Amerika

In every reasonable accounting, philosophy swallows up politics because like psychology, philosophy looks at human motivation, but unlike anything else, it considers what is real and good and the relation between the two.

When humans talk straight politics, they most speak of how to manipulate a system. They want to catch their opposition in logical contradictions, find justifications for their way being right, and validate their personal life choices as absolute, universal, and objective “good.”

A philosopher might view human beings as a type of organic calculator. That is, they assess what will make them feel good about life and the future, and then will vote for whatever seems to make that into a solid enough dogma that their personal life choices seem unassailable.

We saw this last week with the downfall of Roe v. Wade, which like most momentous decisions passed quickly from shocking novelty to acceptance as normal because it simply made sense. It was the Court correcting itself and re-affirming an originalist take on the Constitution.

Tens of thousands of people gathered to express their discontent not because they thought this was bad law, but because it made them feel bad about their lifestyle choices. They do not want reality; they want a line of hope that says that they are good no matter what they do.

Egalitarians choose their belief system as a preemptive defense against criticism. They want to avoid anything that penalizes them for ignorance, incompetence, or poor judgment abilities, so they demand that all be equal. That way, no one is criticized, which means that they are above criticism.

Throughout history, every egalitarian movement has made its mainstay from finding parts of reality that it can censor, alter, conceal, or deflect. The goal is to replace reality with a human social reality, which gives people “hope” because humans are finally in control.

The problem with such people is not that they are mean or evil as the raving Right-wing media front claims; the problem is that they are bigoted against reality, and therefore they choose insanity because it makes them feel better. They pursue politics as a crutch and by doing so, make horrors.

At their core, if we dig down enough, we see hope: the hope that reality is not as it is, and can be replaced with a human social construct which removes all fears and installs safety, mostly pacifism which by accepting everyone ends conflict and leaves only good social feelings.

That is the core of it: good social feelings. Like all systems of control, it regulates method in order to influence mental state, using the external to do what the internal does best, and leaves hollow people agitating for power endlessly in a fugue of narcissism and codependency.

Leftists embrace their philosophy because it makes them feel better about their lifestyle choices, mainly by saying that all people are equal and therefore innocent, which means (ergo) that their bad choices are the result of their situation or some evil scapegoat, not their incompetence.

With Leftism, a group can have happy feelings together and therefore have a sense of unity, so it appeals to the socially underconfident teenager in all of us as well as the cynical businessperson who sees a wider audience of warm bodies opening up to the sale of products.

It succeeds because people use it to manipulate each other. When a few join the pacifist cult, they bully others into joining, and then make those who have not joined feel bad. This gives them power and a sense of (false) purpose, which works for the few hours a week most have for existential concerns.

The line of hope unites them. On their side, everyone is good and nothing is bad except unequal situations. Life is simple. They can believe in “progress” moving us toward an enlightened future where all will be safe, cared for, and relevant.

They ignore the obvious paradox which is that no one cares about those who are merely equal. Hierarchy always emerges. The Leftist solution is to beat it down, except when it is paired with Leftist dogma and therefore seen as absolute, universal, and objective “good.”

Few people will cross the line of hope because it means that they will have to start feeling bad about the future, and they will lose out socially. In the Leftist dogma, anyone who criticizes the dogma must be broken and wrong because being equal did not make them content.

On one hand, they know that the hope is fake, but on the other, they lose out personally for pointing out that the emperor has no new clothes after all. This cognitive dissonance leads to hilarious balancing of momentary realism…

The poll, which was conducted by the CSA Institute, revealed that 65 per cent of French people overall say that the country has seen too much immigration with a small minority claiming that France has not seen enough immigration.

When broken down by age, only those in the 18 to 24-year-old demographic thought France had not seen enough immigration at 60 per cent, while 72 per cent of people 50 to 64 think France has seen too much immigration, broadcaster CNews, which sponsored the survey, reports.

Politically, those on the right are far more concerned about immigration than left-wing parties, however, among supporters of the far-left La France Insoumise party, just 51 per cent said that there had not been enough immigration into France, while the number was much higher among other left-wing parties.

…with long-term denial in order to keep up the happy feelings of hope that only oblivion can bring:

The Ifop survey, which asked a number of questions regarding immigration and topics such as Islamisation, found that 50 per cent of the French believe in the Great Replacement, a theory coined by French writer Renaud Camus to describe the demographic replacement of native peoples by mass migration.

Nearly seven in ten of the respondents to the survey, or 69 per cent, stated they believed there were “too many” immigrants in France, while 62 per cent said that immigration was the primary reason for insecurity issues in the country, French news magazine L’Obs reports.

In the Ifop survey, respondents were also asked about French identity and Islam, with 70 per cent stating that France should remain a Christian country, while 68 per cent said that Islam was a threat to French identity.

Consider that consistently, two-fifths of the population refuse to face what is right in front of their eyes, even when they are willing to admit that problems exist. To admit problems is to suggest a new method; to admit paradox is to become a dissident to the modern way of life and political dogma.

These holdouts do not want to cross the line of hope. On their side of the line, they can still believe in safety, progress, and that they live in a good society. Once they cross, they must admit that they live in an edifice made of illusions and society is collapsing. That feels bad.

Eventually we will hit a tipping point, much as happened in the Soviet Union, where all ordinary people of competence agree that the System has failed, and there are therefore enough of them that these thoughts can begin to be voice en masse.

You can cancel and deplatform an individual, arrest scores of individuals, and effectively cut off whole portions of the population, but you are powerless when they all show up at once saying the same thing. If even two percent of your population does this, regime change is soon to follow.

Right now people want to keep believing in the hope: that this is a good society, that it is getting even better, and that we are doing the right thing. However, faith in diversity and equality is fading, as is belief that Big Government — free stuff, entitlements — is a good thing.

We do not need them to hate the System. We need them to lose faith in it, and therefore be geared toward liberalizing it, or relaxing its wealth redistribution, racial quotas, and endless government agencies writing laws to regulate all areas of life.

When enough of them lose faith, that tipping point goes ballistic and after that point, is unstoppable. To get there, we have to lose enough faith in the line of hope that people stand up as a group and call out the illusion. Then the System falls, and we can restart civilization instead.

Tags: cognitive dissonance, denial, hope