Westmort

Fair statement when you say circle of trust. However, consider this. There is ALWAYS the alpha in the group and people tend to follow and believe whatever that alpha says. If you can shame the alpha then you are in the center of the circle of trust rather than a part of it. And will allow you to better control that circle of trust. I also agree as a whole we do not have the numbers in many urban area's. And I think when you don't have the numbers, then you don't have the luxury of being able to kick people out of your group. I want to repeat, that there are situations that you want to ostracize people, but it should not be your go to. Or you find yourself very lonely in this liberal world.

I love my liberal family, I love it even more when they start screaming and stomp off when they don't win their temper tantrum and we all have a laugh at it.

"A person engaged in a true argument is a interlocutor but if they respond with insults or slurs it is not an argument it is base and primal that is what ridicule will reduce your argument to." -Its about bringing the right weapon to the right fight. If the person brings an argument to the table, bring one back. If the person brings insults to the table understand it as such and use ridicule. You are in a war of idea's you want to win. " Man is a rational animal the only things keeping humans from becoming animals are his conscience (and a decent balance of rational thought with a hint of emotion) " - Don't EVER assume man is a rational animal.....EVVVEEERRRR. If man was rational we would not be in the situation we are today, and this is a discussion all of its own separate from ostracism. "In order to convince someone of something a good way (such as presenting the party switch argument) is to counter the reinvention of history they state as facts by stating that the democratic-republican party in 1829 split." - Sorry, but bring it to today and in simple context please. We are not talking about the party switch argument or talking about democrats or republicans. The topic is about ostracism, that you should only use it when someone is harassing you or harming you and how ridicule is much better weapon especially in a family or friend setting. "Present facts contrary to their beliefs, if their bias towards an argument would keep them from doing research then it's up to you if you bother to keep them or give them the boot. If they try to psycho-analyze you present Popper's argument that Psychology in itself is a pseudo-science because it does not try to prove it hypothesis incorrect but instead tries to (through it's own bias) prove itself correct. A supporting fact would be the countless overlapping diagnoses in the DSM-IV." - I'm sorry but you need to simplify your statement. I don't know what DSM-IV is. And I don't want to comment on something I don't understand. Please keep things simple, the KISS model works well for me. (Keep it simple stupid)

Oh I agree, peaceful talk should ALWAYS be first and foremost. However, from dealing with liberals they will resort to small jabs here and there. And the best way to respond with that is small jabs back with humor and facts. If they get mad and start insulting you etc the best thing you can do is smile and laugh and make fun of them more. The more ridiculous you can make them look, the less likely they are to try any of their bullshit again. I'll use the example of Milo, he gets his point through a factual argument. However when someone attempts to ridicule him he throws it back and wins and gets more popular because of it. If its a peaceful discussion AWESOME If its jab for jab, aim to make them mad and enjoy it. Make sure you get a good laugh by the end of it.

If you go to a family get together, and you know 20% of them are liberal are you not going to go because they are going to talk about bigger government? How about a group of friends where you have a few liberal friends in there? Are you not going to go to work because you have some liberal co-workers? You are only going to isolate yourself if you blindly advocate to ostracize. If you ridicule them and piss them off, you will ostracize them and you will have convinced anyone who is on the side lines of your way of thought. If you leave that group of friends because of a percentage of liberals you have lost the fight and the argument.

Good day Stephen, You mention in many of your video's to ostracize your circle of friends if they are liberal, or are okay with big governments/leftists etc. I say this is the wrong approach. I think the better approach is ridicule, when you are with a group of friends and someone even mentions something liberal it is better and easier to just make fun of them and their argument. If you are around people who cannot take an argument reasonably then ridicule is the next best thing, by making fun of them it will make them angry and when they are alone make them think. If you can make them angry and lash out you show yourself that you are the one with the better ideas within that group of people and that person will not be taken seriously any more. When you leave that group of friends, you are telling your friends that their idea is the correct one and yours is not. When you say it is a battle of idea's it is just that, and the one who leaves first or lashes out first loses. Just like in a boxing ring, the one who does not show up or leaves mid way through loses. This is no different. The only time I think ostracism is a good thing is when someone is hurting you. If someone is attacking your character all the time, or beating you or calling you names consistently then this is a different story and we are talking about harassment. If you enter a boxing match with your gloves and your opponent arrives with a sword then it is reasonable to leave, but only in that sort of situation. Let me know what you think.