Skip to content

Munchausen Politics – Playing the Victim Card

December 19, 2016

Munchausen Politics – Playing the Victim Card

Image result for munchausen syndrome

A Little Background on Derailing Arguments

When Myapologetics used to reside on a more social blog site I was often visited by a small set of people who took exception to what I wrote.  Fair enough, it is their right to hold a viewpoint in direct contrast to my own.  I was happy to read something that was a coherent alternate view but it became tiring when the only reason someone disagreed is because they thought any opposing view was pure evil.  Not wrong but evil because it did not agree with their viewpoint. Reasonable people would understand that any forum has limited influence and would be happy to state their case to agree to disagree.  If only there were more people who understood the art of debate is not about vanquishing a viewpoint.  Unfortunately, there is always a tiny but persistent minority who cannot understand why anyone would disagree with their deeply held ideologies.  These are what I can only suggest are eternally angry people.

The tactics used by angry people are as banal as they come.  Rather than present a counter argument with evidence to support it they go immediately for the emotional cheap shots: “How dare you; that is sexist, racist, homophobic etc…”  Which one of these is an argument in themselves? None.  Yet it does not stop people from blurting them out in place of an actual valid point.  After all the noise and polite requests to justify the barrage of insults the angriest people would eventually take one of a few positions.  Some would just throw insults; some would make threats; some would go to another forum and complain about how stupid I was for not agreeing with them; some would even complain to the blog site owner hoping to have me removed; some would even make up lies spread them.  So much for the nobility of the writing fraternity.  It is neither noble nor a fraternity.  At its worst, it can be a bunch of self-indulgent minds fighting for dominance over other self-indulgent minds.  Despite all the dirty tactics and noisy rhetoric most angry people eventually give up trying to convert you to their partisan cause and concern themselves with not losing their own allies. This is where I have witnessed the cowardly attack followed by the cowardly retreat.

The final effort in any losing argument to use the cowardly insult followed by the cowardly retreat.  After retreating from the forum I have seen people argue that they are hurt and insulted by someone holds a different viewpoint to theirs.  How could anyone dare disagree with what their ideology told them was unquestionably true?  How dare anyone even question the premise that their ideology based upon?  How could someone be so ‘evil’ that they cannot see how ‘good’ their ideological stance is?  The argument ceases to be about points of a disagreement but about saving the world from evil ideas because…. ‘those ideas are dangerous’.  It is at this point the angry person drops their trump card of claiming to be a victim of the dangerous idea.  They are no longer defending a point view, they are now defending their own rights.  And so it goes.  The victim is always right.

Victimhood Status

Victimhood has become currency in the modern world of identity politics. By extension, rational argument is being jettisoned in favor of appeals to emotion.  We are being asked to feel before we think.  We are also being told that because of our physical characteristics our contributions and opinions are not valid.  Hence we have the notion that the perceived ‘Privilege’ of person nullifies their words.

‘Check Your Privilege’ is one the most common statements being made by Social Just Warriors.  As if by some unwritten rule, apartheid should be considered as the basis of permission to speak.  The ‘Privilege’ argument has been extended to cover a whole range people who are no longer permitted to express their opinions. ‘White Privilege’, Cis-Gender Privilege, Ableist Privilege and the list goes on.    Everyone who is not on the ‘Privilege’ list is by default an oppressed victim of some description and therefore needs to be given more ‘Privileges’ to compensate.  The first privilege on the list is the right to be the only one to speak on a particular subject.  By being a member of an oppressed victim group a person becomes the final authority on policy and opinion.  The ‘Privileged’ oppressor class or race have no right to even question what is being proposed, let alone what is being implemented.  If anyone dares question then they are ‘punching down’ to a ‘victim’ whereas the ‘victim’ has the exclusive right to ‘punch up’ against their oppressors.

If someone is trying to sell an illogical, unpalatable or unpopular policy there are few ways making it seem reasonable.  Yet once the untenable is wrapped up in the ‘cloak of the martyr’ it becomes an issue of ‘victims’ and ‘oppression’.  From a pragmatic sense, claiming ‘Victim Status’ protects the activist from counter attack.  ‘Check you privilege’ and ‘do not punch down’ to the victim because: ‘You’re a white male!’, ‘You have Heteronormative Privilege’, ‘You have ableist privilege’, ‘You do not belong to an ‘oppressed victim group’ and even if you do ‘You have slightly more privilege than another ‘oppressed victim group’.  It is an inverted Special Olympics where the most disadvantaged victim wins without even having to compete.  Once the ‘victim’ status is inferred the game is over as far as the Social Justice Warrior is concerned.

Munchausen Olympics

Munchausen Syndrom‘ became a popular term used for people who fake illnesses in order to gain attention and sympathy as a victim.  It is really quite a sad situation where people have tricked doctors into performing unnecessary surgery.  After years of collecting surgery scars the self-inflicted mutilations, the patient can be diagnosed as suffering from ‘Munchausen Syndrom’.  Where ‘Munchausen Syndrom’ becomes truly sinister is when a carer tries to convince doctors that their loved ones are terribly ill and require surgery. This is often referred to as ‘Munchausen Syndrom by Proxy‘ (MBP).  According to the Better Health website:

Typically, the carer deliberately poisons or harms the child to procure unnecessary tests and medical procedures. The most common form of abuse appears to be apnoea (stopping breathing). The child may be revived by ambulance officers and taken to hospital, where all tests prove negative. Sometimes the child doesn’t survive the carer-induced apnoea.

There is even a newer phenomenon known as Munchausen by Internet, where people fake illness online:

in which Internet users seek attention by feigning illnesses in online venues such as chat rooms, message boards, and Internet Relay Chat (IRC).

And also says that:

People who demonstrate factitious disorders often claim to have physical ailments or be recovering from the consequences of stalking, victimization, harassment, and sexual abuse.

We have to remember that there is still much controversy over this syndrome.  Once upon a time we used to call some of these people hypochondriacs.


How does this relate to the punch-down, punch-up world of political activism?  Perhaps more than we think.  If a syndrome exists for people obsessed with people gaining attention in one area (ie: medical) could it metaphorically exist in another?(ie: political)

The stakes in politics are often seen as being much higher and nobler to those involved.  The imaginary fate of the nation or world may hang in the balance.  In this way, the professional victim becomes a valuable soldier to winning the conflict.

A person may engage in ‘Munchausen by Politics’ in order seek attention by feigning oppression in online venues such as chat rooms, message boards, and Internet Relay Chat (IRC).

Or a person may engage in ‘Political Munchausen by proxy‘ in order show that a nominated group is suffering from terrible oppression. The activist may deliberately cite non-existent or trivial differences to procure unnecessary social changes.

For a  ‘Social Justice Warrior‘ who is infused with the theory of ‘Intersectionality‘ playing the victim card is a common tactic.  It is designed to remove all opposition to their proposal by excluding their nominated ‘oppressors’ from the process.  In many ways, silencing decent is an underhanded tactic used by the unscrupulous to sell the unpalatable to the unwilling.  Yet this tactic has been used throughout history.

Political Munchausen by Proxy‘ may actually explain how some Social Just Warriors and activists claim victimhood to justify their tactics.

Editorial Comment

This post was written by the most oppressed victim every born, therefore you are my slave.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: