Skip to comments.Liberalism is a Psychology
Posted on 01/09/2012 2:16:47 PM PST by ventanax5
Many conservatives are absolutely perplexed by the question of what motivates liberals to take the patently wrong political positions they do. Its difficult to explain it without believing such obviously wrong ideas like liberals are just stupid, or they want to destroy our country, but sometimes we resort to those explanations out of pure frustration.
But what is the explanation? Why do seemingly good, intelligent people take positions that cause so much harm in the face of all the facts? Ive finally stumbled upon the answer, and its so stunningly simple, yet profound in its implications, that its absolutely mind-boggling. Liberalism isnt a political ideology; its a psychology - the psychology of self-satisfaction to be precise.
A liberal (or a leftist; I use the terms interchangeably), is a person who only cares about politics to the extent that doing so makes him or her feel good, or avoid feeling bad, due both to external and internal factors. Their motivations can include things like a desire to feel intelligent, moral, noble, or unique, as well as a desire for peer acceptance or reverence, and aversion to being ostracized, among many other things.
Now, before I go any further, I have to draw a distinction between liberals and the people who agree with them. Liberals, the people Im referring to throughout, are the activists and ideologues; the people who truly believe in their leftist ideas and who fight for them.
People who simply agree with the real liberals on some given issue on the other hand, are not generally the people Ill be referring to.
(Excerpt) Read more at web.archive.org ...
It's a pathology.
Damn! Beat me to it.
Oh, so they are just selfish and evil.
The article is right-on. It is *crucial* to understand what this article is saying.
In order to defeat Liberalism, we must understand it. Why are Liberals so irrational? Why do they behave in such a controlling manner? Why do people — especially Hollywood types and academics — become Liberals?
It is a Psychology, but I often think it’s innate. There are exceptions, but you can often (not always) tell who is a Liberal just by looking at them.
Again, in order to defeat Liberalism, we must understand it. Once we understand it, we can begin to reason with the fringes and bring them over to our side and we can prevent kids from being brainwashed into it.
A defining characteristic of leftists is that they are arrogant enough to think they can plan others lives, and insecure enough to think they need to. They are hungry for power over others, because only with unlimited power will they think they are "safe".
The worst are the leftists who are smart, because their intelligence makes them think they are intelligent ENOUGH to rule over others.
I’m not sure the evidence rules out the “Stupid” and “They hate the country” theories entirely.
Well, it's true that you can't get enough of Thomas Sowell, but you relaay ought to attribute your ideas!
(Aimed at the author, not the poster)
It is a psychosis!
They are hungry for power over others...
because they have no power over themselves.
Actually I’d say much of the article is bunk.
I know plenty of lefties from college and they are not motivated in the way this guy describes. Maybe there are example to which his description is apt, but I really doubt it is the majority or a really significant portion.
Most of the lefties I know are convinced that their methods do work, and that corporations are evil. The main factors which convince the Left to do what they do are:
A) the conviction that we are in a zero sum game
B) the idea that marketing is essentially mind control, and that because of this government must restrain corporations or they will run roughshod over people.
These are the things I consistently see when I argue with lefties as the fundamentals of why they fail to understand the world for what it really is.
Sure, there are likely some puffins who are what this guy describes, but this is just the preening Hollywood left rather than the actual thinking left of Academia or the bar.
My tag line says what I think it is.
Mr. Beltt goes on to say that; “...it is psychology of self-satisfaction.”
This is Narcissism...specifically NPD (when it’s in full bloom).
Note these diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality DISORDER:
1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. Requires excessive admiration
5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Every one of these can be attributed to liberals, with countless examples for every point supplied here daily on FR.
Having only 7 qualifies for a clinical diagnosis. (fewer = narcissistic “tendencies”)
In 2004, Mr. Beltt got it as “psychology”.
we know they’re disordered.
- what causes it (abandonment, abuse)
and the compensatory behaviors to deal with such;
- the creation of two polar opposite and FALSE self-images
1. the abused, “I’m a POS”, Stockholm Syndrome, Bradshaw’s ‘toxic shame’ - self, that must be hidden at all costs,
replaced with/compensated with
2. the skittle-pooping unicorn that appears on the outside.
Often, co-morbid with other personality disorders. Taking 0 for instance;
- coke-snorting drug abuse
Narcissists can be confusing, because they’re all bright and skippy on the outside, but rotten on the inside. We knew this about 0 from the beginning. Too many others did not.
liberal vs conservative nowdays boils down to romantic vs classic thought.
The romantic mind views the world and life as a series of good and bad sensations and stimuli that effect the individual...and the amount of pleasure is dependent on selecting the correct sensations.
The classic mind views the world as a series of problems or puzzles to be solved and pleasure comes from success in solving them.
The classic mind thrives in robust and challenging environments that are full of possibilities, while the romantic mind thrives in mild garden-of-eden-like environments. Southern france, hawaii, spain, the california coast...these are places where one finds the romantic mind. Denmark, norway, scotland, american midwest...this is where the classic mind flourishes.
The classic mind toils and derives pleasure from toil and is less interested in feedback of others. The romantic mind craves constant feedback of others.
I believe liberalism begins with the phrase “everything(!) is morally relative”. All liberals I know think this way. They don’t believe in moral “truths”. I even had an engineer “feel” that mathematics wasn’t really real, it was just some “man made” thing. There were no “truths” to him. They really think they can just “replace your reality with my own”, as though it is equally valid regardless of how crazy the thought is.
If you think about it, people thinking like that have no ability to judge one set of behavior from another - from a moral point of view. It becomes a convenient means of embracing ones own desires, rejecting traditional morality and convincing themselves that their behavior is ok.
This is why they *hate* Christianity. It is too much of a “bright light” of truth that forces them to think about what they don’t wish to admit to themselves. They’d rather stay in the dark.
If they were to conclude that there are real “moral truths” that exist their belief system would collapse - which is why they viciously attack them.
Seriously, ask a liberal “where do morals come from?” - most will respond “from stupid religious dogma” (or similar). They’ve no idea that they came from understanding innate truths about our behavior - regardless of religious doctrine (although that’s WHY religion deals with morality, it injects these concepts into each new generation, which we’re losing because of liberalism).
The interesting part is, the more (modern progressive) liberal a society becomes, the more it exposes itself as self-destructive. Unfortunately, it has to get to a crazy level before the masses will see it.
...the thinking left....oxymoron anyone?...or the bar...put this out there, and have sold their souls to the ideas (that seem palatable) for purely financial reasons.
They cynically butter their bread with reality denying obfuscations and explanations.
They’ve built careers and money on their falsehoods.
Bottom line, despite their so-called “thinking”, they still deny reality.
Ask yourself...what is the behavior you usually observe in those who deny reality?
The greater the denial, the greater the compensatory behavior.
Their hypocrisy is the tribute the lies of their lives pay to virtue.
I do know people on the left who are, politics aside, pretty damned smart.
If it were not for some very delusional key assumptions they use in approaching social problem solving and economics, they would likely come to rational(conservative) solutions.
I was merely trying to point out the key assumptions that I have witnessed among people who I know are smarter then their politics would indicate.
Though I very well could have put quotes around thinking and alleviated the whole problem.
bump for later.