Leftists Are The Party Of Human Intent, Which Is Always Wrong

Humans are a mirror of the world, but as with any mirror, things are backward when seen by an observer. This is why humans can exist in opposites to reality within their own minds, and yet these inversions are visible from outside those minds.

Very few people realize how human intent is not just different from, but opposed to reality.

For example, equality is the opposite of reality, because equality does not exist in nature, and therefore human intent seeks to impose equality on the inequality of nature, like clear-cutting a forest but for symbolic reasons. In the same way, human intent itself is the opposite of results in reality. If something exists, it does not require intent, only recognition.

This pattern extends to all levels of human thinking. Whatever we think we should do is usually wrong; whatever works, is usually right. This is the split between Left and Right. The Left believes in equality because it believes all people can receive “reason” through symbols passed on by others, and therefore can make the right decision by using that mental tool. The right believes in time-proven solutions and pursuit of timeless and ongoing goals like excellence, beauty, accuracy, realism and goodness.

When Leftists act, they inevitably choose pathological options, or those in which they repeat the same ideas regardless of results in reality. They have a pathology, or mental compulsion, to act this way in defiance and ignorance of reality because their goal, which is based on human intent, is the opposite of reality.

With that in mind, it makes it easy to appreciate why the idiots double down on insanity:

“In times of economic war and mafia attacks … we must protect employment and workers’ income,” added Maduro, who has now increased the minimum wage by a cumulative 322 percent since February 2016.

The 54-year-old successor to Hugo Chavez attributes Venezuela’s three-year recession, soaring prices and product shortages to a plunge in global oil prices since mid-2014 and an “economic war” by political foes and hostile businessmen.

But critics say his incompetence, and 17 years of failed socialist policies, are behind Venezuela’s economic mess.

If increasing the minimum wage did not help the last five times, it will not help now. This is not a question of degree, but of a failed policy. And yet, he must do it, because he is pathological, because he believes human intent is more important than reality.

In the Leftist mentation, all that matters is intent. People are starving? Your intent is that they do better, so you write a law saying them get more money. This intent-only outlook is inherently solipsistic and denies the fact that the world — including the markets — will have an equal and opposite reaction, such that this money will now have less value. Intent, which is symbolic and appearance-based, cannot recognize this.

This is why Leftists love minimum wages. The symbol is correct; the reality is a disaster. They also love welfare, pacifism, equality, diversity, free love, drug use, communes, anarchy, rainbows, “we are all one” and “peace in our time.” They have made themselves delusional by valuing the sensation inside their minds more than what happens as the result of their actions. Leftism is a pathology.

Our only salvation lies in restoration of the reality principle, but the catch is that most people cannot appreciate or discern reality. Only the best can, and this requires giving them absolute power to do what is right, and to displace the thronging herd of neurotic people who want to impose their intent on us and make us suffer its consequences, all for their pretense of being more good than reality itself.

Tags: , , , ,

16 Responses to “Leftists Are The Party Of Human Intent, Which Is Always Wrong”

  1. JPW says:

    Venezuela demonstrates Ayn Rand’s Theory of Equality. It is only achieved at the zero!

  2. epochehusserl says:

    What we need instead of just denouncing equality a sane method of establishing a hierarchy.

    • -A says:

      There is a forum if you want to join and help to make a kind of think tank.

    • This cannot be done with external factors, nor by egalitarian means.

      The simple answer is this: have the best people choose other best people. Let them figure it out.

      We have natural leaders and heroes among us, and these are the ones we should ask.

      • epochehusserl says:

        This begs the question though. How do we choose the best people to choose the best people? I think we do it by coming up with engagements. For example, we could discuss social processes that would be more efficient and profitable and have a dialogue with those who could implement them. Examples of worthy projects include:
        1. Setting up a rare earth elements exchange.
        2. Developing software that would allow individuals to gamble online using video games that we could sell to cash strapped governments.
        3. Setting up a futures market in Kilowatt hours (charged batteries) to integrate into existing social infrastructure
        4. Developing devices to detect counterfeit drugs using sensors and cloud technology (already exists on smartphone see http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulmonckton/2017/01/11/new-smartphone-can-see-inside-objects/#27fd5d1960e0 but not as finished product

        • ChangeOfSeas says:

          “How do we choose the best people to choose the best people?”

          Are you one of the best people? Then go around and choose some other people who are as good as you. It starts with you, not some abstract method.

          Simple, but very difficult to see for people born into modernity.

          • epochehusserl says:

            How do we choose the best people to choose the best people?

            Are you one of the best people? Then go around and choose some other people who are as good as you. It starts with you, not some abstract method.

            Saying that it starts with me not with some abstract method doesn’t really add much to the conversation. People need rules and meta-rules. What if my version of it starts with me is not the same thing as your starts with me? Moral conflict.

            • People need rules and meta-rules.

              Are you sure?

              And is it a good idea?

              http://www.amerika.org/science/formal-organization-creates-dark-organization/

              • epochehusserl says:

                There is no other way of establishing a hierarchy that is going to be seen as legitimate by people than having sensible rules and meta-rules. I dont see anyway around it.

                • There is no other way of establishing a hierarchy that is going to be seen as legitimate by people than having sensible rules and meta-rules.

                  Who is “people”?

                • ChangeOfSeas says:

                  “There is no other way of establishing a hierarchy that is going to be seen as legitimate by people than having sensible rules and meta-rules. I dont see anyway around it.”

                  I see it as legitimate without rules or meta-rules, and I’m a person.

                  “Saying that it starts with me not with some abstract method doesn’t really add much to the conversation.”

                  No, it ends the conversation so we can begin to act. You cannot plow a field by turning it over in your mind, and constructing endless rules systems is a wild goose chase. The point is that it begins with you as a singular concrete individual, not with a list of bullet points approved by a committee.

                  I respectfully recommend that you spend some time sitting cross-legged and staring at a wall while blanking your mind out and counting breaths. It will help.

                  • Epochehusserl says:

                    You are kind of proving my point by shooting my ideas down. You have no hierarchy that is seen as legitimate by anyone regardless of how I sit.

  3. -A says:

    The tides, thankfully, are turning. This means that even if there is failure in a keeping the momentum of reversal, there will likely be enough enclaving of White people to restore tribal and then feudal systems. I have often been told that I am very optimistic when I want to be.

  4. Doug Copper says:

    And world keeps turning (and tides to) while people argue over silly things, awaiting the next comet / asteroid to come and put out collective (I am that collectives will done in too) misery. There are too many people with “entitlement” issues and don’t understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (what me work?) or live in La La Land.

  5. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

    The ancients already knew this, from looking at reality.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>