PC Proof Theory

What methods do the politically correct use to “prove” their case(s)?
They basically use two methods:

1. Ignore or suppress any facts or rationale
   which would contradict the result they are trying to prove.
   
   (This is basically the old “down the memory hole” method
   so familiar to Orwellians.)



2. Introduce or fabricate “facts”, theories, or rationales
   which suffice to imply their desired result.

---

A mathematical digression, perhaps just for my own amusement,
as to how the latter works.
Suppose you wanted to prove “2 + 2 = 1”.
Here’s how to do it.
Take the ordinary integers and
define a new relation, called “congruence” ( ≡ )
or, if you want to be more precise, “congruence (mod 3)”,
whereby two integers are congruent (mod 3)
if they differ by a multiple of 3.
Then:

2 + 2 = 4 = 1 + 3 ≡ 1,

et voilà!
(In that calculation,
“=” denotes equality in the ordinary integers, while
“≡” denotes the new relation of congruence (mod 3).)
So we have “2 + 2 ≡ 1” in the new system.

If we just live in the new system,
we may view congruence as the new equality, and switch notation.
But if we want to consider both new and old systems, as we almost always do,
we must use separate notations for congruence and equality.

Anyhow, so much for this digression, and back to dreary old politics.

---

The Washington Post, Henry Gates, and Leon Lashley