Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What Were They Thinking?
No matter how fruitless the effort, I am plagued with a debilitating habit that I just can’t seem to shake: I’ve spent an inordinate amount of time trying to figure out, beyond the ideology, what people on the Left are actually thinking or what they believe, for them to continue to invest their time and efforts in foolish and dangerous ideas. Every now and then I have some openings in my thought process that allow me to venture into the dark recesses of the minds of the Left. I want to test out my thinking on all of you.
Since it’s difficult to make meaningful generalizations about the countless errors that the Left and particularly the Biden administration have made, I decided to focus primarily on the following areas: border administration (or lack thereof); policy toward China (or the lack thereof); policy on the economy (or the lack thereof) wait a minute, am I repeating myself? Regardless, our negotiating with Iran on the nuclear deal, and finally the mess of managing Covid give us plenty to focus on. I think it’s possible to infer similarities in thinking (or non-thinking, if you prefer) regarding these five areas that would explain how inept and feckless their efforts have been.
Elitism/Arrogance—More than ever, the Left relies on its belief in its own superiority. Whether these people point to their college degrees, affirmations of each other in their enclaves or just their own narcissism, they believe that they are best suited to run this country. Since their actions are driven by their elitist ideology, e.g., Marxism, socialism, wealth accumulation, and social circles, anyone who doesn’t embrace or live within those bubbles is clearly inferior and unqualified to contribute. It is possible to join this cadre, but you must begin by lauding the ideology first, then checking off all the other Leftist boxes.
Idealism/Naivete—These two attributes tend to feed on each other. The Left clings tightly to its ideals, and its naivete about the nature of real life and living as a productive member of society allows it to maintain its idealism. As it continues to live in its bubbles well into adulthood, seeking out others who are as idealistic and naïve as it is, it never encounters the middle class, which often struggles to make ends make; the Left insists that the struggles of “ordinary folk” are caused by Conservatives who have evil goals to quash those who live outside the Left’s elite circles. The ills of society, which are often the outcome of ordinary struggles to survive and thrive, can all be blamed on the capitalistic forces. Once those forces are controlled, or better yet eliminated, everyone will be equal. But of course, some people will be more equal than others; the elite will need to have the power to create and replicate this equality.
Faux Compassion—Although the Left has always claimed to be compassionate, the truth has been leaking out that it could care less about anyone who isn’t part of its in-group. Lately, it has been faced with the inconvenient truth that people are discovering how deluded it is: providing government funding that strips people of their work ethic; thinking people will accept vaccine mandates because it’s for their own good and the good of others; shutting down businesses while it destroys local economies; claiming compassion for those who cross the southern border, promising to provide funding and ignoring Covid infections; allowing drug deaths to skyrocket as fentanyl is carried across the border by cartels. The list is quite long, but the truth is emerging. The Left doesn’t care about anyone except its own agenda and its partners in crime.
Diplomacy vs. Demands—The Left wants everyone to believe that due to its elite expertise, it can finesse diplomatic activities it is involved with. The diplomats went into the latest Iran negotiations thinking that if they made their best offer, the Iranians would be so impressed that they’d simply agree and the negotiations could be wrapped up; the Iranians insisted, however, on further negotiations. I suspect that our elites are prepared to “give away the store” to finish up the Iran deal. We also see the feckless threats made to Russia and China, who are not in the least intimidated by our threats. And of course, our insistence that people should stop crossing the southern border is a farce. I suspect the Left believes that implementing penalties against our enemies is uncouth and will hurt people’s feelings. In addition, it is afraid to make demands because some of us will expect them to follow through, and that could hurt the Left politically when it doesn’t.
Analysis/Action/Paralysis—I’m convinced that since the Left relies on feelings and instincts, even serious decisions don’t undergo any kind of legitimate analysis. One only needs to look at the debacle in Afghanistan: if your “feelings” tell you that you must get out, then it’s important to take action, regardless of the potential outcomes. The alternative to action is paralysis—doing nothing because it just seems too difficult to do—and hope that no one notices.
All of these attributes are part of the Leftist mentality and have been for over 100 years. I guess we can at least say that it is consistent in its ineptitude.
* * * *
Given this analysis, I see no reason for the Left to wake up to the limitations of its ideology, or to take corrective action. These ideologues are headed for the abyss, and either refuse to acknowledge the potential disasters ahead, or simply ignore them. And they are prepared to take all of us with them.
To them, reality is relative and malleable; they will try to reshape impending disasters as opportunities. And since their reality is focused on attaining the ultimate good, which can either be described as the Global Reset or the transformation of America, power is key. They will risk nearly everything to hold onto it.
I’ve always maintained optimism in the face of these calamities; we do see pockets of the country fighting back against mandates, critical race theory, and the lack of a border policy.
But will it be enough?
[photo courtesy of Vadim Sadovski on unsplash.com]
Published in Politics
Well, partial conversion, in that case. He still felt the need to throw some “virtuous” stones. I did a compare and contrast on his “conversion”:
https://ricochet.com/1104131/my-turn-versus-liel-leibovitz/
Great post, Susan!
Second to David’s point in number #21: I think there are several distinct cohorts we tend to think of as “the left,” and I think you were wise to identify several distinct motivations and perspectives. We often tend to project the worst of the left upon the rest of the left, and to believe that the particularly awful examples of leftist extremism and insanity are characteristic of the bulk of people who consider themselves left-of-center. I don’t think that’s true.
At one extreme is the highly visible progressive public figure, the politician, pundit, or popular “intellectual” who is routinely in the news. I think these people are, as often as not, simply pandering to their chosen revenue and voter base. They have an obvious personal incentive to serve their market, and no idea is too nutty or counter-productive if it achieves their short- and medium-term end. They are the opposite of a “true believer.”
I think there’s generally no way to reach these people. You simply have to defeat them in the polls, and counter their ersatz arguments whenever you have an opportunity.
At the other extreme is the largest population on the left, the big body of generally poorly informed and only mildly committed center-left Americans, the NPR listeners and CNN watchers, the people who tend to accept the prevailing leftist narrative of major media and popular culture. These people are also not “true believers.” They’re simply living their lives, absorbing what passes for the popular wisdom, and saying what they think decent people are supposed to say because it’s almost all they ever hear.
I think this larger population is ripe for conversion. They feel the consequences of bad policy, they rarely hear a coherent and compassionate criticism of the dumb ideas they take for granted, and they don’t realize that everyone doesn’t agree with the stuff they hear on the nightly news. (I quoted Professor Jason Hill, DePaul University, making that point quite eloquently in this post.)
Finally, there’s a problematic group in the middle, the “true believers.” I think the greatest failing of this group is hubris, the mistaken belief that, because we solve easy problems so well, we can take on deceptively simple problems of real complexity with equal success. I think this describes the generation of meddlesome technocratic elite that is rising in our midst, the high end of the mandarin class of bureaucratic nannies, and some smart and well-meaning people who just don’t appreciate how immune to top-down solution are the truly interesting challenges we face. Some of these people may learn that putting a man on the moon is a lot easier than managing an economy, and so give up central planning in favor of free markets. But a lot of them are too smart, have solved too many easy problems quickly, and don’t have opportunities to discover the limits of their abilities until they’ve imposed them on all of us. I think the best we can hope for, where these people are concerned, is to try to use the law and the courts to keep them from amassing too much power and influence.
An excellent post! I missed it the first time around, so I’m glad people can read it if they missed it, too. Thanks.
Yes–we need to understand the degree to which people live their (politically-relevant) lives within an information flow that is controlled almost entirely by the Left.
Year ago, a wise executive remarked to me:
When you are running a large organization, remember that you are not seeing reality. It’s like you’re watching a movie where you get to see maybe only one out of every thousand frames, and from that you have to figure out what’s really going on.
I think this is very true…and it’s even more true when it comes to political affairs. Nobody gets to see directly what’s happening on the border, in Afghanistan, in thousands of different polling places across the country…they have to rely on the frames selected by the media for their viewing.
Now, think how much power this gives to the selectors of the frames.
You’ve made this point a number of times, Hank, and I’m trying to agree. ;-) I don’t even know how I would find them. Maybe if they, even hesitatingly, approach us, we should be ready. I’m finding I seem to be losing my patience, though, and would probably ruin the whole discussion all on my own.
I know it’s frustrating. But I suspect you have friends and relatives with whom you don’t discuss politics because they hold all the conventional leftist views. Those are the people I’m talking about.
Very well put.
The left/progressives can be summed up in one phrase I heard years ago regarding some uncomfortable facts: I refuse to believe that.
Not, you’ll notice, “Here are some facts that bring that into question”. Not “What are your sources?” Not, “I gotta see more.” Just, “I refuse to believe that.” They just refuse to believe that their ideas always fail when put into practice.
They can’t be reasoned with. They have to be defeated.
I totally understand what you’re saying. When we moved into our brand new house here in AZ my husband would walk through the house shouting Hellooo, Hellooo because the rooms were big enough to echo. We still pinch ourselves that we are “lucky” enough to live in a home without a mortgage. We didn’t even get married until we were in our 40’s and we had next to nothing. We weren’t big executives or anything like that. We just had good, ordinary jobs, lived within our means and saved. Even when I was growing up in a family with six children and a father in the Navy I was never envious. And I’m not envious now of others who have lots more. I just figure I didn’t have whatever it takes to get that rich. Not their fault.
Thank you for sharing this, Justme! You do understand, and I love finding others who know how to live responsible lives and now can enjoy the fruits. Good for you and your husband.
Yeah, I relate. Some of our close relatives were missionaries and drifted to the Left side of the street. On the one hand I can understand her grudge as she is a strong, capable woman who would be a fine pastor or teacher – a trait not always welcomed in Conservative churches. Yet her couching her embrace of leftist ideology in Christian language and her constant pot shots at the failure of the historic church as legalistic, racist, and “looking at the Bible through western eyes” has me leaving conversations with her feeling attacked and triggered. I’m at the point where I am ready to say, “I really don’t care what you believe. Quite frankly, I find it uninteresting and boring. You’re a good person who devoted your life to serving God the best you can. Just stop with the pot shots.” It is as if to justify their progressive, “generous orthodoxy” (a liberal pastor’s term) they have to destroy any vestige of the past.
I remember a liberal woman complaining about the all-male priesthood in the Catholic Church. I was just listening rather than taking part in the discussion. Someone pointed out that the original twelve were all male and she said that Jesus couldn’t choose women because of the status of women in his time. At that time, I shot my mouth off and said something like, “WTF are you babbling about? He was God incarnate, and if the prospect of being crucified didn’t deter him from his mission, do you think a little societal disapproval would have stopped him from appointing women priests?” My comments were not well-received.
I read through the post and I was thinking about how I could respond in the simplest terms when I got to the above comment. The terms I had settled on were the Left focuses on state of being, ideologically a utopian state of perfection and the Right focuses on process, ideologically responsible individual freedom. There are many variants, like we get with the virus, but these are the poles.
For the Left to fulfill theirs they must control the behavior of others. For the Right to fulfill theirs they must live their lives with a few basic rules.
I don’t think so. If anything, it neglects the ideological drivers and the massive money that now promotes the most extreme ideologies.
Ideas like this have been out there for at least half a century:
The idea that there are too many people is commonplace. How many too many, and how best to reduce the population are under discussion. Moderates talk about a population reduction of a billion or two; people like Pianka believe that the earth’s carrying capacity is under a billion humans. Some are perfectly willing to die if that’s what it takes to reduce the population sufficiently to save the planet, but of course as part of the small minority who really understand things, they have important work to do first. It would of course be preferable that many enemies die first.
AOC is, I think of at least slightly above average intelligence. She has been thoroughly indoctrinated, and rewarded throughout her education for assiduous regurgitation of the Party line. There are others who are also true believers, but are smarter.
There are staffers at every level of political organization whose job is to Cloward-Piven the USA. They often move up with the elected officials who employ them knowingly or otherwise; they also move from foundations to advocacy groups to government. If they are far enough up the food chain, they can go international (the UN, NGOs, etc.) and they have counterparts in foreign governments.
Since I was a teenager, I figured that if I didn’t die rich, I wouldn’t resent it, because I could have, had I really wanted it.
The left does not understand that incentives matter. They don’t criminalize property crimes and then get shocked when it skyrockets. They inflate the money supply and then blame retailers for high prices.
I’ve just started reading a book called “The Art Of Conjuring Alternate Realities”.
Not by a modern-day Aldous Huxley, but by a “data analyst, campaign consultant” and a “cyber security and privacy researcher who also dabbles in financial modeling”.
From their promotion of the book:
It’s too soon to tell about this book, but Singh’s last (“How To Win An Indian Election”) was excellent – and the questions they put seem relevant to the OP.
It sounds fascinating, Zafar. And prescient. Thanks.
I can identify with your frustration. I just try to limit my time with my friend and insist that certain topics are off-limits. It’s sad.
This VDH article does a great job comparingthem with us by giving “what ifs” the Repubs could do to mimic Dem behavior these past few years. In doing so, it artfully describes what the NTs have voted for and would then condemn if the Repubs followed suit. Most of all, it brings home what Trump and his followers have been subjected to and amazes me that such shenanigans haven’t wrought something much worse than Jan 6. There is no certainty to me that the new low in politics won’t cause another great fighting match like we had before. When one adds up the years, we are overdue for another. Dems got out the box of matches.
https://amgreatness.com/2022/01/09/what-makes-riots-conspiracies-cabals-and-insurrections-good-or-bad/
Reminds me of this quote from Peter Drucker: “On Knowledge as a Battleground: …it is quite possible that the great new ‘isms’ of tomorrow will be ideologies about knowledge. In tomorrow’s intellectual and political philosophies knowledge may well take the central place that property, i.e. things, occupied in capitalism and Marxism.
VDH is amazing. He gets right to the issues and doesn’t hold back. Too bad enough people don’t follow him. Thanks, EHerring.
That’s easy. The Left does not Think, they Feel. That’s why you can never argue with a Leftist.
You’ll hurt their feelings if you do.
What we call the left may be as diverse as what we call the right. There are elites who run things, get rich from them, and may or may not believe the notions we call left. It gives them power and they know how to use it. Power and wealth are the only things they have in common with each other, other than a profound historical ignorance. Then there are the ordinary voters who have been Democrats their whole lives and have been taught to distrust and hate Republicans. This is a very wide diverse group who don’t read a lot and may or may not be intelligent, but just go along. There are folks who burn places and rob and radicals who egg them on; they tend to be young, are mostly not educated and when the left consolidates power the elite will have to get rid of the disorderly street mobs and use some of them systematically. By then it won’t be the same elite. It will be folks who know how to exercise total power. What most, (except the kids who are ignorant and like the excitement and disorder in itself and lets them steal stuff) have in common is a lack of understanding of where it ends up. They think Washington believes what it says and can actually run things well and disinterestedly. Let’s not forget that the entire history of the world has been top down and corrupt and ends in decay and disorder. If we don’t radically transform our schools we can’t change any of this. But were’ playing along thinking that we can work it out over a generation or so. We can’t. We either pull out, as southern states did, or we fix it if we are allowed to win the next two elections.
You bring up a topic that has come up a number of times in this post, IWalton: how diverse, from top to bottom, the Left is. Trying to focus on ways to get them to at least listen to us seems impossible. Making critical change is even more so. And do we focus on the top (to vote them out) or the middle and bottom, who are the ones who would vote them out? I don’t know.
This is what I am thinking about what they are thinking:
https://ricochet.com/1118371/loc-77-bryan-g-stephens-strikes-back/
How diverse they are depends on what you a using as categories.
Leftism is first and foremost a mental state of the educated elites. That is why ideas like those of the Frankfurt School found their home here in the Ivy schools. The ideas spread among the faculty, then to the students, then on to other colleges and students. Those ideas are now spreading through secondary schools.
It isn’t that the other groups, the least educated, are natural lefties, but are tools of the lefties, instead. Lefties exploit the 7 deadly sins, the weaknesses in mankind we have been warned about for several thousand years. Envy, greed, lust, pride, wrath, gluttony and sloth.
And even elementary schools. They don’t care whether they understand; they’re laying the groundwork.