Guest Post by Eric Peters
It is difficult for people who respect civilities to be other-than-civil, even toward uncivilized people. This is a weakness that has led to the widespread incivility of our times. It is a mistake based upon the erroneous assumption of fair-play and well-intendedness. It is the same mistake made by a man who gets into a fight with someone who does not play by the rules. Who fails to grasp that in a fight, there are no rules.
There is only win – or lose – when you’re forced to fight.
The problem is that civilized people want to avoid fights. This leads them to try to avoid confrontations. A very good example of this problem being the old saw about not talking about religion or politics over Thanksgiving dinner. The intention – peace at the dinner table – is good. But it serves to empower people who refuse to be civil, at the expense of civilized people. The latter shut themselves up – for the sake of those who can’t have a civilized discussion.
There is a cruel irony here in that a civilized society requires civilized behavior. But it is also the thing that can destroy civilized society – by allowing the uncivilized to dominate it.
An example of this interesting dichotomy is the way people who were willing to abide the people who thought wearing facial underwear provided a barrier against the inhalation and exhalation of particles so tiny that the wearing of facial underwear served as no barrier at all – but go ahead, if it makes you feel better – were treated by those who demanded everyone wear facial underwear. 
Another example is the abiding of civilized people of the aberrant personal lifestyle choices of other people; this not enough for some of the latter people. They require much more than abiding. They require overt approval. We are expected to celebrate the aberrant personal lifestyle choices of other people. Part of this entailing our agreeing these personal lifestyle choices are not aberrant.
In sum, these people – the uncivilized people – will never behave civilly toward us. They will never mind their own business. They will never agree to disagree. And they never fight fair – because (unlike civilized people) they understand there is only winning. They will do – and say – anything, if that’s what it takes to win.
For example, they will say they are in favor of free speech – so long as it is their speech. So long as you agree with their speech. They will use “free speech” as a cudgel to force their views (and their violence) into the public domain, often at the literal expense of those who disagree with being made to finance such speech (viz, NPR) or who object to being impeded by it (viz, the “free speech” of squatting in the road to prevent vehicles from moving) to “stop oil now.”
But when a civilized person asks questions about such “speech,” it becomes hate – or denial or some similar such thing.
The uncivilized use civilization – its institutions, its traditions, its culture – to end civilization. It’s literally in their playbooks. Read Lenin. Read Alinsky. 
There are two difficulties that follow from this, the first being understanding. Most civilized people have an innately difficult time with this – being civilized, themselves. It is the same difficulty people who would never throw trash out of the window of their car or spray graffiti or smash someone else’s mailbox have understanding people who do those things. The why eludes them. The gratuitous, mindless destruction is foreign to them. So also the public belligerence; the loud-mouthed talking in the hearing of others, undermining the civility of public life. The use of foul language and insults.
Belittling disagreement by framing it as immoral.
All such things. Civilized people ache to live away from those things. To deal only with other civilized people who are quiet and respectful; who mind their own business, don’t litter and would never yell at an old person or threaten a weaker person.
Or anyone at all, for that matter.
This is why white flight – as the phenomenon of people moving away from the uncivilized cities to the more civil suburbs (and the even more civil countryside) is styled. It is framed as a racial thing and while there is an element of truth to that it is not fundamentally about that. Most civilized whites would not move away from civilized blacks such as Thomas Sowell or the late Walter Williams. Because why would they? But it is rational – it is self-defensive – to get as far way from incivility (whatever its color) as is possible.
The second thing – which follows understanding – is acting. White flight is a kind of sotto voce form of this. But to save civilization one must not abandon it. One must stop giving ground to the people who are bent upon its destruction. One must stand and defend one’s ground – and be ready to fight, if that’s what it takes.
This fight begins by being willing to have a confrontation – not necessarily physical – with the uncivilized. A very good example of this being the not-wearing of facial underwear, if you think wearing it is absurd – regardless of the feelings of those who feel otherwise , who demand you defer to their feelings. Never do this when dealing with an uncivilized person – for the same reason it is unwise to give-in to the foot stomping and screaming of a temper-tantruming child. It will only embolden the child to throw a fit whenever its demands are not being met. It creates a Lord of the Flies world, the antithesis of civilization.
If it becomes necessary to fight with the uncivilized – whether physically or otherwise – do not make the mistake of fighting fair.
Fight to win.
A good example of how not to fight when your existence is on the line is provided by the general-in-charge of the Confederate armies during what was not the Civil War (it was in fact an attempt by the South to separate from a “union” they regarded as tyrannical, as the American colonies successfully separated from Great Britain). Robert E. Lee was a gentleman. A civilized man. And that is why he lost the war. He was up against Abraham Lincoln – who was the antithesis of a gentleman. But Lincoln was a man willing to do anything to win the fight.
And that is why he won the war.
Lincoln sicced Sherman and Sheridan (among others like them) on the Southern states. Men who, like himself, were willing to do whatever it took to win – and did exactly that. They desolated the land. They did not play by “the rules.”
Because in a war, there are no rules.
Lee behaved like the gentleman he was when he rode into Pennsylvania – and that cost him the war and the Southern states their independence.
The dilemma – for civilized men – is how to remain civilized while also doing what must be done to preserve and defend civilization. But in truth, it is only a superficial dilemma. It only seems like one when the assumption is that you are dealing with other civilized people.
When you understand that you’re not, then it is no longer a dilemma.
And it becomes easier to do what must be done.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
