熱血時報 | ( ̄▽ ̄)ノ Dear Lewis Loud, scurrilous insults are symptoms of your degenerative thinking power

( ̄▽ ̄)ノ Dear Lewis Loud, scurrilous insults are symptoms of your degenerative thinking power

( ̄▽ ̄)ノ Dear Lewis Loud, scurrilous insults are symptoms of your degenerative thinking power


In response to Lewis Loud’s articles entitled “Has the nation-building camp sunk so low as to destroy Ms Bonsai Keiko’s livelihood?” and “It’s always unrelated to the Empress”, I wrote an article earlier to point out how he attacked the nations-building camp and the constitutional reform faction through partial yet inaccurate conclusion through the harassment of an anonymous Facebook page towards Ms Keiko, while it was pointless to drag an Internet personality such as Ms Keiko into political arguments.

Few days have passed and Loud has yet to respond to his inaccurate conclusions, his attack on the nation-building camp and the constitutional reform faction and his unwise choice of involving Ms Keiko into political wrestling in his articles, but rather chooses to pretend in the image of the bullied with multiple Facebook statuses, claiming he has “withheld his well-intention long enough”, that “there are people who wouldn’t cave in”, that “these people are starting to harass my ex-girlfriend” and that “he has been naively avoiding these topics”. He has completely avoided whether he has indeed chosen the wrong words and made the wrong conclusions and opted to only deflect the accusations by publishing on his weakened image. Moreover, he has even started to hurl scurrilous comments to Chin Wan, calling him “a political cult figure” and that he is “wicked and deceiving”, again without any evidences or points to support his comments.

This reminds me of a passage in Lee Tien Ming’s Art of Thinking arguments and thinking, “Scurrilous insults are principally abuses or insults that lack reasoning. It often appears as outraged and confused, or even involving teeth-grinding and jumping up and down in anger, lacking the calm and steadiness necessary,” followed by “scurrilous insults are symptoms of the lack of ability to think; it is the reasoning of the unreasoned.” Lewis Loud was once known as one of the great writers of the localist camp. His articles in the past were filled with both facts and sound reasoning, how can he possibly lack in the ability to think? However, his recent insults show that he is longer his previous self, perhaps it is more suitable to say that “scurrilous insults are symptoms of your degenerating thinking power”.


According to Lewis Loud, “I feel sorry for the ones who are still blindly defending their master (Chin Wan), for them are only manipulated by someone who is selfish and calculating. You do not know and do not wish to know how many of his cult follower has left him all this time. You have been controlled, yet you do not believe.” One must first understand all ideas have its stance underneath, therefore what is the true sin behind defending Chin Wan? Aren’t we defending with facts? Aren’t those facts true? Aren’t we defending with reasons? It is strange for Loud to only accuse the defenders of Chin Wan being manipulated and controlled, yet providing no relations or evidences whatsoever.

Lewis Loud calls Chin Wan as “selfish and calculating” and “cult-like”. Many are of course selfish and calculating, yet Chin Wan has been generous in his teaching on Facebook. For us to be called “controlled” by benefitting from Master Chin Wan is one confusing conclusion; are we “controlled” by Lewis Loud for us to have read his articles and be inspired? Are we criticising Lewis Loud under Lewis Loud’s “control” then? What strange logic! I have certainly benefitted much from both Chin Wan and Lewis Loud’s articles in the past. I wish there was no need for me to enter the arguments between Lewis Loud and Chin Wan for both have taught me a lot, why must Lewis Loud continue to start arguments out of thin air once and again?

Secondly, Lewis Loud once said “Chin Wan always said his network is broad and he is approved by both China and the US. He said his political agenda is one to who would have its place in history, yet he lost with such poor vote counts. I didn’t want to say a bad word, and I didn’t mock or laugh at it…”. Chin Wan gained 23,635 votes in the September election. It may not be a lot, but it is much more than other politicians who have established for a long period of time in multiple regions such as Andrew Cheng and the likes of the Liberal Party, not to mention the collusions during the election and the interference of the PopVote Project by the pan-democrats. It is simply ignorant for Lewis Loud to dismiss the 23,635 hard-earned votes gained by a candidate who is not used to lobbying on the streets and the countless supporters’ effort campaigning door-to-door. It may be easy for one to stand on the stage of a convention to face only supporters in the audience who may be well-versed in our beliefs. However, the contrast in difficulty when campaigning on the streets are so stark as we may be campaigning to people who have absolutely no idea of what is going on. Furthermore, if the election was won, the ones who stood beside would certainly look smart in doing so. When the results turned out to be a disappointment, how could someone like Lewis Loud, who once stood on the same convention stage, even consider mockery or laughter?

Thirdly, Lewis Loud said “for the article published on Local Press that Chin Wan heavily criticised on, I once asked someone to pass on my words to Chin that the article was not written by me. I did not approve of that article, it was merely part of my job duty.” I was amazed of the similarity of these words to the ones who defended the police with sayings such as “the police are only doing their jobs” during the occupation. Sometimes when we are firm in our beliefs, things would work out according to our will. The police, for instance, were requested by many to resign in their jobs during the occupation, some actually oblige in the expense of their high salary and impressive benefits. Back to the matter at hand, was the title of that article truly accurate? If not, in this day and age, it was merely a few clicks away from correcting. One must ask is Lewis Loud still holding the same standard he used to hold in previous years.

Fourthly, Lewis Loud said “these people have criticised from top to bottom, yet they still fail to accept their persecutions for the past months were nothing but shameful act, something they cannot bear to face the truth.” Well, for Lewis Loud to criticise others for their persecutions, let’s look back how he treated his counterparts in the past. Denise Ho, Tang Siu-wa, the occupation and private life of Yip Tsing-shun have all been the targets of Lewis Loud’s articles. By his standard, how should his attack towards the pan-democrats and the abuses hurled at Yip Tsing-shun rank in such double standards? When Loud sees people as “nothing”, or of insignificance, it is the very same group of people, along with some anonymous Facebook page that drive him out of his usual self.

Finally, to properly respond, and to avoid your arrogance towards the so-called “people of insignificance” like Leung “Long-hair” Kwok-hung, I would directly respond and criticise you. Lewis Loud, you still have your supporters, why are you pretending to be bullied? It seems to me you intend for this to happen, to paint this image of the oppressed. The articles you are writing are of such poor quality, a staggering contrast with your usual self. Think about this, the world is not your enemies. It might help with your depression as well.


Original Text in Chinese 中文原文:

( ̄▽ ̄)ノ盧斯達,謾罵是思考力退化的表徵

作者
讀者回應