Able Was I

Has anybody ever accused you of being a cynic? Of course they have.

I have to say nobody has said that to me recently but it's something I always expect. When you present a compelling opinion and perform it with clinical accuracy, you invite attack.

The more deadpan delivery you choose, the more the weak will feel they have to urgently respond.

When faced with an opinion informed with a gritty realism (mine), you can expect some people of fairly low resources to strike out.

But that won't tell you anything about me.

It will only tell you something about them.

Firstly about their capacity for name-calling, previously the prerogative of the playground.

Secondly about their own personal ability to achieve whatever the subject is that I'm actually referring to.
Thirdly that they don't know the difference between cynical and clinical.

So their rejoinder will give you three beams with which to illuminate the darker corners of their personality. They give away much more information than they think they are soliciting just with their approach, their manner.

In my case, I'm much more likely to be called an idealist. 

I don't know which is the least friendly way of telling me I'm "out of touch", but frankly I don't really mind either... cynic or idealist. There is worse to come.

But whichever word is chosen, it will only tell you something about the person who chooses it. 

How they feel towards me, which is likely to be ambivalent at best. 

What their character is all about, which is saying negative things to other people they may barely know.

All the while illustrating a taste for self-flattery that borders on delusional.

Which am I? An idealist. Or cynic? 

Well, it is your diagnosis... so how nasty are you feeling today?

Because any opinions you may have heard from me have been either experientially informed or are playfully inquisitorial. Or a joke.
Are you really sure you've made a diagnosis which one, before you open your face? 

Don't you have checks? Balances? Anything to ensure you know what you are talking about?
In the time it took you to react, (for that is what is happening, there is no considered response here), those key factors remained unconsidered. Unprocessed. You are just throwing mud hoping to hit a target and score a point for your mythology. You might have been Fry-level articulate but the fact that you have reacted in that way precludes that. (The three points above make that a racing certainty).

So. I say the best way to do something is "X".

When you come back at me and say well "it's impossible to do X all the time, but I'm sure YOU do", is that really supposed to be an articulate, mature contribution?

Cynics are the opposites of idealists.

If you going to name call, at least get it right. Gather enough information before taking breath.

And, if it wouldn't kill you, present it with a little more charm.

Because if you are looking to score some points off somebody, you are looking in the wrong place.

I like my idealism. I like it exactly where it is

But if you sense cynicism, look in the mirror before you open your mouth.

There are cynics to the left of you, jokers and idealists to the right... and here I am stuck in the middle with you. But don't worry....
You can still win this.
I'm going to tell you how.
I'm going to hand you victory.
You can call me ... an outlier.
What better way of estranging a challenging opinion.
Exile.

And if you're worried that I'm out out of touch, well, don't worry about it. As a correctly identified "outlier" you can just kick me (and any inconvenient ideas that get caught in the backdraft) into touch.  (Ever read any Orwell?)
I'm used to it, believe me.
You will have defended your borders.
Your bubble will be undamaged.
Order will have been restored.

Call me what you like.
Cynic. Idealist. Outlier.
I don't mind any of them. They're all true.

But I'm not alone.
There are at least two of us who are not defined by any of them.

Me.

And Patrick McGoohan.