Good Faith Isn't a Quality of the Left

By Rich Kozlovich

On June 6, 2022 Derek Hunter published this subscription Townhall.com article, How Can Anyone Negotiate with a Democrat?  He starts out saying:

There is no doubt that the current president of the United States is a moron. Yes, he is suffering from senility too, but he's been a stupid man his entire life. So when he says something just so amazingly stupid or tone-deaf, you have to wonder if it's because of the senility or the stupidity. The answer is usually "a little from column A, a little from column B," but not always. Sometimes he does what all Democrats do, which falls firmly into column C: they are simply unserious people who lie to the public every time it advantages them.

After that he gets really serious by making this observation:

Imagine going into negotiations with someone in good faith, and as you're walking in the door, you see them talking to reporters. You nod hello, they wave and smile, and as you pass by, you hear them say, "I'm about to sit down with Hitler Jr. over here. This pile of garbage is not trustworthy in any way, shape, or form. I hate him and wish ill on him and his family. May he forever rot in hell.".........That's what Joe Biden does every single time.

This is the pattern of all leftist movements.  Whether it involves green energy, pesticides, social services or whatever their philosophical flavor of the moment may be, they do not negotiate in good faith.  One speaker at a conference I attended told how he tried to negotiate with green activists on some issue or other, and just when he thought they came to an agreement, the next day they would come back and rebuff what they'd already agreed to.  That was the pattern over and over again leaving him with the view negotiating with these people is a waste of time.  

You can not, and will not, find harmony with leftist misfits and activists.  They're self-righteousness is unassailable, and there's no real command and control structure. As soon as you come to an agreement with one of these groups, one of the other groups within that philosophical structure will scream and yell how horrible that agreement is, even attacking their fellow activists, declaring the agreement will doom the world....doom it I tell you!  

Remember when we were told the world would be a burnt cinder by now because of "anthropogenic global warming"?  I guess we missed that doom!  Also, prediction isn't their strong suit either.  The left almost has a monopoly on being wrong.  However, just in case you haven't noticed:  They're really good at hyperbole.  Facts, history, actual science, consistency of thought? Meh, not so much. 

Their whole concept of reality is one predicated on intellectual and moral corruption.  Starting with the French Revolution, along with the communist revolutions of the 20th century, and right up until now, intellectual corruption is the one defining characteristic they all have in common, along with a stunning lack of human compassion leading to mass murder.  In The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression the authors outline the disaster communism wrought around the world:

"terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years."

That came to a provable 100 million people murdered by communists, and actually, it's probably a lot more.  But leftism appears in many manifestations, including the environmental movement, which didn't really get started until the 1960's with the ban on DDT.   The death toll for that could be 100 million alone, and that's not including all the other demands they've made that's caused sickness and death, and that's still going on.  That comes to well over 200 million people who've either been murdered or died unnecessarily because of leftism, a secular religion, and the green movement is functionally genocidal.

“They hate us, the humans, they consider us selfish and sinful creatures who must be controlled by them. I used to live in a similar world—called communism—and I know that it led to the worst environmental damage the world has ever experienced.”  President of the Czech Republic, Vaclac Klaus

Corruption is like cancer that eats away the body.  Political corruption is the cancer that eats away the social structure by using our own values against us.  Good faith isn't part of the left's moral foundation.  

Once we understand that everything becomes much easier in order to cut the cancer out of the system, and be glad about it with no moral equivocations, no hedging and no self recriminations, because the left has no moral foundation other than greed, envy, hate, violence, and to do and say whatever it takes to gain and hold power in order to control everyone's life, all to humanities detriment.  We now have 233 years go history of prove that, and that history is incontestable.

Leftism is like rust.  It never sleeps.

No Objectivity Please, We're Leftists

Daniel Greenfield February 17, 2021 @ Sultan Knish Blog

The American Left has never been this in love with science and the class of experts who claim to dispense it. Any of its obsessions gains a glow of legitimacy when it attaches, “according to science” somewhere in the sentence, usually preceded by “do this” or “if you aren’t.”

And yet there’s a great deal of interest in science in China, but it’s on the way out in America.

STEM is on the social justice chopping block, under siege on and off campus with demands for equity and diversity, that also translate into less science and more social justice. Science is denounced by social justice squads as the work of dead white men and the new leftist ideology rejects the idea that the sum of 2 and 2 consistently add up to anything except systemic racism.

Seattle public schools contend that western math is “used to disenfranchise​ people and communities of color.” A University of Illinois education professor insisted that, "mathematics itself operates as Whiteness."

"Our research papers turn into media releases, books and legislation that reinforce anti-Black narratives. In STEM, we create technologies that affect every part of our society and are routinely weaponized against Black people," Shut Down STEM insisted. “The evidence of systemic racism in science permeates this nation,” Science, the journal, claimed.

The inherent problem with science is that it requires objectivity. And objectivity is the thing that leftists hate for the same reason that any cult does. Objectivity asserts that we can find the truth by stepping back from our beliefs and emotions in any field from journalism to particle physics.

The Left insists that we don’t transcend our biases through objectivity, but subjectivity.

The politically correct way to discover the truth is by understanding your white privilege and deconstructing the history of human civilization, not by searching for evidence or proof.

Truth comes not from objective facts, but from the subjective “lived experiences” of oppressed minorities whose suffering acts as the revelation of truth. This isn’t truth in the scientific sense, but in the religious sense, with minorities as martyrs revealing our sins to us with their suffering.

To be objective, lefties insist is just to deny your prejudices and evade the important work of checking your white privilege in response to the revelation of minority suffering in America.

But if objectivity is impossible, and scientific objectivity is just whiteness and colonialism, then the only legitimate science is one that asserts that leftist beliefs and values are absolutely true. The Soviet Union attempted to police science, upholding Lysenkoism because it offered a vision of science as the Communist hierarchy wanted it to be, rather than as it was, while suppressing Cybernetics because it offered a vision of reality that the Party elite found threatening.

Communist bosses liked the idea of an easily malleable agricultural system, but disliked the notion of robots replacing workers. The actual science was secondary to the ideological biases of ignorant ideologues who were convinced that they already had access to a higher truth.

Sound familiar?

The Cold War pitted Western scientific objectivity against Eastern ideological subjectivity. And objectivity won. It won to such a degree that scientists in Moscow or Shanghai don’t bother consulting ideological texts like Stalin’s articles or Mao’s sayings before doing research.

But, objectivity is dying off in the West.

Accusations of “whiteness” are to American academia what denunciations of reactionary, cosmopolitan, or idealism were to Soviet scientists. These signals serve the same function, warning scientists that they’re treading on ideologically dangerous territory by pursuing the truth.

So why does the Left claim to love science when it hates it and is threatened by it?

Marxism started out as a bastardized impersonation of a pseudo-science. Time and countless revisions hasn’t improved it any. The Left loves the idea of science, as long as it reflects its agendas, and remains subservient to its crackpot ideas. Just leave the objectivity out of it.

The same war rages in journalism.

“American view-from-nowhere, ‘objectivity’-obsessed, both-sides journalism is a failed experiment. We need to fundamentally reset the norms of our field. The old way must go. We need to rebuild our industry as one that operates from a place of moral clarity,” Wesley Lowery of the New York Times ranted.

Moral clarity is what the Communist apparatchiks also wanted. Their morality and their clarity.

Contrasting moral clarity and objectivity asserts that we can either be moral or search for the truth, but we cannot do both. Moral clarity demands unquestioning allegiance to a belief system. And that belief system must permeate whatever work we do, otherwise our work is immoral.

This quintessentially Communist idea was once relegated in America to certain cultural and academic bywaters, but is now becoming the central requirement for operating in public life.

It’s why corporations have rushed out absurd statements endorsing Black Lives Matter.

Morality, in leftist ideology, comes from politicising everything because the central struggle of humanity, which used to be class, and is currently race, and might, tomorrow, be sexuality, pervades everything in a pseudo-religious struggle for the redemption of mankind.

To be apolitical or objective is to deny the revelation that we must all join the struggle.

What is at stake is more than abstract ideas. The legacy of the Enlightenment divided individual morality from objective truth. Morality became personal and communal, instead of collective, and those beliefs became all the more precious when confronting a universe that did not always reflect them. The reaction to that universe destroyed the faith of some and upheld the faith of others. And some of those who lost their faith used false reason to manufacture another one.

That is where the Left came from. Its ideas sought to fuse together a collective morality and reality by insisting that it had discovered the principles that would make the world into utopia.

The seduction of the pseudo-scientific and pseudo-religious cult of the Left is that it offers theocracy without god. Its followers believe that they are battling for a moral order that is absolutely true, and that submitting to that moral order will resolve the conflicts of theodicy, restoring a moral universe that accords with our moral views. This is the tragic lie of the Left.

The utopian kingdom of heaven never arrives. The worse things get, the more society has to be purged of its evil ways to atone for its social sins. Pre-revolutionary era ideology reduced social failures to a single root cause, but even once the revolution arrives and the root cause of class warfare or racism is done away with, the system begins hunting for someone else to blame.

That is what we are living through now.

In its pseudo-religious and pseudo-scientific folly, the Left believes that suffering, that of its martyrs of class or race, or of the designated oppressors, represents truth. It attacks science by insisting that the suffering of the working class or of trans people of color represents a truth beyond the flawed reasoning of the human mind to which everyone is obligated to kneel.

Truth, it tells us, comes from empathy and guilt, not from stepping away from our emotions.

How we feel about something can represent a moral truth. But what we do about it requires objective reasoning. The Left’s rejection of that reality is why it always ends up failing.

The Left exploits other people’s misery for power and ego. It doesn’t want answers. It wants to transmute idealism into hate, fear, and guilt. That’s why it hates truth. Its bastardization of religion and science is a lie and its prophets and experts never explain their failures.

Objectivity enables a moral society to solve its problems. The Left is at war with objectivity because it doesn’t want those problems solved. Objectivity would take away its power.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Click here to subscribe to my articles.

Tags: Culture, Left, recent, Science 

Share This: Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest Linkedin

 

About Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield is a journalist investigating Islamic terrorism and the Left. He is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center

Related Posts:

 

Democrats freak out over Mike Pence's role coordinating coronavirus efforts

By Andrea Widburg

For people who are neither leftists nor caught in the grip of Trump Derangement Syndrome, Vice President Mike Pence is an intelligent, principled, competent man. When President Trump announced on Wednesday that he was putting Pence in charge of coordinating the federal government's response to the coronavirus, it seemed like an eminently sensible decision. For Democrats, though, Pence is the man who caused an HIV outbreak in Indiana. This is a lie...........These are not principled people. These are political hacks who will never let a crisis go to waste...............To Read More....

There's No Rule Democrats Won't Change for Their Own Convenience

February 26, 2020 By William Terrell

 

I experienced deja vu watching the Democrats’ rule change to include Michael Bloomberg into their debates, despite their refusal to change those rules for other Democrats who hadn’t met the qualifications for inclusion.  For nearly twenty years I’ve watched Democrats change the rules to suit their convenience of the moment.

For example, those who are old enough will remember the case of Robert Torricelli, the Democrat senator from New Jersey who withdrew from his Senate race because questions about his campaign finance practices were causing him to lose popularity and threaten that his Republican opponent might actually defeat him. However, his withdrawal left the Democrats without a candidate in that race, which in turn endangered their bare 1 seat majority in the Senate. To further complicate matters for the Democrats, the legal deadline to put forward a new candidate had passed.

Never fear. The Democrats went to the friendly New Jersey Supreme Court and got a decision that allowed them to call the venerable Frank Lautenberg out of retirement and run in Torricelli’s stead. And, of course, the seat was saved.

For the second example we move to the Senate. Many readers will also remember the contretemps over George W. Bush’s nomination of Miquel Estrada to the Washington DC district court in 2001. By all accounts, Estrada was supremely qualified to sit on that bench, but he spelled trouble for the Democrats. For one, he was conservative; for two, he was Latino; and for three, he may have been a White House choice for a future Supreme Court nomination.

Thus, at the behest of liberal activists, Democrats, newly in the minority in 2002, would not let Estrada’s nomination come to a vote in the full Senate (a vote they would have lost.) For the first time in history a nominee to a sub-Supreme Court position had been effectively filibustered. Estrada was filibustered seven times until he finally gave up and went into private practice.

The Democrats had again changed the rules.......To Read More....