Understanding Leftism As Inertia And Rationalization

Over cocktails with Leftists, the most extraordinary thing was said: “You either give to the top or you give to the bottom, and Republicans choose to give to the top.”

This statement was striking in its simplicity. Is that all? It shapes the mind to think about giving, instead of creating, and this shows the difference between Left and Right.

The Left, defined by its only idea, egalitarianism, seeks to redistribute wealth. On the Right, where we recognize the necessity of deciding issues on a case-by-case basis and recognize the particularity of solutions as superior to general theory, the question is not redistribution, but the production of wealth, because we realize that without affirmative acts to produce wealth, it dissipates.

This leads in turn to the realization that the Left does not recognize that civilization requires ongoing and regular acts to maintain. To them, it is there and can be taken for granted, and thus the only question is carving up the wealth that exists to make sure everyone feels included, because this is the way to win at the game of socializing and peer pressure.

They exist in a perpetual present tense where what we have today exists as if by a divine hand, and did not require the work of yesterday to create, and will exist tomorrow without the work of today. In this, we see a disconnect in cause-effect reasoning caused by the proximate intermediary of socializing, which tells that all things exist by human intention alone.

In other words, humans intend for no one to go hungry, so they write a check from the Treasury and the problem goes away. Or they intend for all people to be equal, so they proclaim it and execute dissidents on the guillotine. Maybe they want everyone to be accepted, so they force acceptance of all people, no matter how much they deviate from social norms.

What they forget is that civilization as we know it comes from the affirmative acts of our people. It takes work to make food, shelter, and an economy. Social norms keep people moving in the same direction, and enable civilization to function in the first place. Inequality drives people to rise above others and therefore, to put the competent at the top of our hierarchy.

Leftists do not recognize these needs, and as a result, are entirely blind to the task of maintaining civilization. This means that to them, the questions of leadership are as simple as how to spread money and power around. Conservatives aim to create that wealth and power, and to them, division of it is done so that more is produced.

This is why conservatives emphasize giving money and power to the competent. It is not a question of making everyone feel accepted, but ensuring that the people who are most likely to make more wealth and power are in a position to do so. This is entirely lost on the Left, who do not exist outside of a perpetual present tense where these things already exist.

Inertia drives the Left. Finding themselves in a civilization where benefits are present, they assume these are perpetual and given by heaven. This inertia may reflect a fear of the passage of time, including aging and mortality. It manifests in a denial of the cyclic nature of reality and our part in it.

It also provides a rationalization and decline and justification for profiting from it. If civilization “just exists,” without requiring us to be means to the end of its perpetuation, there is nothing wrong with taking everything that one can and giving nothing back. One is freed from the guilt of watching another labor for shared benefit while taking for personal benefit only.

This inertia and rationalization provides the individual with the ability to act selfishly without guilt, while simultaneously not worrying about the future. In this view, what existed at the birth of the individual will exist in perpetuity regardless of the actions of the individual. They view themselves as having no effect and no obligations.

From this comes the “bourgeois” mentality or the view of the successful middle class, which is that society is a competition for resources and the only political involvement required is to “virtue signal” or demonstrate moral goodness through transferring wealth to those with less success. Politics is a means of symbolic gestures that lead to personal success.

When we view Leftism through this filter, its origins as an adaptive pathology become clear. It seems to be an ideology, but really, it is a defensive rationalization for the individual to disclaim obligation to maintain civilization. This explains its enduring popularity as well as its incoherence.

Once it is visualized this way, Leftism becomes defeatable. It is no longer an active philosophy that has actual goals. Instead, it is a pathology of people seeking to accept and deny the decline. They perceive it as a way of making themselves more important in a shrinking pond. If this power is removed, Leftism becomes inert and thus unrewarding, and will be discarded.

Tags: , , , ,

2 Responses to “Understanding Leftism As Inertia And Rationalization”

  1. epochehusserl says:

    When civilization becomes too successful it sows the seeds of its own destruction by the people you describe in the article. The liberals take as a given the civilization we have which was carved out of a wilderness on land “stolen from the Indians”. They never ask why did the native americans not have wood framed houses or advanced cities or roads or any of the things we take for granted because they are so busy “virtue signalling” that they do not reflect on such matters.

  2. Anonymous White Male says:

    I have believed for decades that the left (and many of the right) view society, or the conglomerate of human interaction, as something as immutable as gravity. They don’t have to understand it. It works and it works based on a religious conception that even though there is “no God”, somehow the atoms of the universe and the cells in your body respond to some universal concensus that enforces what is “right” on all humans. According to leftists, since the universe itself exists with some kind of programmed “laws”, there is a right and a wrong, even though there is no living form that determines what that is. Its like evolution. Although evolutionists would never admit it, they have assigned the position of “God” to the DNA molecule. The DNA molecule doesn’t make a moral assumption about actions, it just enforces reality with encoded truths that follow physical laws of nature. And it somehow knows that dinosaurs need to grow wings, so it selects for a single entity that has vestigial growths that one million years later will be wings. That and all the other changes that have to occur so a Brachiosaurus can fly.

    This is why liberals believe that human beings are interchangeable. Even though a society was created by a specific people, because of the overriding laws of the universe any other people would have arrived at the same results as long as they were in the same place. A million muslims can immigrate to a country and, while there may be some problems at first, eventually everything will coalesce into the same homogenous sequence of expectations and actions. Just because. Similar to the “magic dirt” theory. It is not humanity that determines actions, it is the environment. And God, I mean, the universe wants, I mean, imposes this with some magic, I mean, physical force, just as a comet will proceed on the same path that it always has. The universe doesn’t know what it is doing anymore than the ground knew why Newton’s apple fell toward it.

    Liberals have to admit to physical differences between people. They don’t have to admit to mental, emotional, or spiritual differences in humans because there is no way to measure them. Oh, there is, but they discount these as just so much pseudoscience or “fear” of the unknown. They don’t acknowledge that since this always occurs, there must be some universal mechanism that leads individuals to protect themselves from outside threats. But, its all a misunderstanding, bigotry, homophobia, anti-Semitism, whatever. Just lay back and enjoy it since it has been declared inevitable by the universe. Which, by the way, has no knowledge of itself.

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>