The Left Is Insane…and Evil

I’ve been on the road for a number of issues this past week, my wife’s grandmother passed on Friday and we are helping my son move from Orlando for his new job with ESPN…and I’m trying to finish my first book, so blog time has been limited.

One thing that I have learned is that when you can’t say something better, you should just shut up and let the person speak who is saying it. I find myself this way often when I read Ace’s work at Ace of Spades HQ:

This is why I think the left is actually insane.

It’s not that the left broadly supports Jahar or anything. They don’t.

But the left, broadly, does have a pathological urge towards evil, or what they’d call Enlightened Contrarianism, or a thoughtful repudiation of conventional morality.

The trouble with such kneejerk contrarianism is that when the dominant position is also right and moral (which it tends to be in most cases, but not all), those who have a psychological need to oppose, oppose the masses, oppose whatever, oppose simply to cry out I exist, are forced into reflexively taking the position opposite of right and good, which is, of course, wrong and evil.

Marxism is premised upon this. Marx declared the only correct response to the dominant culture was spiteful contempt, indignant anger, and constant subversion.

Were the dominant culture mostly evil that might be a decent response. But as it’s not mostly evil, Marx’s prescription is itself an urging towards evil.

And so here is Jahar Tsarnaev. He coldly butchered and maimed a hundred people with a bomb, for no other reason than the psychological desire to assert his own identity and culture through murder. (Marxist in temperament, if not in ideology.)

And so he will of course have his bevy of psychopathic bent supporters, who, as usual, compelled by their neuroses and psychoses to always take a position opposite the masses, are driven to praise evil, chaos, and murder.

Ace is, of course, talking about the idiot fellow travelers chanting outside the courthouse when the surviving Boston Bomber was charged but this applies to all situations as he notes.

I’ve been in Orlando for the past few days and there are people on the left here who will discard the evidence and disagree with any Zimmerman verdict just because they see it as a black kid getting shot for no reason. I can guarantee that there will be riots if there is an acquittal (which, based on the actual evidence there should be) and if he is convicted of anything, there are people who will never believe the judgment was harsh enough. Bob Beckel on Fox typifies that perspective, he has been saying that Zimmerman shot a unarmed black kid and he had “minor injuries”…well, at the time Martin was banging his head into the sidewalk, Zimmerman had no idea if Martin had a gun or a knife…but that doesn’t matter – it is only a black vs. white issue, even though Zimmerman isn’t “white”.

Similar to that is the idiotic argument that the Democrats are making about the 20 week cut-off for abortion in Texas:

Quoting from Ace once again from another post:

Let’s work out the math here. A woman suspects she’s pregnant at the first skipped period, which comes within 1-4 weeks after sex, depending on when in her cycle she got pregnant. Even if her first skipped period isn’t enough to give her a big alert, her second one must be; that would be 5-8 weeks in.

Let’s say she just says “Ah, whatev’s, let’s take a wait and see attitude.” Now the third skipped period comes between 9 and 12 weeks. At this point, she knows she’s pregnant (or can ascertain this by buying a off-the-rack pregnancy test at any drug store); she now has a minimum of 8 and maximum of 11 weeks to decide if she should have an abortion.

Mind you, narrow window of two-to-two-and-a-half-months comes after the third missed period.

Now, there are two things I gather from the protest against this bill:

Only giving a woman 2 to 2 1/2 months to decide to terminate after her third missed period is monstrous and is a form of sexual slavery; and,

Dudes won’t get sex because if women think “Oh shit I’ll only have 60 to 80 days to schedule an abortion after my third skipped period, sex is now so risky I’ll just have to join a convent.”

Okay whatever I guess.

I haven’t heard of such a War on Women since some people said Sandra Fluke could pony up her own $4 per month for birth control pills.

The left isn’t just inane and frustrating, they are evil.

32 thoughts on “The Left Is Insane…and Evil

  1. “Sandra Fluke could pony up her own $4 per month for birth control pills.”

    In regards to that specifically, I was lost on that whole ordeal when she tried to justify a whole Summers wage (somewhere in the 3-4 thousand dollar range) worth of contraceptives. A whole Summers wage worth of contraceptives!? Has anybody even cared to do the math on exactly how much sex it takes to divvy out a whole Summers wage worth of contraceptives!? Was Rush really all that wrong about the comment he made not to long after that? At any rate, that story earned a quick “next” from me as soon as I read the theory about a university’s “responsibility” to cover these costs, which is code for “hey man, pay for all the sex I want to have. Hold the please”.

    • Like most issues championed by the modern “progressives”, it was a manufactured issue. The liberals stock issues like Wal-Mart stocks shelves, what they feel a need to be outraged, they run in and pick one that looks good right off the shelf and then build anger around it.

      Take racism – I heard Jesse Jackson on Neil Cavuto’s show the other day claim that the ending of the federally enforced Section 4 and 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act was tantamount to the return of Jim Crow – and the topic was the economic conditions in Chicago and Section 4 and 5 have no effect in Illinois anyway – but the fear is so visceral that he had to work that in…He even said something about a company that moved jobs to Chicago after it was bought by “Mitt Romney’s company” – he was talking about Bain Capital, a company that Romney hasn’t been involved with in decades…but again, got to get that manufactured crisis in there…

      I lived in Port Huron, Michigan for 18 months as VP for a company up there – I saw more racism in Michigan than I ever saw growing up in Mississippi.

    • “…Has anybody even cared to do the math on exactly how much sex it takes to divvy out a whole Summers wage worth of contraceptives!?…”

      Liber….I’m not great at ‘rithmatic…….But that’s a Lot of “Sweat Equity “huh !?

  2. The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness
    Jr. M.D., Lyle H. Rossiter

    The Liberal Mind is the first in-depth examination of the major political madness of our time: The radical left’s efforts to regulate the people from cradle to grave. To rescue us from our troubled lives, the liberal agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom. Given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on character development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness. Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends. Only an irrational man would want the state to run his life for him rather than create secure conditions in which he can run his own life. Only an irrational agenda would deliberately undermine the citizen’s growth to competence by having the state adopt him. Only irrational thinking would trade individual liberty for government coercion, sacrificing the pride of self-reliance for welfare dependency. Only a madman would look at a community of free people cooperating by choice and see a society of victims exploited by villains. [From The Liberal Mind; The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., MD]

  3. stop confusing liberals and Marxists, Marxists are the true scientist of politics and liberals and conservatives are the just two groups with varying moralities trying to force their own morality on each other,
    conservatives/liberals-have different definitions of morality and try to construct a world around it,
    Marxist-recognize morality does not exist,

    Case in point. Some liberals here try to to defend Muslims, because they perceive Muslims as a victim. And they are correct Muslims are being victimized in society and mass paranoia and hatred is concentrated on them.

    Conservatives see Muslims as a threat and believe the only reason they commit terrorist acts is their religion,

    The truth is that Muslims and most of the third world has been kept from developing by western imperialist, not only this but The gulf war and Iraq war of aggression, plus support for the colonialist anti-Arab state of Israel has not done us any favors.

    The harder truth you all should be talking about is making an economy that works for everyone. instead the right pursues pet issues, conspiracy theory, outrage of the week issues, and even sadder the left responds. I pretty much can’t watch the news nowadays since it is mostly flavor of the week and scandals and outrages.

    • There is no such thing as a “Science” of Politics.

      As your comment that ” Marxist-recognize morality does not exist” clearly shows. Muslims have been commiting Terrorist acts since about 670 AD. Which just shows the Bankruptcy of Marxism wrt real Science or History.

      • Christians have kidnapped, enslaved and tortured people in the past. Or are those not REAL Christians.? I bet many Muslims abhor terrorism and murder, and would classify those who would commit such acts as not real Muslim. The world isn’t an evil contest, and if it was your side wouldn’t be any better,

        I don’t start evil contest since they are a waste of time and no one ever wins,
        Not only that but they ignore the issues of an unstable economic system that is going into collapse and what to do about it.

        • Karl,

          They are not following Christ’s Gospel message. Christ taught the opposite.

          Not so for Muhammad.

          FACTS you seem to refuse to accept. So much for your claim to NOT believe in morality, and for your claim to be the “true” scientist. As usual, you see an inverted reflection in the morality mirror.

    • *I pretty much can’t watch the news nowadays since it is mostly flavor of the week scandals and outrages.
      The rightist can’t analyze events and history. They see things only in one frame(with no context or history) and in black and white. The rightist theory for any act of violence is that evil was behind it. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, sometimes even Abraham :Lincoln are all called evil. I don’t support Hitler, but I know that buzzwords like evil fail to describe the social, historical and economic reason for his rise to power, and his prejudice against non-aryans. In short Rightist are stupid in using the word evil. Rightism being the most subjective of ideologies will describe certain things as evil if committed by the side they don’t like. Then be apologetics for the crimes (I could use the word evil in place of crimes, but that would be rightist logic, the word crimes here is being used to mean violent acts, so don’t get on trying to say I am saying evil, without saying it) committed by their side. They even use fighting evil as a reason to commit violent acts against civilians and to start wars of aggression,

    • Karl,

      You bloody well DO believe in morality. If you didn’t, you wouldn’t be so worried about the workers.

      Also, there is no such thing as the “science of politics.” What there is is a “science of manipulation.”

      Nexy, Muslims have been kept from your MORAL JUDGMENT of “advancement” by…ISLAM! Muhammad is the one who told them NO SCIENCE, NO ART, NO QUESTIONING ISLAM — PERIOD! IF you believed in “science” as you claim, then you would acknolwedge this as FACT because it is in the Qur’an as MUHAMMAD’S OWN WORDS! But since you do not acknowledge FACT, you cannot support science — only your own interpreations, which YOU jsut said is forcing YOUR morality on others.

      Face it, Karl, Utah is correct: you Lefties are all NUTS!

      But you’re bloody entertaining 🙂

      • I care about the economic system,because I participate in it and it is on its way to collapse. Also there are many Muhammad quotes where he talks about peace, love and searching for knowledge and science.

        It doesn’t matter what mohamad or jesus say, but the actions of their believers. There have been many muslims and christian scientist. I bet there are hard-line believers on both side who denounce scientist as not true muslims or christians,

        Playing a moral equivalency game does not advance the issues facing the economy and society. You could eliminate all the muslims in the world and their would still be unemployment, poverty and class struggle. Not only that but there would still be terrorism, from many nationalist separatist groups like the IRA and ETA or crazies like the unabomber and mcveigh. You think you have a solution to terrorism but all it is, is a call for deaths and war,

        • Karl,

          You have said you care about the workers and that you think they are exploited. Exploitation makes no sense in a world without some notion of right/wrong. That means you have admitted that morality DOES exist.

          If you insist that it doesn’t, then you STILL admit Utah’s original assertion because we call people without a conscience PSYCHOPATHS! And it recognized as a dangerous pathology.

          As for Muhammad’s “peace” verses: I covered that in my post about abrogation. This means that — once again — you are rejecting objective reality. This is irrational. It mean no “science” from you and another point in favor of Utah’s assertion.

          Now, here’s another objective reality you reject: THERE WILL ALWAYS BE UNEMPLOYMENT, because there will always be lazy people seeking to live at the expense of others, and there will always be enablers such as yourself willing to pander to them and destroy jobs in the process.

          • so why do you want to eliminate muslims?
            I never said exploitation of the workers is right or wrong. I have said it can only lead to crisis, and is an unstable unsustainable economic system. I was not judging it on a right or wrong basis.

            • You have things backward again.

              1 — I never said I want to eliminate Muslims.

              2 — You HAVE said the workers are exploited. By just using the word, you are making a moral statement.

              • exploitation is not a moral word, it signifies that one group is benefiting to the detriment of others. Rape is not a moral statement either, it just means sex without consent is being forced one a person. Some nutjobs out there will actually argue rape is good. Just like murder is th act of ending another’s life intentionally. Most will argue that murder is bad, but some will argue murder is good especially when it is a punishment for prisoners,

                On your first point, why all the Islam bashing all of a sudden? You are not bashing Islamic extremism, but regular ole Islam and mohamad as the source of terrorism, not the extremist clerics.

                • Karl,

                  Benefit is a value judgment. Value judgments are — BY DEFINITION — moral judgments. hence, benefit, exploitation, etc are ALL based in the notion of morality.

                  Once again, you cannot see that you are trying to ignore the reality of your world. That there is such things as morality is imprinted on all NORMAL humans. We call it a conscience. Those without said conscience are considered psychopaths.

                  And, Karl, there’s one more implication in the FACT that we are born with a conscience and that is…GOD MUST EXIST! Otherwise, we’d all be psychopaths.

                  • psychopaths are people who are anti-social and can’t abide by society’s rules. They are the perfect individualist, the Randian uber-mensch. It is the economic system that enables them to have control over society, that you defend.

                    Why do you assume I made a value judgment?. How is a capitalist making money off a worker good or evil? All I’m saying is that it is unsustainable and leads to economic crisis.

                    • Karl,

                      No, a psychopath has a definition: it is someone who has no moral compass or conscience. Being anti-social is just a natural product of having no conscience — not the defining characteristic.

                      Next, whether you want to admit it or not, YOU are “the perfect individual.” Nothing you do is actually done as part of a collective action. When you think, you do not hear the combined voices of every other INDIVIDUAL who thinks the way you do thinking the same words in unison with you. Nor do those same individuals do the same thing you do, the same way and at the same time. You act in unison, but as an individual. hence, you do not really support collectivism as much as you support the use of the idea as a means toward your end: control of others.

                      Finally, we ALL make value judgments — every day. We must. Morality is a natural part of this universe. It is part of the same natural law that governs the physics of our universe. Therefore, it is as impossible NOT to make value judgments as it is to ignore gravity. You can no more ignore the fact that you make value judgments than you can levitate because you chose to ignore the law of gravity.

                      Personally, I think your problem is that — for all you believe to the contrary — you are actually a very shallow thinker. It goes hand-in-hand with being lazy (a mark of the collectivist). Otherwise, you would reflect upon the very nature of language. Then you would realize that value judgments are built into most every word we use, and the judgments we make are reflected by the words we chose to express our thoughts. You do not see this much the same way a fish doesn’t know it’s wet: because you do not look inward, or to the reality of your surroundings. You just act according to your baser instincts and desires.

                    • I don’t make moral value judgments, I just operate by society’s rules. What society tells me is right and wrong. You probably think it is morally right to overthrow the U.S gov’t, act out your little Jeffersonian option fantasy, but society’s rule and regulations would not let you do such a thing, so you don’t

              • Indeed Joe,

                It is just the opposite…..By the Koran and Hadith and mohamedd’s word…it is the muslims who are tasked with eliminate all nonbelievers…..and many have shown they WANT to do just that !!

  4. Karl, please.

    “Marxist-recognize morality does not exist” according to this logic…

    “And they are correct Muslims are being VICTIMIZED in society and mass paranoia and hatred is concentrated on them.”
    How can you agree when morality doesn’t exist?

    “The truth is that Muslims and most of the third world has been kept from developing by western imperialist, not only this but The gulf war and Iraq war of aggression, plus support for the colonialist anti-Arab state of Israel has not done us any favors.”
    Since morality does not exist, what’s wrong with that?

    ” I pretty much can’t watch the news nowadays since it is mostly flavor of the week and scandals and outrages.”
    Since morality does not exist, you should have no problem watching the news.

    “but I know that buzzwords like evil fail to describe the social, historical and economic reason for his rise to power, and his prejudice against non-aryans.”
    So what non-moral words would you choose?

    “They even use fighting evil as a reason to commit violent acts against civilians and to start wars of aggression”
    If morality does not exist, how can you call it evil?

    “Christians have kidnapped, enslaved and tortured people in the past. Or are those not REAL Christians.?”
    According to your logic, this is irrelevant since morality does not exist. There is no standard to judge slavery or torture.

    “You think you have a solution to terrorism but all it is, is a call for deaths and war”
    Again, irrelevant by your logic. Since morality does not exist, there is no standard to judge deaths and war by.

    The bottom line is that this reasoning contradicts itself at every turn. How can one deny morality, then turn around and cynically judge the right? In order to judge the right, doesn’t that require a moral standard of some type? The Communist concept of exploitation itself is a moral concept. How can one claim that morality does not exist, then condemn exploitation!? It just doesn’t make much sense at all.

    This>>”FACTS you seem to refuse to accept. So much for your claim to NOT believe in morality, and for your claim to be the “true” scientist. As usual, you see an inverted reflection in the morality mirror.”

    • I didn’t say anything was wrong with imperialism with imperialism. I am just stating that it is the action causing a reaction by third worlders.

      I would not describe Anything in moral terms either,

      By bringing up that Islamophobia, is a call for war and death is not so people can call it evil. But they can realize that it is not a solution to problems, but a creator of problems.

      I’m not judgin slavery or torture, i’m just showing those who do judge the slavery and torture by muslims are blind to their own crimes.

      • Killing people because they don’t believe in islam (mohemeddansiam) is a Crime……calling the muslims out for it is not “islamophobia”….it is just stating facts…….You and people like you who call People who REJECT murder, terrorism and even MASS Murder…(Islamo-phobists) is….(1) a Kind of Hate-speech towards those rejecting murder in the name of allah……..(2).It is also an enabling act which excuses the continued world-wide murder of Non-muslims by muslims…………..and it does so by saying that thoseNon-believers who are MURDERED by islam……..deserve to be killed because in Your words (Karl).they are the “Creators of the Problems”…….which (3) is EXACTLY what the muslims say……So, you are in effect (4) sanctioning islam’s call to Kill all Kufir (Non-muslims).

        What You and muslims espouse is a sick twisted….blame the victim kind of philosophy that sanctions ( indeed encourages) violence by one group (muslime) and condems physical defencive responses by those murdered or even VERBAL condemnations of muslim murder and other violence.

        You really are quite a rhetorical piece of work………BUT, you expose Marxism for what it is and of course the Orogressives and all their Liberal allies i the press, Media and muslim community.

        • When did I say non-believers should be killed? When did I say anything, except that genocide against muslims won’t solve the problems that the west faces.

  5. Here’s the problem, Karl, in order to refrain from moral language, you have to rephrase your arguments, sentence for sentence. If you simply say: “Some liberals here try to to defend Muslims, because they perceive Muslims as a victim. And they are correct”, you are implying moral language by simply agreeing. After all, the perception of victimhood is being made through the lens of moral perception. There is no way to perceive victimization without a moral filter, otherwise we would have to find another word in the English language that would not contain moral elements. Otherwise we are left with, what did you call it? Buzzwords? Furthermore, you go on to contribute to a moral appeal by saying: “Muslims are being victimized in society and mass paranoia and hatred is concentrated on them”. Define “victimization”, “mass paranoia”, and specifically “hatred” outside of moral reasoning. If these words can be spliced apart from any moral binding, then there is no sufficient grounds to claim hate crimes. What is victimization? What is hate? By this reasoning, there is no sufficient ground to criticize the socialist/communist mass murders of the 20th century. Since words like hate necessarily bind to morality, those mass murders we’re indeed “bad”, “wrong”, “evil”, “immoral”, “hateful”, or whatever word you would use to describe it.

    If you take this method and apply it to anything else you have said on this thread, or anything else you have said on any thread, everybody would find (and most certainly agree) that you most certainly do believe in and appeal to some standard of morality. Especially since you seem to be a top critic of Joe. Even on posts where things like economic/social theory are irrelevant. Therefor, if Marxists don’t recognize that morality exists, then you are either a bad Marxist, a false Marxist, or a closet Capitalist!

    “Or are those not REAL Christians.?”
    ^Just like that.

    • can you not understand words. the words I used to describe the issues facing muslims are not moral, they are just words. If I acknowledge the victimization and persecution of Nazis by Israelis exists. Does that mean I support Nazis? of course not. It just means that one group is in conflict with another.

      So If I recognize Muslims are being victimized, does that mean I support them? No. I Just bring up their problems as a real reason for terrorism. I do this to contrast it to the rightist reason for terrorism which is. Islam is evil, or they try to be coy about it and say true islam is evil.

      The main point i was trying to make was, that evil does not explain the actions and reactions of people. In short evil and good does not exist. Evil and good are subjective labels, idealist(non-materialist philosophers) use to label their opponents and allies.

  6. “can you not understand words”
    You’ve got me wondering the same thing buddy. Those words do have moral binding to them, so regardless of their intent, you are still making a moral appeal by using them.

    Nobody is saying that you support muslims or Nazis. What I’m saying is that you are making moral argument by agreeing with moral arguments.

    Good exists. Evil exists. The only time they don’t exist is when non-materialist philosophers and Marxist refuse to confront reality.

  7. Pingback: My Brothers, There Is No Revolutionary Truth | The Rio Norte Line

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.