The anti-majoritarian crusade of the Left

moonrise_over_ancient_ruins

We have a politeness barrier in this society. When someone states their intention, it is considered rude to instead look at their actual motivation and derive intent from it.

The left claim they are here to instill “progress” in our society by increasing equality and opportunity for all. I suggest a simpler explanation on the level of individual psychology: they hate the majority.

Imagine that you are an extreme individualist, bordering on narcissism and solipsism. Why are you this way? You distrust the world and/or hate it. You want your own ego to reign supreme as a result, to clear away that alarming world.

What this translates to socially is different from what it is as an individual. Socially, you can’t admit that you want everyone else to do what you want and leave you alone. You need to manipulate.

Your rule in this case is that you want zero obligations imposed on you by the group. Your individual ego wants absolute freedom, which requires absolute unencumbrance. You can’t care about about anything because it conflicts with your own individualism.

As a result, you’re going to be against values, rules and other obligations that require you to do more than please yourself. But what creates and supports such rules? Agreement among the group that they’re important.

Thus you target this group, the majority, because they are the source of the rules interrupting your absolute narcissism.

This explains why people on the left have such a destructive mentality. Their goal is to destroy the majority, but not to get caught doing it. Every illogical program they sponsor that creates failure is a step toward that end.

In the eye of the leftist, the individual is the victim and the majority in society are the oppressor. That majority must be destroyed. Immigration, socialization, and other destabilizing programs are favored means of doing this.

As we go into a new century, we still feel haunted by the past. It is because the same psychology follows us. Until we clear our heads of this mental parasite our fortunes will not change.

13 Comments

  1. Holmgang says:

    Lately, I’ve found it much easier to debate and deconstruct the views of leftists. Their methods are actually a cowardly or deceitful way of reaching their selfish goals. Even though they may hold a diametrically opposed view than my own. Their tactics, sinister in its application as it may be, do follow the laws of nature in an attempt to ascend the ladder of social hierarchy. Everything became clearer when I came to this conclusion. The leftist is not seeking the tolerance and acceptance from the majority. What it does seek is our annihilation.

    1. The leftist is not seeking the tolerance and acceptance from the majority. What it does seek is our annihilation.

      I agree. The sooner we learn this, the sooner we waste less time trying to “make them understand” and instead put all of our energy into defeating them.

      1. eman says:

        Brett, I agree with what you are saying but how can we overcome such a situation in which we are constantly backpedaling? Since crowdists are the aggressors in this case, we are in defense, and there does not seem to be much we can do to “defeat” them. It seems that our only chance is to hunker down and try to blunt their attacks until they run out of energy (which is inevitable).

        One of the ways I intend to help our cause is to drop out of the tax cycle, stop spending money, stop earning money, supply my own food, and have land and resources for my children to do the same thing. Besides that, I’m slowly, steadily educating people on “alternative” ideals, basically leading them to anything that they can identify with that runs contrary to crowdist thought. What else could be done?

        1. Vigilance says:

          Every conservative I know personally plays into the frame of the debate established by leftists. It’s ritualistic almost. We need extreme figures in the right to embody the rhetoric, transcend it, and it will lose its power over the majority of the right wing through sublimation. Your vast majority is not comfortable saying, “Yes the right is elitist and racist.” So you’ll need a fringe extreme to show the majority that words only have power if its given. The sublimation effect is seen in the Monastical tradition and its effects on the folk religious communities which surround it.

          The problem with the fringe right is that it’s unprincipled and incohesive.

  2. Lord Mosher says:

    QUOTE: “In the eye of the ___, the individual is the victim and the majority in society are the oppressor. That majority must be destroyed. Immigration, socialization, and other destabilizing programs are favored means of doing this.”
    .
    Is there a particular group or ethnicity in the history of the world that has secretly promoted this wherever they go? Or is it just a coincidence?

    1. Neither. That’s confusing, so let me elaborate:

      No one “invented” the temptation to cheat on their wives. It’s obvious; it’s one of the choices we can make and, if we don’t think through the consequences, it “seems” like a good one at the time.

      It’s the same way with Crowdism. No one “invents” it although they think they have. It’s just another bad decision that seems great if you think it through only halfway.

      Even if such a group as you describe existed, they wouldn’t get there before decay. “Stupidity is always an option.” Someone should patent that slogan.

    2. nitram says:

      I believe prof Kevin B Macdonald is correct about his observations but the society has to be “ready” for it. Middleclass leftists are provided with ammunition in the forms of Marxism, frankfurtschool and so on.

  3. LoreTek says:

    In high school they called themselves nonconformists.

    What happens when they become the majority? O.O

  4. evilwhitemalempire says:

    I’d like to share this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnOJgDW0gPI

    Obviously it was ‘progressive’ made with the intention of trying to place the hetero majority in gay shoes. “See what you’d have to go through if you were gay?” Yeah, maybe like 50 years ago!

    BUT I think that this movie can work both ways.

    The film outlines the gay agenda.

    They envision a world where gay is the norm with the population sustained by a ‘breeding season’ (the only time male and female have sex) where gay men and women [begrudgingly] do the duty of procreation.

    In reality this film is a WARNING to hetero society of what’s in store for us!

  5. tony says:

    Never commented before but first I would like to say good job Brett and thanks for sharing. I also enjoy the comments as It makes one feel as working toward a common goal as a group.
    I do question if our group is the majority. I feel as we have turned the corner and we are actually the minority.

    1. crow says:

      If that is the case, we are in fine shape. Minorities rule, these days.

  6. Hugo says:

    Great post. You put in words what I’ve been trying to explain to my acquaintances for years: that egalitarianism and state-collectivism are the social “projection” of extreme burgeois individualism and arrogance (“no one’s better than me”).

    The only quibble I have with the post is its title. I really believe we should carefully frame our language, just like the Decadents do. I’d write “The anti-majoritarian jihad of the Left”. Or “The anti-majoritarian purge of the Left”.

  7. […] is a leftist subculture supposedly based around the idea of “equality,” (really anti-majoritarianism, driven by envy and self-loathing). Social justice warriors, or SJWs (as they are often referred […]

Leave a Reply

41 queries. 0.922 seconds