Posted on 12/17/2023 6:29:59 PM PST by TBP
The term “kafkatrapping” describes a logical fallacy that is popular within gender feminism, racial politics and other ideologies of victimhood. It occurs when you are accused of a thought crime such as sexism, racism or homophobia. You respond with an honest denial, which is then used as further confirmation of your guilt. You are now trapped in a circular and unfalsifiable argument; no one who is accused can be innocent because the structure of kafkatrapping precludes that possibility.
The term derives from Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial in which a nondescript bank clerk named Josef K. is arrested; no charges are ever revealed to the character or to the reader. Josef is prosecuted by a bizarre and tyrannical court of unknown authority and he is doomed by impenetrable red tape. In the end, Josef is abducted by two strange men and inexplicably executed by being stabbed through the heart. The Trial is Kafka’s comment on totalitarian governments, like the Soviet Union, in which justice is twisted into a bitter, horrifying parody of itself and serves only those in charge.
Kafkatrapping twists reason and truth into self-parodies that serve victimhood ideologues who wish to avoid the evidence and reasoned arguments upon which truth rests. The term appears to have originated in a 2010 article written by author and open source software advocate Eric S. Raymond. He opens by acknowledging the worth of equality before the law and of treating others with respect. But, he notes, “[g]ood causes sometimes have bad consequences.” One such consequence is that tactics used to raise consciousness can veer “into the creepy and pathological, borrowing the least sane features of religious evangelism.”
Raymond offers various models of how kafkatrapping operates. He calls the two most common ones A and C.
Model A: The accuser states, “Your refusal to acknowledge that you are guilty of (sin, racism, sexism, homophobia, oppression…) confirms that you are guilty of (sin, racism, sexism, homophobia, oppression…).” Harking back to The Trial, Raymond explains how the novel’s plot parallels the structure and purpose of the accuser’s nonargument. No specific acts are named in the accusation, which makes the claim unfalsifiable. The vague charge constitutes a thought crime, which also makes it unfalsifiable. As with The Trial, the process seems designed to create guilt and to destroy resistance so that you become malleable. Indeed, “the only way out … is … to acquiesce in his own destruction.” Even if you are innocent, the only path to redemption is for you to plead guilty and accept punishment. Ideally, for the accuser, you even come to believe in your own guilt.
Model C is a common variant on the same theme. You may not have done, felt or thought anything wrong but you are still guilty because you benefit from a position of privilege created by others. In other words, you are guilty because of your identification with a group such as “male,” “white,” or “heterosexual.” The accusation makes you responsible for the actions of strangers whose behavior you cannot control and who may have died long ago. Raymond writes, “The aim … is to produce a kind of free-floating guilt … a conviction of sinfulness that can be manipulated by the operator [accuser] to make the subject say and do things that are convenient to the operator’s personal, political, or religious goals.” To be redeemed, you must cease to disagree with your accuser and condemn your entire identity group.
What happens when an accuser confronts someone in the same identity group to which he or she belongs? For example, one woman may question aspects of politically correct feminism being presented by another. An entirely different phenomenon occurs. Obviously, the questioner will not be encouraged to condemn herself for being a woman or to excoriate all women. Instead, she will be defined out of the group.
This is called the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. It occurs when someone is confronted with an example that disproves a universal claim. The British philosopher Antony Flew described the fallacy, which he also named. One day Hamish McDonald reads an article in the Glasgow Morning Herald which reports on an attack by a sex maniac in England. Hamish declares aloud, “No Scotsman would do such a thing!” The next day, the Glasgow Morning Herald reports on an even worse attack in Scotland. Rather than reject his original statement, Hamish exclaims, “No true Scotsman would do such a thing.” Thus, conservative women like Sarah Palin are not true woman; blacks who question the validity of ‘white privilege’ cease to be viewed as truly black.
Other techniques are often associated with kafkatrapping. (Note: For a tactic to be true kafkatrapping, it has to involve an unfalsifiable claim.) Associated techniques that prove your guilt could include:
Requesting a clear-cut definition of what you are charged with – for example, homophobia; Pointing out an injustice committed by the accuser’s identity group; Applying a single standard to everyone, e.g., refusing to accept that blacks cannot be racist; Expressing skepticism about any aspect of the victimhood ideology, including the plausibility of anecdotal evidence; Being ignorant of or uninterested in the subject; Arguing against the ideology; Saying “some of my best friends are X.” Kafkatrapping would seem to be a win-win situation for an accuser. And, in the short term, this may be true but its long-term impact can be devastating.
A movement becomes widespread because its voice is truth – at least, largely so – and its demand for justice is valid: For example, homosexuals have been hideously abused through much of history. When a movement discards the truth and justice that made it grow and favors abusive attacks instead, it is in decline. The abuse also quashes any productive discussion of real issues. Raymond observes, “[m]anipulative ways of controlling people tend to hollow out the causes for which they are employed, smothering whatever worthy goals they may have begun with and reducing them to vehicles for the attainment of power and privilege over others.”
A separate problem arises if the accuser honestly believes the kafkatrapping. A woman who believes all men are oppressors is unlikely to cooperate with them in a good will attempt to solve social problems. She is more likely to seek a position of dominance over men, which she justifies in the name of self-defense or as a payback that is her due. This heightens tension between the sexes and obstructs sincere attempts to resolve problems. A kafkatrapper true believer becomes increasingly isolated from people who are seen as “the enemy” because they disagree; the true believer becomes increasingly unable to even communicate with or have empathy for a broad spectrum of people. The kafkatrapper ‘wins’ the argument but loses a shared humanity.
My Plan B Blueprint to Become Anti-fragile
The US and US dollar are clearly deteriorating. And there is a lot of danger in having too much exposure to a crumbling empire.
That is why I have a Plan B, which has allowed me to:
Cut my tax rate to 4% Use that savings to invest in real assets, precious metals, and crypto Gain a second residency and apply for a second passport Diversify internationally And much more.
A Plan B gives you the tools to respond to whatever the world throws at you from a position of strength.
I thought I identified the correct book.
Please correct me if I failed - “Inquiring minds want to know.”
Yes, it’s akin to murder for very good reason. When you falsely accuse someone of grave crimes, you effectively murder their good reputation in society, community, even family. And it truly is a grave sin.
The work I referenced was Franz Kafka’s “Die Verwandlung” (see link in my #12).
But your discovery of the other book was rather serendipitous, n’es’t pas? Kinda cool, really.
if you read to the end, you’ll discover that this is a gold commercial ...
WIKI
Metamorphosis (German: Die Verwandlung) is a novella written by Franz Kafka and first published in 1915. One of Kafka’s best-known works, Metamorphosis tells the story of salesman Gregor Samsa, who wakes one morning to find himself inexplicably transformed into a huge insect (German: ungeheueres Ungeziefer, lit. “monstrous vermin”) and subsequently struggles to adjust to this new condition. The novella has been widely discussed among literary critics, who have offered varied interpretations. In popular culture and adaptations of the novella, the insect is commonly depicted as a cockroach.
With Gregor’s unexpected transformation, his family is deprived of financial stability. They keep Gregor locked in his room, and he begins to accept his new identity and adapt to his new body. His sister Grete is the only one willing to bring him food, which they find Gregor only likes if it is rotten.
His father, mother, and sister all get jobs and increasingly begin to neglect him, and his room begins to be used for storage. For a time, his family leaves Gregor’s door open in the evenings so he can listen to them talk to each other, but this happens less frequently once they rent a room in the apartment to three male tenants, since they are not told about Gregor. One day the charwoman, who briefly looks in on Gregor each day when she arrives and before she leaves, neglects to close his door fully. Attracted by Grete’s violin-playing in the living room, Gregor crawls out and is spotted by the unsuspecting tenants, who complain about the apartment’s unhygienic conditions and say they are leaving, will not pay anything for the time they have already stayed, and may take legal action. Grete, who has tired of taking care of Gregor and realizes the burden his existence puts on each member of the family, tells her parents they must get rid of “it” or they will all be ruined. Gregor, understanding that he is no longer wanted, laboriously makes his way back to his room and dies of starvation before sunrise. His body is discovered by the charwoman, who alerts his family and then disposes of the corpse. The relieved and optimistic father, mother, and sister all take the day off work. They travel by tram into the countryside and make plans to move to a smaller apartment to save money. During the short trip, Mr. and Mrs. Samsa realize that, despite the hardships that have brought some paleness to her face, Grete has grown up into a pretty young lady with a good figure and they think about finding her a husband.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Metamorphosis
“2023...I want cheaper labor. F...
Rich globalists have long thought similarly.”
Add giving women the right to vote (empowering them), as they then entered the workforce and watered down wages.
Just say "So?"!
You are being sarcastic aren't you? Please?
Verwandlung
change for the worse (as I understand German)
Perhaps, the leftists would like to stomp on us like we were cockroaches.
Would that the accusation had form and were falsifiable (as in the case of calumny—publicly uttered falsehoods).
The more baseless and abstract, fact-free amorphous, indictments, called contumely, are really just horrid, really mindless public behavior strategically geared toward causing onlookers, disinterested third parties, even acquaintances, friends, family members to disown, turn their backs toward, reject and avoid the unfortunate target. Everyone is to drink in unadulterated negativity and contempt until the target is effectively banned from polite society.
It’s satanic.
You are correct, sir. Excellent points well made.
“Because before women had the vote they never worked outside the home.
You are being sarcastic aren’t you? Please? “
Some did, of course, and they had the right to. But no, women generally stayed in the home. The RICH Oligarchs financed the suffragist movement for the express purpose of CHEAP LABOR (from mass entry of women into the workforce), with a secondary purpose of getting kids out of the home and into the hands of the government. They succeeded in both.
Read about it from someone who actually did the research.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC5b48oXylM
“watered down wages”
It was more to increase government revenue [ for Democrats] (and allow for tax rate reductions [ for Republicans]).
Ah, bipartisanship!
“The word bipartisan usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out.”
— George Carlin
https://quotefancy.com/george-carlin-quotes
The proper response to “kafkatrapping” is “I know you are, but what am I”. Worked in the playground, and still works with childish accusations like this.
The best response to such an accusation is probably “Let me tell you about Jesus and what He has done for me” and launch into a witnessing conversation. The perp will probably flee in terror.
The next best response is a simple “eff off, jackwagon”, perhaps using a more forceful slur that cannot be posted here. The slur used cannot be racial, sexual, religious, etc. - that would give the perp ammunition.
Ok, pedo can be used.
If you were middle class you probably did work before your marriage but stopped afterwards.
About 20% were categorized as "breadwinners" which meant they were sole supports of themselves and any children they may have.
If adding women to the workforce was enough to drive wages down there would have been no need to import as many immigrants as they did.
And yeah I have done the research.
The idea promoted by both liberals and conservatives that before the 1920's women did not work outside the home either full or part time is not true.
I think you are on to something here. After your witness conversation, you could go on to say that it is ultimately a great honor for a Christian to be persecuted for their religion like they are obviously doing to you because of their religious bigotry. This could take their whole line of attack and turn it sideways into a competition of victimhoods.
Good to hear, might you have a link to your book, so I can check your work?
While you’re looking, here’s a link to her book, so you can do the same:
https://www.amazon.com/Occult-Feminism-Secret-History-Liberation/dp/B0C5S6JHZM
Guess “Kafkatrapping” wouldn’t work on me; when somebody calls me a racist, homophobe/lesbophobe,feministphobe, etcetera I just look at them, smile and say DAMN RIGHT!
I am not afraid of them therefore phobe is actually the wrong description, but I do find them disgusting, perverted, repulsive, repugnant and detestable.
As to the racist part, again DAMN RIGHT, I dislike any body who doesn’t think and talk like I do.
It’s not a matter of skin color or where you come from, it’s more a matter of thinking and acting like an AMERICAN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.