“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
– – Newton’s Third Law of Motion (1687)
Historically speaking, it was roughly halfway between the time the pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock (1620) and the start of the American revolution that science proved actions have consequences. With his publication of Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, Newton laid the foundation for all of modern mechanics. Sadly however, the concept of consequences has been all but lost on modern liberal politicians.
Whether we’re talking about our illustrious rotund governor, our black knight mayor, any member of the city council, or your average liberal voter, the very notion of negative consequences never enters their worldview. After all, they are only trying to help people. What can possibly be wrong with that?
The situation is confusing to them because feelings don’t have consequences.
Unfortunately for all of us, liberals’ actions have massive consequences.
Know thy enemy – – Sun Tzu
Mayor Brandon Johnson genuinely does not understand any questions alleging a connection between his policies regarding illegal immigrants and the death of Sheridan Gorman. Those items are completely disjointed in his mind. How could they be connected? All he’s trying to do is make life better for black and brown people. Helping people can’t lead to someone else being killed. He knows this is true because this is what he feels. And feelings don’t have consequences.
You have doubts? Consider a recent exchange:
Last week a reporter ham-handedly tried to pin the mayor down by asking, if illegal aliens continued to commit bad acts within the city, “would you rethink your policy of… giving hundreds of millions of dollars to illegal aliens, or would you rethink your policy of not turning over violent repeat offenders to ICE?”
Now, if you read this author’s piece last week here in the Contrarian, you know how this question should have been asked. The reporter failed to psychologically tie the consequences of the mayor’s policies to Sheridan Gorman’s death by using the word BECAUSE. Nevertheless, the mayor’s answer is demonstrative.
The mayor responded:
I think you want to know, how I engage on this on a very personal, intimate level. I understand your question. Anyone that is harmed by anyone, any act of violence, we have to hold those individuals accountable, regardless of their status. I know people who have been harmed in the way which you have described by individuals that have documentation. It doesn’t make the tragedy less because they are documented. Do you understand? And so what I am saying is that we have to ensure [interrupted] We have to make sure that we’re doing, as government, everything in our power to protect people, period.
The mayor was so proud of his answer he posted it on X.
It’s a great answer. Responsive to the question, and uses BECAUSE to eliminate documentation status from the equation. This answer changes the psychological framing of the issue to the ‘relative degree of the tragedy’ instead of one where Sheridan Gorman is alive or dead.
The mayor just sat and calmly explained that there is no connection between Chicago’s sanctuary city policies and Sheridan Gorman’s death. Further, to argue against him one is co-opted into taking the position that somehow it would have been less of a tragedy had Gorman been killed by a documented person.
Take note that there is no situation in the mayor’s mind whereby Sheridan Gorman is alive today. That option simply never enters his worldview. The only distinction he considers is whether the shooter was documented or undocumented.
This is how the mayor thinks. And he is confident he is correct.
This is how liberals think. And they are confident they are correct.
This is what we are up against.
There is no free lunch.
We are dealing with people who value their feelings over facts. And as explained in last week’s essay, this isn’t a problem until people start acting on their feelings. Whereas unlike feelings, actions come with consequences.
A recent Chicago Tribune article (no link for communists) lamented that, “Under current state law, apartment dwellers cannot install rooftop solar, leaving millions of Illinoisans without viable options to generate their own renewable energy.” Oh no! The tragedy. This is just the kind of platitude liberals can get behind. Who wants to deny anyone their fundamental right to alternative sources of energy?
Liberals are simply not open to the possibility that anything bad can happen.
One can almost hear the mayor now, ‘We need to pass this legislation BECAUSE everyone has a right to sunshine.’ Don’t laugh. You know it is coming. And anyone who wants to argue against another’s right to sunshine will lose. Every. Single. Time. Period.
But actions have consequences.
Spending $300 million on affordable housing? Feels good. Nothing bad can happen. Except now you have $300 million less to spend on public safety in a city awash with crime, and now you have more net-takers burdening a cash strapped city and school district.
Taxing the rich? Feels good. Nothing bad can happen. Except now “the rich” are leaving in record numbers and taking their money with them leaving the middle-class and the poor with an insurmountable pile of debt.
Giving criminals second chances? Feels good. Nothing bad can happen. Except when habitual offenders — WHO SHOULD BE IN JAIL/PRISON — rape, rob, murder, carjack, set on fire, assault, stab, shoot, hit-and-run, and otherwise make life hell for an innocent population that actually just wishes to live in peace.
If consequences are inconsequential BECAUSE liberals are governed by their feelings and feelings don’t have consequences, then how does one fight them?
As we covered last week, you have to use the word BECAUSE and ram those consequences right down their throats. I thought this was a good start. It was the because that caught my eye.
… if only he had stuck with the because in every paragraph.
Get out of the echo chamber.
While reading Paul Vallas’ recent article on John Kass’ website I noticed a comment by a reader named John W. who wrote, “You are preaching to the choir on this site… you need to get your message out to the non-JK public, and, above all, get them to the voting booth.” Well ain’t that the truth.
Websites like this one and our friends at CWB, HeyJackass, Second City Cop, & the aforementioned John Kass News (and the others who don’t necessarily focus just on Chicago; we mean you Wirepoints & Illinois Policy) are great at providing you with facts you can use when arguing with liberals. However, the problem is you are not fighting a war based on facts and logic. You are fighting a war based on feelings.
The problem with these websites is that they are designed to be factual and not persuasive. No liberal has ever gone to any of these websites and changed their mind on anything. Ever. (Sorry guys.) In fact, should a liberal find you spouting facts from one of these websites they will immediately dismiss it out of hand.
If you want to make a change you need to break through the wall of feelings. As discussed last week, you can do that using BECAUSE. But now you know that arguments will be meaningless without pointing out the consequences BECAUSE liberals never think of them.
Stick to this format:
[bad consequences] BECAUSE OF [you | your/liberal policies]If you’re dealing with this in person — especially if you’re dealing with someone who is familiar with your political persuasion; and thus might be suspicious of your intentions — you might want to start with a very simple Yes Set. A Yes Set is a small series of easy-to-answer questions to which a person will say yes. Don’t worry about the details but this builds what’s called psychological momentum.
You: Hey, you follow what’s going on at CPS?
Them: Yes. (What parent wants to admit they don’t know what’s going on?)
You: Did you vote in the recent election for school board?
Them: Yes.
You: Did you vote for the slate of CTU candidates?
Them: Yeah.
You: 50% of the kids can’t read because of you (and people like you who support CTU.)
Them: [pause] (processing cognitive dissonance) then…
Them: Either “No” or something else negative.
Amend to suit your own needs.
In the online space, follow every liberal politician and hammer with the regular format.
MBJ, Sheridan Gorman is dead because of your sanctuary city policies.
JB Pritzker, Katie Abraham is dead because of your sanctuary state policies.
Stacey Davis Gates, black kids are condemned to a life of poverty because you won’t teach them reading and math.
Liberal voter, Chicago is failing because you keep electing these morons into office.
The average 8-year-old knows what Newton proved nearly 350 years ago; actions have consequences. The challenge is getting people who are governed by their feelings to acknowledge the consequences of their actions.
If we can’t, then we will continue to live in inconsequential Chicago.