Replies

I see the aberrant and odd behavior on the left, which I regard as mental illness, as a direct result of the inherent cognitive dissonance that is an unspoken yet vital component of Leftism.

George Orwell saw this clearly when he wrote his dystopian masterpiece “1984”. They even had a developed lexicon to define that cognitive dissonance and embed it in the thought process: Thoughtcrime. And the subcomponents, things like: “crimethink” and “crimestop’. The meanings of those terms should be frightening, and Orwell meant them to be.

Cognitive Dissonance is described as: “An unpleasant psychological state resulting from inconsistency between two or more elements in a cognitive system.”

I have long felt that much of what we see on the Left that we regard as insanity is fed from an unavoidable reservoir of cognitive dissonance that all Leftists have in them. (Important: This generally refers to the “True Believers” on the Left, who believe and buy into all the Leftist views on environment, social justice and racial matters...not the people who understand that Leftism is all about power and control.

A simple example is the price of gasoline in an economy where the price has been deliberately elevated to achieve a political goal.

As Conservatives, we can view the high price of gas, and come to grips with it. In this case, petroleum has been targeted for demonization, so the push must be made (in their words, not mine) to make energy more costly and less available. This has been done by making refinery construction impossible with environmental regulation, impeding improvements in the efficiency of delivery and lowering costs by opposing pipelines, removing land from consideration for exploration (denying leases) and so on.

All this we as Conservatives understand, so we don’t have to wrestle with it.

Leftists don’t have that opportunity. To be Leftists, they have to accept the goal, and nothing else matters, even if it is at odds with more fundamental standards of human behavior. The collective is most important. Which means, to be part of the collective, you have to agree with that collective, even it it conflicts directly with what you see as reality.

That is, you have to support the higher price of energy, and you have to support it for their reasons, which means you have to accept their means to achieve goals as necessary. If that means destroying the livelihoods or freedoms of others (NOT your own livelihood or freedom) then it is necessary even though you know it is a bad thing. You have to find a way to make it fit in your brain.

They cannot view reality and construct a cause and event in the same way conservatives can so this leaves them, always, with unresolved internal conflicts which they have to rationalize in order to contain them