The Liberal Mind

A good way to learn about the liberal mind, for those who don’t already know, is to read the comments by MuddyW in “The Real Question About Muslims“.

The answer is classic liberal thinking because it includes all the standard elements: ad hominem attack on the non-liberal, statement of one’s superiority due to education, use of “difficult” words the person doesn’t really understand herself, dividing the world into “good” and “bad” – all that while totally ignoring the other person’s argument.

Rather than address my question (please name a single 20th century Muslim invention), Muddy starts with a claim that she has a Master’s in Psychology.

A Master’s degree is a real achievement. A Social Studies teacher with an MA in History or a Wall Street manager with an MBA are obviously very bright and deserve admiration. A graduate degree also isn’t necessary to be regarded as successful. A cop who has an Associate’s degree may be very bright, but he just doesn’t need to waste more time studying “critical lesbian theory”. Education isn’t even a sign of intelligence, as has been proven by the trillions spent on minority education that did not result in lessening the Black-White IQ Gap. Many people who never finished college (e.g., Bill Gates) are very bright.

However, psychology is different. Psychologists need a Ph.D. or a Psy.D. to practice, and nothing else will do. A person who has a Master’s in psychology is someone who has failed to achieve their desired endeavor. The person is obviously not bright enough to do what the job they desire, they obviously overestimated their abilities when they began their education and they are almost definitely bitter about their lack of personal success.

We see this with many (though not all) liberal “baby boomer hippie” college professors. Despite having Ph.D.’s and tenured jobs, they are miserable and take it out on the students who disagree with them. These professors are upset because they do not want to preach to two dozen bored teenagers, but to thousands in filled stadiums. They want to be a force for leftist change – but they can’t.

The inability to achieve inflated personal goals leads them to disappointment and bitterness, and the desire to feel better about themselves leads them to wear their degree on their sleeve.

Every conversation with a liberal always involves them charging at you with their degree (e.g., I have a bachelor’s degree in Political “Science”, so I know everything about politics better!). They just presume that everyone will recognize their superiority after learning of the existence of their worthless piece of paper (a degree that can’t get them a job), and fail to realize that many people out there are better educated then them.

One reason they fail to realize that others may be well-educated as well is that others do not try to “show off”. Muddy repeatedly uses “SAT words” incorrectly making it clear that she doesn’t quite understand them, but it’s also clear that she thinks that because others use standard English, they must be stupid and uneducated.

Which brings me to the next point that the only reason liberals, including Muddy, got as far as they got is that it’s very easy being a liberal in most universities. When speaking in class or writing a term paper, a liberal need not ever back up anything they say. To the leftist professor (who’s usually surrounded only by other liberals in his department), leftist claims are common sense. What politics or sociology professor will challenge you if you say in class, “blacks are 12% of the overall population and 50% of the prison population, so therefore our criminal justice system is racist”? None.

But if a conservative student will ever say that it’s improper to compare prison demographics to that of the overall population, and the more accurate comparison would be to the demographics of criminals as reported by victims and witnesses who were able to observe the person’s race, he will be sent off to “sensitivity training”, placed on academic probation, threatened with criminal prosecution because “racism is illegal” (it’s not – see First Amendment) and will likely fail the course.

Surrounded by leftist professors, and students who are only allowed to speak up in class if they are liberal or don’t care about their grades, liberals think they are the only ones who go to school and all conservatives are somewhere on a farm.

If a conservative teenager dares to challenge liberal dogma in class, he’ll be alone against a mob that will jump on his every word with the aid of the adult professor who’ll use his authority, the wisdom of his age, and his Ph.D. to grind the poor 18-year-old freshman into dirt.

This mob mentality that gives liberals the idea that they can destroy conservatives at will leads to that very over-confidence in career goals that will be the cause of their own destruction as they fail to move from psych BA/MA to psych Ph.D., or from political science BA to law school.

Muddy claimed that she did challenge her professors. Yes, and people in the Soviet Union were allowed to challenge their leaders – but from the left only (e.g., “we need to speed up the road to real communism”).

So clueless is she that she didn’t even realize the existence of liberal bias. Did she ever ask in her professors how homosexuality could be regarded as “normal” if the two primary basic elements of normal psychology is the desire to survive and the desire to reproduce (conscious or subconscious via your desire to have sex)? If homosexuality is normal, then all of psychology must be wrong because it is based on the presumption that one has at least a subconscious desire to reproduce. To call homosexuality normal is an equivalent of calling suicide normal, seeing as both of these go against the two primary presumptions psychologists make.

Homosexuality was re-classified in the Golden Age of Leftism after gays rioted and lobbied by pleading that psychology should base classifications not on science, but on the effect it would have on millions of “Gay Americans”. But this classification remains in conflict with the rest of psychology. So did you, Muddy, ever ask your professor this question? No!

In her post to me, she decided to display her knowledge of things like the cortex. Why? I have no idea, but probably to show how smart she is.

But in her psych or women’s studies class, did she ask if the fact that men have 6.5 times more gray matter (and women have 10 times more white matter) may be the reason why men tend to be more successful in subjects like math?

No, she didn’t ask those questions. Just as her professors thought her liberal positions were “common sense”, she thought the same of their leftist preaching in class.

College is easy and fun when you are a liberal. You can get a Master’s degree with a very average IQ and then go around telling everyone you meet that you have your useless piece of paper.

But the liberal did not learn anything in college. Liberals almost always can’t defend their point of view.

In fact, they can’t even understand what the argument is about.

Repeatedly I asked Muddy and her fellow traveler Johnny Maudlin to cite a few examples of Islamic inventions in the 20th century. I was attacked as a racist and fascist. I was called stupid. I learned that Koran was apparently written in the 20th century and that 9/11 also happened during the 1900s. But no Islamic invention was cited. in fact, they showed a complete inability to comprehend my question and the facts I was asking for.

But when you are a liberal, facts don’t matter. It’s all about what you “believe”. Liberalism is thus a religion, with some adherents being more fundamentalist than others.

Being members of a religion, liberals ignore facts. They will respond to any fact with, “so you believe …?” and “I don’t believe that!”.

According to FBI statistics, victims identify blacks as being violent criminals almost 10 times more than whites. Tell this to a liberal. Print the FBI statistics and show it to the liberal. You know what he’ll tell you? “I don’t believe that blacks are more violent. It is morally wrong to believe that. If you believe that blacks commit more violent crime than whites, then your belief makes you a racist.” They will not even try to challenge the statistics. It’s all about belief.

Like the belief in God, either you believe or you don’t. You can be a good person or a heretic to be shunned and destroyed. Facts are not to be used in deciding one’s belief. Belief simply determines if you a good person, a person morally superior to those who disagree with you.

Being a liberal, you also can’t grasp the concept of average. In fact, I’ve never met a single liberal who understood what an average is.

When someone says that blacks on average commit more crime than whites, the leftist is outraged. Why? Because in his mind, the speaker just announced that all blacks are criminals and all whites are saints. Their ability to comprehend what’s an average isn’t limited just to race issues. Ask them what’s the average salary in the US and they will be equally confused. Their usual answer will usually sound like this: “There’s no average. Some people make make nothing and some are billionaires.” But of course there is an average. So long as we have 2 or more people, there’s always an average.

To understand that there is an average, the liberal must understand that the world isn’t black and white, that the world isn’t divided into two groups: one always bad, one always good.

But leftists think that the world is just black and white precisely because of what they learned while getting their degrees beginning at the intellectually-tender age of 18: you’ll get a treat for being a liberal and you’ll get smacked in the face (with a low grade) if you aren’t liberal enough. And so your logical reasoning never develops.

A good example of that was Muddy’s attempt to compare my attempt to find out if Muslims invented anything in the 20th century with Hitler’s denial of the existence Jewish culture.

In the Muddied liberal mind, I said something bad about someone, and Hitler said something bad about someone else, so that makes me the new Hitler. It’s really that simple inside the leftist head.

The liberal can’t cite anything that I’ve written and draw a direct comparison. Partly because that would be impossible, partly because they cannot function on that level. All they can figure out is “good” v. “bad”. Just like children.

But their analogy is, of course, shockingly wrong. Hitler said that Jews don’t have a culture. I, on the other hand, think that Muslims have a culture. I just don’t want it to be imposed on the West. Their culture has burqas. Our culture has miniskirts. I prefer our culture. I wish them the best of luck with their culture – in Yemen, Sudan and Afghanistan, but not in London, Paris and Barcelona.

But guess which group allegedly doesn’t have a culture? The Whites! Ask any liberal why blacks can have a “black association of …”, but whites cannot, and they will always respond that blacks have a culture, but whites do not, whites can only meet together as part of a racist scheme to unfairly manipulate others (just like the Jews did according to Hitler).

When minorities move into a white neighborhood, they add “culturally enriching diversity”. When whites move into a minority neighborhood, they engage in “culture-destroying gentrification”. Why? Because minorities bring in their culture. But whites don’t have a culture.

So who’s really like Hitler? The liberals! Maybe Muddy should salute Johnny Maudlin with a Heil Hitler since just like Hitler with Jews, the leftists do not believe that whites have a culture worth preserving.

Muddy goes on to state several facts, mostly accurate, about the way Hitler viewed Jews, but then suddenly concludes that it “is exactly the same drivel you are peddling here regarding Muslims”. But how exactly is that true? What exactly did I say that was exactly the same as Hitler’s claims?

If my “drivel” is “exactly the same”, then why not quote a sentence or two that I’ve written?

But Muddy, being the good liberal that she is, doesn’t understand the need to do that. She believes that Hitler saying that Jews are so clever they can out-compete others with unfair manipulation is “exactly the same” as my saying that Muslims invented nothing during the 20th century.

After all, bad always equals bad, in the liberal mind. Most people, however, will be able to see that Hitler’s belief that the Jews are “too clever” is the direct opposite of the claim that Muslims failed to invent anything.

The two liberals did not to address my main point, and liberals in general almost never do.

They called me names. They discussed irrelevant facts (”Hitler believed Jews didn’t have a culture”… you mean just like you believe that whites don’t have a culture?).

But they never cited any Muslim achievements.

You’ll almost never hear a liberal answer your questions. Usually they can’t because answers don’t exist. Just as common is their inability to comprehend the other side and respond to it with facts because liberalism is about “belief” not facts, and because their “education” consisted of being their professor’s bubble-headed “yes-men”.

Ignorance is bliss. And being a liberal fundamentalist must be the greatest joy in the world.