Last time I blogged about how one of my Amazon product reviews was rejected for the first time since I started reviewing. Amazon sent me a list of reasons why a review might be rejected, none of which applied to what I wrote.

The elephant in the room is that the review addressed the politics in the book…

But not from the state-approved left-wing perspective.

 

Now  infamous liar and impudent hypocrite John Scalzi, after being targeted in a short parody e-book, has convinced Amazon to remove the book from their virtual shelves. Judging by the Soviet zeitgeist strangling our entire culture, I doubt he had to twist their limp-wristed arms.

The book in question is John Scalzi Is a Rapist: Why SJWs Always Lie in Bed Waiting For His Gentle Touch… The title alone takes advantage of Scalzi’s self-identification as a rapist, and seems to also poke fun at the masturbatory hive mind of Social Justice Whiners in general, as I sort of did in The Greater Good.

Just to catch you up (in case this is new to you) after the Hugo Wars surrounding Sad Puppies III and the Rabid Puppies, Vox Day released his e-book SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police on the anniversary of #Gamergate. It quickly shot to the top of the Amazon rankings.

It also quickly inspired a parody by the target of his literary roast: John Scalzi is Not a Very Popular Author and I Myself am Quite Popular. In true SJW fashion author “Theo Pratt” attempts to skew the debate away from relevant points by portraying Vox Day as some kind of sore loser obsessed, offended, and in denial about Scalzi’s popularity. This can be traced back to Scalzi’s lies about his own website traffic, and the fact that Vox Day refuses to let him off the hook for it.

That parody evidently inspired a counter-parody…and now you’re caught up.

In many ways, Amazon is run on sound business principles–that is how they rose to the top. But look at this:

So a company that otherwise practices sound business strategies banned a #1 bestseller (while leaving the left-wing parody on the same subject, #3, on the shelf.  Notice?) even after Ken at Popehat  advised him the parody is First Amendment-protected.

Fascinating, in light of how George Bush is a War Criminal and Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot and Paula Deen is a Big Fat Idiot are still available for sale there.

It’s doubtful the SJWs will ever recognize that they have proven that they are, indeed, thought police.

Scalzi is just being Scalzi–a predictable Marxist/feminist/homophile/transphile tool who tries to dish it out but just can’t take it. The alarming aspect of this is Amazon being so eager to lose profits (when there is no legal neccessity) in order to impose a double standard on the expression of ideas.

Get used to this. For those who have paid attention, it’s obvious the SJWs only believe in freedom of speech so long as the speech agrees with them. We are losing every liberty formerly protected in the Bill of Rights as I write this. It has been piecemeal and incremental up until now, but you can expect the crackdown to spread like wildfire soon, across every front. This is the first little mudslide of the avalanche.

(Update: looks like the thought criminal Alexa Eren has re-published her book under a new title; and more counter-parodies have been released  by puppy-friendly authors. How long before Amazon grinds these titles under its pink jackboot is unknown at this point. Image links are sprinkled throughout remainder of post.)

A clarification might be in order. “SJWs always lie” has been Vox Day’s mantra well before this book came out. You may have trouble with the title, because SJWs don’t literally always lie. They sometimes speak the truth when it fits the Narrative and advances their agenda. They might even be truthful when asked mundane questions like “what is your favorite flavor of Starbucks latte?” or “what color is your Prius?”

What the author is doing with that assertion (and title) is commenting on the character of SJWs by speaking their own language. Day has studied Aristotle, who compared rhetorical to dialectic debate. Pinkos, cultural Marxists, CHORFs, SJWs…whatever you choose to call them…are completely incapable of dialectic reasoning, and so must be engaged rhetorically.

An example may help illustrate: A former female companion had a primordial compulsion to instigate strife and drama. While I sometimes forgot things that did happen, she often remembered things that never happened. It baffled me how easily she resorted to dishonesty in an argument, and could ignore facts right in front of her face in order to double down on some preposterous accusation she insisted on holding to. I could write a book-length breakdown on her absurd behavior, but one little tactic that annoyed me for some reason was her use of “always” and “never” according to the circumstances of the argument–not according to reality. Me pointing out the truth after one of her ridiculous lies never got me anywhere. Then one day, out of exasperation, I decided to give her a taste of her own medicine. She accused me of always doing this or never doing that (I forget which) yet again, and I calmly replied, “You always say that, and it’s never true.”

For the first time I can remember, she was speechless. In fact, that finished the argument. It was like I forced unconditional surrender by unleashing some devastating secret weapon. The war was won, but at the time even I didn’t understand why the weapon had been so effective.

Looking back now, I understand that my choice of words had built a temporary bridge between the rhetorical and dialectic that even her reptilian brain could briefly cross.

I have Vox Day to thank for my epiphany regarding communication with these kind of people. I had never been taught about dialectic vs. rhetorical, but I had been frustrated by debates with SJWs for 20+ years, never understanding that I was using dialectic and they were only fluent in rhetorical. Then one time Vox said, “You will never, ever, change the mind (of an SJW) by giving them information.”

Everything clicked into place in an instant. All my frustration and years of wasting my breath using honest, rational arguments suddenly made sense. Why my ex-girlfriend’s mouth was closed with such finality that one time years ago suddenly made sense. Women in general suddenly made a lot more sense. The wilful ignorance of Obamunists and Klintonistas suddenly made sense.

It is possible for us to switch to their language, but but not for them to understand ours.

For example, an SJW who reads this blog post from beginning to end would come away from it with this mental summary:

“Blah blah blah John Scalzi sucks blah blah blah I hate women blah blah blah I’m probably racist too blah blah blah.”

Literally that is all they would grok. And I could spend hours in a comment flame war quoting what was actually said in defense of myself…but it would be entirely moot. Like trying to explain the workings of an internal combustion engine to a house cat.

Save yourself cumulative years of futile labor trying to reason with these people. Jesus addressed such people in His time this way:

John 8:⁴³ Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. ⁴⁴ You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. ⁴⁵ Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!