Do you have some racist beliefs? Do you hold an untenable position but you are too embarrassed to declare?
Here are some techniques that will help you cloud reality, conceal what you believe, and suppress any real action, without declaring what you really believe, therefore avoid the risk of being looked down as a degenerate racist. Some of these techniques are intertwined:
1) The “what about” technique:
That’s an easy one: every time there is a specific campaign shedding light on a specific grievance of a certain group of people, you shift the focus of the conversation into another irrelevant grievance.
Examples: Stop mutilating female genitalia!
You: What about male genitalia? And monkey’s genitalia? (and then you end with a general piece of wisdom that no one would be able to protest, however irrelevant they may be, like: All genitalia should be protected!)
2) The irrelevant solutions technique:
You should use this technique when there is a very urgent demand about an imminent catastrophe; so you start introducing alternative solutions to distract everyone and derail the conversation off track.
Example: We should stop the genocide against the Muslims of Burma!
You: Wouldn’t it be better if we focus on eliminating illiteracy and ignorance by building technical schools in the rural areas? (or any other good, however irrelevant and impractical solution to the same effect)
3) “Where were you when..” technique:
Here you indirectly attack your interlocutor by assuming they had a hidden agenda and double standards.
Example: Stop the genocide against the Muslims of Burma!
You: Where were you when Bangladeshi Muslims were suffering in Saudi Arabia? I didn’t hear your criticism then! (say it with a condescending sarcastic smile like you really care about Bangladeshi Muslims living in Saudi Arabia.)
4) “Who knows?” technique:
Here you would come to a very hot topic, like the massacres of Aleppo by the Syrian regime and declare you don’t know who is killing whom (even though there is a way to know, but you would ignore that, and insist that you don’t know, and then focus on how you feel about the tragedy.)
Instead of pointing fingers at the direct perpetrators and butchers, that might eventually lead to an action deterring them, you make vague demands, and denounce abstract meanings like “suffering” and “evil”, and say stuff like: “Stop the killing! No more blood!” (Who are you talking to? Who should stop the killing and how? It doesn’t matter! Remember: you were not serious from the beginning)
5) “They are all the same” technique:
Here, you say you are neutral; you only follow the truth. Your logic is easy: The Syrian regime and its allies, for example, did bad things (killed hundreds of thousands, and dislocated millions) but the revolutionaries had their own breaches of human rights as well, so they are also bad. The conclusion: They are all the same! This is a war between two equal evils!
Congrats! Now you can lay back, and relax! A pure neutral person like you wouldn’t give his support to anyone: they have to be infallible angles to deserve your support!
6) “The wood in your eye” technique:
You hear something true, but you ignore it and counter attack with another true thing.
Example: Muslim women can’t put on Hijab freely in France!
You: Yes, but don’t forget that women can’t drive in Saudi Arabia! (So we are even now! What is the problem here?)
7) The world cup of suffering technique:
Here, you deal with grievances like it is a competition. You are suffering, you say? That’s nothing compared to my, or my group’s suffering.
8) “Life is unfair” Technique:
This is somehow related the last one, but a bit mitigated: If it is any consolation, you are not the only one suffering; It is not personal. This is how things are; C’est la vie (so man up and deal with it).
Example: Black people are facing racism in some Arab countries.
You: They are not alone; We are all suffering under the harsh realities of a sophisticated human condition. Aren’t we all suffering from the racism of poverty? (you can get philosophical here.)
9) “All lives matter” technique:
This is a jewel! Here, you go a step further, you ignore the realities on the ground and ask for justice for everyone! You throw the grievance out of context and make general demands that no one can disagree with.
The (Black lives matter) hashtag was aimed at shedding light on the unfair treatment the blacks actually face, but you say angrily: All lives matter! (It is incumbent that you say it angrily as if you are defending the rest of humanity against blacks who want their lives only to matter!)
These are some of the basic techniques you can use to successfully divert attention, and block any real action aiming at solving an existing problem, that you don’t want’ to see solved, by turning every possibly serious talk into and endless stream of useless garbage, and wasting every body’s time and effort in nonsensical sophistry!
Good luck!