge the left’s sacredly held belief that Trump’s proposed travel ban was a Muslim ban, and Australian comedian Jim Jefferies cried out “Oh, fuck off.” I’m sure Morgan then wanted to clarify that 87% of the world’s Muslims were not affected by the ban, but Jefferies, true to leftist form, was hysterically yelling over him with unfounded appeals to emotion making it flat out impossible for Morgan to make any kind of rational and informed statement. The facts are not on the left’s side, so the facts must not be heard.

That interaction, like Morgan’s equally hysterical treatment of Tommy Robinson, was celebrated in the mainstream media and by leftist public figures like author JK Rowling.

Only the left could so brazenly lose a debate and then still claim victory. They use their dominance on the mainstream platforms to try and convince the world of their moral high ground, as if bombarding us with the idea that telling someone to “fuck off” is winning an argument. It seems they still don’t understand that people have access to alternative sources nowadays, that their dominance is quickly becoming a thing of the past and people in growing numbers simply do not believe them anymore.

Piers Morgan could have recognized that shutting someone out of a debate because you feel they crossed a line is counterproductive, and makes you look like an idiot to anyone but the people who want you to prove them right. Those lines in the sand are not universal – I know the left likes to call everything they don’t like a “social construct” now. You know what an actual social construct is? Taboos. They only exist in your head, and the only way to deal with them and the problems they cause is to attack them relentlessly.

Clearly, Morgan knows that the loser of the debate is usually the one yelling insults at the other. This was his own conclusion, as shared on Twitter. That’s one life lesson he has quickly forgotten, and that’s too bad, because it could have spared him that embarrassment of a performance on Good Morning Britain.

Piers Morgan could have learned from his experience on Bill Maher’s show. But he chose to continue employing the same tactics against people he doesn’t like, in defense of the ideas he does not want to be challenged. That is how far the establishment is removed from reality.

 

Vlog version: 

One comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *