Losing Our Humanity

 

One evening my husband and I were commiserating about the latest outrage that had been committed by the political Left. As he often did, he was lamenting their lack of common sense, as well as the hatefulness and deception that comes incessantly from those with whom we disagree. When he stopped to take a breath, I quietly said it was simpler than that: They just don’t care.

Now when I talk about people on the Left, they do care about some things: they care about Marxism, power, systemic racism, propagandizing our children, and controlling the narrative. When I say they don’t care, I’m being very specific: they don’t care about people.

Of course, they will talk about creating a new society; but they never talk about the damage it will do to the people. They talk about teaching children about those oppressed by the oppressors; but they never talk about the emotional damage these efforts cause to children on both sides of the issue. They talk about the laws they will enact to deal with climate change by demanding nascent technologies and requiring electric cars; but they never talk about the financial burden these actions will inflict on the population.

In a word, these people lack empathy.

The negative consequences of the absence of empathy reverberate through both the Left and Right. What do we mean by a lack of empathy?

  • Being extremely critical of other people
  • Blaming the victim
  • Not forgiving people for making mistakes
  • Feeling like other people are too sensitive
  • Not listening to other people’s perspectives or opinions
  • An inability to cope with emotional situations
  • Lack of patience for other people’s emotional reactions
  • Reacting with impatience or anger when frustrated with other people
  • Feeling baffled by other people’s feelings
  • Believing that negative things won’t happen to you

Sound familiar? Although I don’t visit social media platforms, time and again, I hear how these attitudes are manifested by those who disagree with us.

The problem for our society is not just how these people are behaving. A large part of the problem rests with those of us who protest this type of behavior. And in so doing, we are taking a serious risk.

We risk becoming just like them.

I wouldn’t blame you for bristling at such an idea. Those of us on the Right have put up with this kind of abuse for years. Don’t we have a right to be angry? Isn’t it reasonable for us to be offended? Shouldn’t we reject these kinds of behaviors and those who abuse us with them repeatedly?

We could certainly justify all these reactions, given how they are ceaseless and unrelenting. These people have earned our resentment and disrespect, maybe even our hatred. We try to inure ourselves from their attacks. We try to soften the bruising. When they are hateful enough, we even call them evil.

It’s only right, isn’t it?

It’s understandable. But it is not right.

Unfortunately, the more we attack them in return and demonize them, our capacity to be decent human beings decreases. We find in general that it’s harder and harder to empathize, even with those whom we love and respect. Boundaries between those who disrespect us and those who are simply wounded are more difficult to distinguish.

We begin to lose the ability to empathize.

Just like them.

We may realize that we can try to dream up ways to change them, but spending time on ourselves may be more productive. We may discover that we must strengthen our capacity to grow by reflecting on a few questions:

  • Do we believe that every person is created in the image of G-d?
  • Can we find a way to hold destructive people accountable and empathize with their own suffering?
  • Can we remind ourselves that saving our own humanity is one key to saving our families, communities, and country?

Making the effort to nurture empathy does not mean that we don’t judge others who are trying to destroy our culture. It doesn’t mean that we don’t speak out against them. It doesn’t mean that we don’t condemn their actions and behaviors.

It does mean that we grow the capacity to empathize: to identify with their suffering, even if we don’t agree with their actions. To keep in mind that we have all been wounded, misled, disappointed, and abandoned (even if we have managed to deal with those states in productive ways) and that we have choices for how to manifest our deeply held beliefs in virtuous ways.

I truly believe that in some respects, raging against the destructive forces and identifying the empathy within ourselves is an almost impossible task. It is a paradox of sorts.

But losing our own humanity is at stake. We should never forget that truth.

[photo courtesy of unsplash.com]

Published in Culture
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 28 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gary McVey Contributor
    Gary McVey
    @GaryMcVey

    Very well stated, Susan. I’m glad you wrote this. It’s something we should keep in mind. 

    • #1
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Gary McVey (View Comment):

    Very well stated, Susan. I’m glad you wrote this. It’s something we should keep in mind.

    Thanks, Gary. It’s so difficult to do, but I’m concerned that we will “lose ourselves” if we don’t.

    • #2
  3. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Susan, I don’t think that this is correct.

    If I’m following you correctly, your hypothesis is that Leftists “don’t care about people” and that they “lack empathy.”  When I look at what they say and do, this is not what I observe.  They seem to care about people — or at least some people, usually those they consider to be “oppressed,” though they often seem to care about the poor generally.  They also seem to empathize with some people, though perhaps not with others.  The people for whom they don’t appear to display empathy seem, to me, to be the “oppressors.”

    I think that people on the Left simply have a different vision of the good.  On some issues, I think that they are simply incorrect, mistaking wrong for right.  On other issues, they seem to have an incomplete view.

    On economic issues, at the moment, the American Left seems to have little concern for the white poor.  I think that this is because they view them as part of the oppressor class, and prioritize the “black and brown” poor.  They are correct that poverty is more common, statistically, among blacks and browns than among whites.  They attribute this to oppression.

    It seems to me that the reason for this is the Leftist refusal to consider the possibilities that such differences may be based on either culture — meaning the culture of the black and brown poor themselves — or biology.  Based on the evidence that I’ve seen, I think that both play a role, though my current conclusion is that biology is the larger factor.  Leftists, however, reject the idea that either cultural or biological differences may contribute to differential rates of poverty among groups, deeming this to be “racism.”  As a result, oppression is the only remaining explanation.  When they could no longer point to much evidence of such oppression, they adopted a belief in “systemic” oppression.

    All of this, to me, seems to be motivated by concern for people, and by empathy.

    On social issues, the Left’s focus seems to be on support of sexual immorality and even perversion, at least by traditional standards.  Again, this seems to lead to an oppressor-oppressed dichotomy.  Fornicators, homosexuals, and transsexuals are “oppressed” and therefore worthy of protection.  Those opposed to this are “oppressors” who must be punished and re-educated.  Leftists seem to find the traditional family to be an oppressive idea.

    Again, to me, this seems to be motivated by concern for people, and by empathy.

    So I think that the problem with the Left is misplaced concern for people, and excessive — though selective — empathy.

    Does this seem reasonable to you?

    • #3
  4. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Susan, I don’t think that this is correct.

    If I’m following you correctly, your hypothesis is that Leftists “don’t care about people” and that they “lack empathy.” When I look at what they say and do, this is not what I observe. They seem to care about people — or at least some people, usually those they consider to be “oppressed,” though they often seem to care about the poor generally. They also seem to empathize with some people, though perhaps not with others. The people for whom they don’t appear to display empathy seem, to me, to be the “oppressors.”

    I think that people on the Left simply have a different vision of the good. On some issues, I think that they are simply incorrect, mistaking wrong for right. On other issues, they seem to have an incomplete view.

    On economic issues, at the moment, the American Left seems to have little concern for the white poor. I think that this is because they view them as part of the oppressor class, and prioritize the “black and brown” poor. They are correct that poverty is more common, statistically, among blacks and browns than among whites. They attribute this to oppression.

    It seems to me that the reason for this is the Leftist refusal to consider the possibilities that such differences may be based on either culture — meaning the culture of the black and brown poor themselves — or biology. Based on the evidence that I’ve seen, I think that both play a role, though my current conclusion is that biology is the larger factor. Leftists, however, reject the idea that either cultural or biological differences may contribute to differential rates of poverty among groups, deeming this to be “racism.” As a result, oppression is the only remaining explanation. When they could no longer point to much evidence of such oppression, they adopted a belief in “systemic” oppression.

    All of this, to me, seems to be motivated by concern for people, and by empathy.

    On social issues, the Left’s focus seems to be on support of sexual immorality and even perversion, at least by traditional standards. Again, this seems to lead to an oppressor-oppressed dichotomy. Fornicators, homosexuals, and transsexuals are “oppressed” and therefore worthy of protection. Those opposed to this are “oppressors” who must be punished and re-educated. Leftists seem to find the traditional family to be an oppressive idea.

    Again, to me, this seems to be motivated by concern for people, and by empathy.

    So I think that the problem with the Left is misplaced concern for people, and excessive — though selective — empathy.

    Does this seem reasonable to you?

    No. But thanks for sharing.

    • #4
  5. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Susan Quinn:

    They just don’t care.

    Now when I talk about people on the Left, they do care about some things: they care about Marxism, power, systemic racism, propagandizing our children and controlling the narrative. When I say they don’t care, I’m being very specific: they don’t care about people.

    Of course, they will talk about creating a new society; but they never talk about the damage it will do to the people. They talk about teaching children about those who are oppressed by the oppressors; but they never talk about the emotional damage these efforts cause to children on both sides of the issue. They talk about the laws they will enact to deal with climate change by demanding nascent technologies and requiring electric cars; but they never talk about the financial burden these actions will inflict on the population.

    In a word, these people lack empathy.

    And without empathy we aren’t human?

    Good heavens. This sounds like Mencius. And The Abolition of Man by Lewis!

    Woo hoo!

    • #5
  6. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    The left loves Humanity but can’t stand humans.   I think this is because they can conceive of a perfected humanity, but they quickly lose patients with the flawed individuals that make it up.

     

    • #6
  7. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn:

    They just don’t care.

    Now when I talk about people on the Left, they do care about some things: they care about Marxism, power, systemic racism, propagandizing our children and controlling the narrative. When I say they don’t care, I’m being very specific: they don’t care about people.

    Of course, they will talk about creating a new society; but they never talk about the damage it will do to the people. They talk about teaching children about those who are oppressed by the oppressors; but they never talk about the emotional damage these efforts cause to children on both sides of the issue. They talk about the laws they will enact to deal with climate change by demanding nascent technologies and requiring electric cars; but they never talk about the financial burden these actions will inflict on the population.

    In a word, these people lack empathy.

    And without empathy we aren’t human?

    Good heavens. This sounds like Mencius. And The Abolition of Man by Lewis!

    Woo hoo!

    It sounds like I’m in good company–yes?

    • #7
  8. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn:

    They just don’t care.

    Now when I talk about people on the Left, they do care about some things: they care about Marxism, power, systemic racism, propagandizing our children and controlling the narrative. When I say they don’t care, I’m being very specific: they don’t care about people.

    Of course, they will talk about creating a new society; but they never talk about the damage it will do to the people. They talk about teaching children about those who are oppressed by the oppressors; but they never talk about the emotional damage these efforts cause to children on both sides of the issue. They talk about the laws they will enact to deal with climate change by demanding nascent technologies and requiring electric cars; but they never talk about the financial burden these actions will inflict on the population.

    In a word, these people lack empathy.

    And without empathy we aren’t human?

    Good heavens. This sounds like Mencius. And The Abolition of Man by Lewis!

    Woo hoo!

    It sounds like I’m in good company–yes?

    Yes.

    • #8
  9. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    The Left loves a collective group of people. They dislike individuals because they are messy and hard to control, especially when an individual disagrees with them. They don’t want to deal with individuals, and it shows in social programs that they want everyone else to fund. You might see them in a photo op in a soup kitchen, but that only happens when an election is coming.

    Mother Teresa appealed to individuals. She said if you cannot feed many then just feed one.

    • #9
  10. Caryn Thatcher
    Caryn
    @Caryn

    This is why war is so terrible and shouldn’t be entered into lightly.  Unfortunately, war seems to have been declared on the Right by many on the Left.  We (right-wingers, I presume) have been demonized simply for arriving at different conclusions, through logical (and emotional) means, given the same fundamental circumstances, but different first and foundational principles.  It has become impossible to speak to each other because we no longer share the same language.  This is a rather frightening prospect and demonization leads to just that lack of empathy you describe, Susan.  Also growing paranoia about the demons infecting (or whatever it is we’re/they’re supposed to do) society.  That’s an extremely potent and volatile mixture.

    Sadly, I’ve seen a similar thing happening here around Covid.  It is probably a post of its own and I don’t want to hijack yours.  Suffice it to say, it’s not a good look and is being used against us.   

    • #10
  11. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    When one realizes his side really sucks, he must either abandon it or cling more tightly to the notion his side’s enemies are vastly worse.  If one is shallow, ungrounded, and pathetic enough to need partisan membership to establish your identity and meaning, then demonizing the Other can become all there is.  

    If, for example, your side were led by corrupt, visionless, morally empty partisan hacks (say, hypothetically, people like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer) then your leaders would direct you to treasure the narrative that Jan 6 proves the other side is violent, ignorant and undemocratic.  You would have no qualms about an absurdly massaged “hearing” and cherry-picked videos and a broad condemnation of teh Other.  And you would even endorse the sick travesty of having the remains of a dead policeman lie in state in the Capitol so as to use his corpse (or, I think, his ashes) to advance the lie that he had been murdered by the mob.  The silly howls about Tucker Carlson are reflective of that sad but widespread psychological state.

    • #11
  12. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    When one realizes his side really sucks, he must either abandon it or cling more tightly to the notion his side’s enemies are vastly worse. If one is shallow, ungrounded, and pathetic enough to need partisan membership to establish your identity and meaning, then demonizing the Other can become all there is.

    If, for example, your side were led by corrupt, visionless, morally empty partisan hacks (say, hypothetically, people like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer) then your leaders would direct you to treasure the narrative that Jan 6 proves the other side is violent, ignorant and undemocratic. You would have no qualms about an absurdly massaged “hearing” and cherry-picked videos and a broad condemnation of teh Other. And you would even endorse the sick travesty of having the remains of a dead policeman lie in state in the Capitol so as to use his corpse (or, I think, his ashes) to advance the lie that he had been murdered by the mob. The silly howls about Tucker Carlson are reflective of that sad but widespread psychological state.

    So knowing all that, OB, does it somehow allow you to discover empathy in yourself?

    • #12
  13. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    When one realizes his side really sucks, he must either abandon it or cling more tightly to the notion his side’s enemies are vastly worse. If one is shallow, ungrounded, and pathetic enough to need partisan membership to establish your identity and meaning, then demonizing the Other can become all there is.

    If, for example, your side were led by corrupt, visionless, morally empty partisan hacks (say, hypothetically, people like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer) then your leaders would direct you to treasure the narrative that Jan 6 proves the other side is violent, ignorant and undemocratic. You would have no qualms about an absurdly massaged “hearing” and cherry-picked videos and a broad condemnation of teh Other. And you would even endorse the sick travesty of having the remains of a dead policeman lie in state in the Capitol so as to use his corpse (or, I think, his ashes) to advance the lie that he had been murdered by the mob. The silly howls about Tucker Carlson are reflective of that sad but widespread psychological state.

    So knowing all that, OB, does it somehow allow you to discover empathy in yourself?

    You’d think.  But how many of us really step back from what we know is wrong or harmful?  How many addicts of all kinds simply say this is bad and quit before more serious harms accrue?   How many MSNBC or CNN people found they had enough with foisting nonsense about “the dossier” or Hunter’s laptop?  For that matter, how many concentration camp guards said it was all clearly wrong and they had to quit?  The capacity to rationalize, ego, and moral inertia are invariably more powerful than we admit.

    • #13
  14. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    During the Spanish Civil War, the writer/pilot Antoine de St-Exupery to Spain in order to locate and, if needed, rescue, French people who might be in danger. During this mission, he met many Spanish people on both sides. He reflected:

    Let us, then, refrain from astonishment at what men do. One man finds that his essential manhood comes alive at the sight of self-sacrifice, cooperative effort, a rigorous vision of justice, manifested in an anarchist’s cellar in Barcelona. For that man there will henceforth be but one truth — the truth of the anarchists. Another, having once mounted guard over a flock of terrified little nuns kneeling in a Spanish nunnery, will thereafter know a different truth — that it is sweet to die for the Church.

    People’s worldviews are heavily influenced by their specific life experiences.

     

    • #14
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    David Foster (View Comment):
    People’s worldviews are heavily influenced by their specific life experiences.

    So very true. Our choices are not simply intellectual.

    • #15
  16. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    There is hope. There is always hope.

    • #16
  17. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Percival (View Comment):

    There is hope. There is always hope.

    I wonder how many friends are now falling away from Naomi.  

    • #17
  18. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    There is hope. There is always hope.

    I wonder how many friends are now falling away from Naomi.

    I waited for her to set the hook; to announce that she didn’t really change her mind. It never happened. She’s seen through the propaganda. She now knows that the government – her government – not only will lie to her but has been.

    Once you’ve seen that, you can’t unsee it.

    • #18
  19. Autistic License Coolidge
    Autistic License
    @AutisticLicense

    I often hear that the other side doesn’t see us as mistaken, but as stupid (which is permanent) or evil (which is nearly permanent).  

    If we see ourselves as flawed, it’s harder to condemn persons (as opposed to actions), harder to adhere to Master Plans for other people, and harder to see others only as representatives of groups.  

    On the other hand, flawed people don’t need to be soft on principles.  We just need to pursue principles without supposing that we personify them. 

    Pride is a sin because it’s an elective form of blindness.  It hides my shortcomings from me.  There are few people prouder or blinder than the career podium-thumper. 

    I can see the falseness in political hackery without having to believe I’m innately better.  

    Reading this over, it sounds very pious.  Please understand that I’m describing the attitude I’d like to have, not the one I often walk around with.  

    • #19
  20. Autistic License Coolidge
    Autistic License
    @AutisticLicense

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    The Left loves a collective group of people. They dislike individuals because they are messy and hard to control, especially when an individual disagrees with them. They don’t want to deal with individuals, and it shows in social programs that they want everyone else to fund. You might see them in a photo op in a soup kitchen, but that only happens when an election is coming.

    Mother Teresa appealed to individuals. She said if you cannot feed many then just feed one.

    In my worst moments I am a voice for the voiceless.  That way, I can claim to represent them without their permission ;)

    • #20
  21. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Autistic License (View Comment):
    Reading this over, it sounds very pious.  Please understand that I’m describing the attitude I’d like to have, not the one I often walk around with.  

    I think you speak for most of us, AL.

    • #21
  22. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    When trying to market something effectively, it is usually important to segment your base of potential customers and understand their buying motives, rather than treating them as one large blob.  This is as important in political persuasion as it is in the marketing of goods and services.

    One of the people I follow at Twitter, @michelletander, is a woman in the Silicon Valley startup & venture capital world, she defines herself as a ‘moderate liberal’.  In recent weeks, she’s been writing eloquently about the deterioration of San Francisco and how much of the leadership there is interested in virtue signaling but not in solving problems and saving lives.  She responded to one of those ‘science is real’ signs:  “seriously, what? That is not how science works, people!”  And when someone tweeted:

    On international women’s day, I am asking for a commitment from all the male check writers to meet with 5 female co-founded teams this year that meet your thesis, check size and stage”

    her response was:  “I find this tweet misleading & somewhat offensive. I’m a former VC. Every male VC I know meets with hundreds (if not thousands) of women every year. Your tweet implies that they aren’t meeting with women and I think that is categorically false.”

    I’d put someone like Michelle in a very different category from the extreme Wokies, despite her ‘moderate liberal’ self-identification.  And I think there are a lot of people of whom that is true.

           

    • #22
  23. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    David Foster (View Comment):
    I’d put someone like Michelle in a very different category from the extreme Wokies, despite her ‘moderate liberal’ self-identification.  And I think there are a lot of people of whom that is true.

    I think moderate liberals are actually people who for cultural or personal reasons can’t come around to admitting a more conservative world view.  There are a lot of people who have “actually woken up” to what the democratic party is pushing but can’t quite get to the point where they can work against it yet.

    • #23
  24. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    I’d put someone like Michelle in a very different category from the extreme Wokies, despite her ‘moderate liberal’ self-identification. And I think there are a lot of people of whom that is true.

    I think moderate liberals are actually people who for cultural or personal reasons can’t come around to admitting a more conservative world view. There are a lot of people who have “actually woken up” to what the democratic party is pushing but can’t quite get to the point where they can work against it yet.

    I hit that point back in college. I woke up one morning with radio informing me of President Carter’s latest misadventure and thought “dammit, I’m a conservative.”

    • #24
  25. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    I’d put someone like Michelle in a very different category from the extreme Wokies, despite her ‘moderate liberal’ self-identification. And I think there are a lot of people of whom that is true.

    I think moderate liberals are actually people who for cultural or personal reasons can’t come around to admitting a more conservative world view. There are a lot of people who have “actually woken up” to what the democratic party is pushing but can’t quite get to the point where they can work against it yet.

    That’s one reason why we have secret ballots. 

    • #25
  26. GlennAmurgis Coolidge
    GlennAmurgis
    @GlennAmurgis

    I would add the following to Susan’s list:

         – always changing the language (e.g. Latinax) and demonizing those who do not adapt.

        – Making every policy decision that disagrees with theirs are an example of Hitler (remember how many people were going to die from Net Neutrality)

       – Always pitting groups against each other (it used to be class, now it is race/gender)

     

    • #26
  27. Nanocelt TheContrarian Member
    Nanocelt TheContrarian
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    The problem with the Left goes very deep, as Susan outlines. The core concept of Leftism is that Humans are not Human. That we have no empathy. Or that empathy is a delusion. That we have no Humanity. (See Yuval Harari). And the point of Leftism is to deny and eradicate from all of us the idea than Humans have Humanity. The idea of Humanity, to the Left, is a social construct of Western (Judeo-Christian) Civilization that is invalid.  Empathy is to be destroyed.  Per Susan, to preserve empathy (as described by Adam Smith in his Theory of Moral Sentiments) is to preserve our humanity. Ironically, Adam Smith, essentially an atheist, along with David Hume,  denied the concept of a conscience, or a natural moral sense, and accused his mentor, Francis Hutcheson, of being a casuist for postulating such a thing as a moral sense in humans. He used the term “sympathy” as today we use the term Empathy.  But as we see from the devolution of Adam Smith’s idea of Empathy, that is hardly sufficient to preserve our Humanity. 

    Western Civilization is built on the idea that Humans are unique, possessed of something (awareness of being aware, essentially, inwardness, the loss of which Marilynne Robinson bemoans in her remarkable short book, Absence of Mind).

    The Left defines Susan, and me, and you, as possessing no such thing as a soul.  We are collocations of cells, of atoms, of no special significance. Accidents of Evolution. Errors in the cosmos. Interlopers. Entities who have no right to exist and are an existential threat to the Planet, if not the Cosmos.   For those of us who do not share their views, we are vermin, over-populating our habitat (Earth) and in need of culling, if not complete destruction. The Final Solution is hardly “final” enough for them.  Half or more of “Humanity” needs elimination.  The Jews were first and foremost to be eliminated because their entire history is one manifesting the concern of Deity for His creation. And that HAD to go. Now they are coming for the rest of us. 

    When Joe Biden talks about the “soul” of the nation, he is using that in the Aristotelean sense, eg, not as something eternal and transcendent, but simply as something that equates with the nature and characteristics of the nation. And he defines (along with the Left) the American Nation as something deplorable, to be fundamentally transformed, into a collectivist, controlled society that has no use for Humans as individuals with God given rights, with eternal souls, beings created by Deity and having some characteristics aligned with Divinity, specifically a capacity to know good from evil.  Gaia forfend!

    Our Humanity is going to be beaten out of us, or destroyed altogether, by the Left, if the Left achieves its desires  Do we lose our Humanity by opposing that effort?  

     Judeo-Christians are the target, because of what we believe. 

    You tell me if the Left is Evil.

    • #27
  28. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Nanocelt TheContrarian (View Comment):

    The problem with the Left goes very deep, as Susan outlines. The core concept of Leftism is that Humans are not Human. That we have no empathy. Or that empathy is a delusion. That we have no Humanity. (See Yuval Harari). And the point of Leftism is to deny and eradicate from all of us the idea than Humans have Humanity. The idea of Humanity, to the Left, is a social construct of Western (Judeo-Christian) Civilization that is invalid. Empathy is to be destroyed. Per Susan, to preserve empathy (as described by Adam Smith in his Theory of Moral Sentiments) is to preserve our humanity. Ironically, Adam Smith, essentially an atheist, along with David Hume, denied the concept of a conscience, or a natural moral sense, and accused his mentor, Francis Hutcheson, of being a casuist for postulating such a thing as a moral sense in humans. He used the term “sympathy” as today we use the term Empathy. But as we see from the devolution of Adam Smith’s idea of Empathy, that is hardly sufficient to preserve our Humanity.

    Western Civilization is built on the idea that Humans are unique, possessed of something (awareness of being aware, essentially, inwardness, the loss of which Marilynne Robinson bemoans in her remarkable short book, Absence of Mind).

    The Left defines Susan, and me, and you, as possessing no such thing as a soul. We are collocations of cells, of atoms, of no special significance. Accidents of Evolution. Errors in the cosmos. Interlopers. Entities who have no right to exist and are an existential threat to the Planet, if not the Cosmos. For those of us who do not share their views, we are vermin, over-populating our habitat (Earth) and in need of culling, if not complete destruction. The Final Solution is hardly “final” enough for them. Half or more of “Humanity” needs elimination. The Jews were first and foremost to be eliminated because their entire history is one manifesting the concern of Deity for His creation. And that HAD to go. Now they are coming for the rest of us.

    When Joe Biden talks about the “soul” of the nation, he is using that in the Aristotelean sense, eg, not as something eternal and transcendent, but simply as something that equates with the nature and characteristics of the nation. And he defines (along with the Left) the American Nation as something deplorable, to be fundamentally transformed, into a collectivist, controlled society that has no use for Humans as individuals with God given rights, with eternal souls, beings created by Deity and having some characteristics aligned with Divinity, specifically a capacity to know good from evil. Gaia forfend!

    Our Humanity is going to be beaten out of us, or destroyed altogether, by the Left, if the Left achieves its desires Do we lose our Humanity by opposing that effort?

    Judeo-Christians are the target, because of what we believe.

    You tell me if the Left is Evil.

    A beautiful, thoughtful comment. Thank you.

    • #28
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.