Meerkat Prompts: Pretzel Logic
I confess, dear ‘kats, to being uncertain as to where to place this post. Does it belong as a Meerkat Prompt? Is it best suited as a response post, or can it be classed as a Thinking ‘Kat entry? In the end, I’ve decided to leave it as a Meerkat Prompt, but it could certainly suit a number of categories.
On more than occasion and across more than one arena, I have been told by people to watch what I say. Apparently the act of daring to voice an opinion on certain subjects is an offensive one to some people. Some of these people have no sense of irony, and operate with a great deal of hypocrisy, twisting themselves in knots to justify their stances, thus displaying what I like to call pretzel logic.
The bulk of this problem stems from this meerkat referencing US politics. There are some out there who really resent this Brit having an opinion on what’s going on across the Pond. One commentator – the one most indulgent of hypocrisy – has gone as far as to suggest I am trying to force people to accept my point of view, simply by expressing it, which is in itself a spectacular act of pretzel logic, for reasons I shall come to. It is also absurd.
Every so often, I’ll metaphorically tap the above sign. It seems necessary, because some people don’t understand what freedom of speech is. By all means, object to the content; I cannot stop you, but to offer nothing but heated and angry rants in my direction, demanding and dictating what I can and cannot write about on my blog, will be met with, at best, scorn. Suggesting that in exercising my freedom of expression, I am somehow impeding yours, is a peculiar and especially twisted piece of pretzel logic, that to date I have seen no justification for.
This ‘do as I say, not as I do’ mentality is often most found within the realm of the devoutly religious, and this is where one particular troll has proven, time and time again, that they cannot abide by their own beliefs. Demanding I do not speak of US politics (merely code for ‘don’t criticise my Messiah, Donald Trump), whilst writing at length about US politics themselves, is a piece of performative pretzel logic that is truly quite epic. You see, this commentator is also not American, and currently resides further from the USA than I do! What is worth noting here is that I do not even suggest he should refrain from commentary about foreign politics, yet he continously tries to interfere with what I have to say.
Practice what you Preach
Those four words rather eloquently summarise the situation. If you are upset by my critiques and posts about US politics, then by all means, issue a rebuttal. If you have your own blog, then I obviously cannot stop you from posting whatever you want, and I would not dream of doing so. You are free to leave comments here if you so wish. Create a YouTube video or podcast that you believe counters my arguments. Whinging that I am writing about foreign affairs whilst also writing about foreign affairs does not qualify as an evidence-driven rebuke to what I post. When I post criticisms of anything, I try to provide links and quotes to assist my arguments. If you all can offer in reply is a lengthy assault on my character, whilst deceitfully claiming that’s all I’m doing… well, you have proven yourself cowardly and dishonest. There is nothing Biblical or Christ-like about lying and cruelty, so practice what you preach.
I am not perfect, and I do not always succeed in my aims to be even-handed, but then again, nor do I pretend to be. There are those who lord it over non-believers, contemptuous in their statements and arrogant in their approach, holding fast to their moral superiority, whilst endorsing policies of unchecked greed and malice. Once again, practice what you preach, instead of twisting your reasoning several times over in a bid to always be right. A little humility would go a long way with these people.
Concluding Summary
Attempts to denounce one form of behaviour whilst actively practising it are the ultimate demonstration of pretzel logic. It is a tangled web of lies and hypocrisy, and those following such ideals are devoid of merit. I am certain they will cry that this is an attack on them; they have hoisted themselves by their own petard through their actions, and if they wish to be taken seriously, they should be offering evidence-driven posts to refute my arguments. I would welcome it if they did, and gladly engage in any such debates. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a desire to be credible, based on past observations.
What about you, dear ‘kats? Have you encountered demonstrations of twisted logic? Please let me know what happened!
Update, 24/1/26:
Predictably, Derrick issued a lengthy-yet-misleading post that failed to address one word of my post. As expected, he doubled-down and continued to deceive. As usual, he lacks the confidence and conviction to link to my posts so people can get some context, because context would ruin his arguments. What he did do, a couple of days ago, was leave an hilarious comment under a different name. He was unable to drop his usual style, and served up yet more irony. It can be found here.
‘Kat Comments