Comments (29)
sorted by:
6
Junionthepipeline 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yes

4
Primate98 4 points ago +4 / -0

I would suggest a subtle but crucial change to the question, to wit: is Leftism caused by a mental disorder?

I would further suggest that it's not a mental disorder per se, but that their thought process fundamentally differs from that thought process which everyone assumes we all share (without evidence).

Anyone remember there was a horse that could do simple arithmetic? Greatly impressed everyone for quite some time. How could a horse think in a way that it takes a human child some years to develop?

Wrong question. The horse was not thinking at all in the way a human does arithmetic. Rather, the horse was looking for extremely subtle clues his owner would subconsciously give off when the horse reached the correct answer.

As I said, it took some time for someone to stumble upon this. That means all the humans who examined the situation were completely oblivious to that subtle form of interaction. Important lesson there.

2
HonestTruth [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

would further suggest that it's not a mental disorder per se, but that their thought process fundamentally differs from that thought process which everyone assumes we all share (without evidence).

Precisely my understanding, basically if the mental processing used creates rationale that is not logical or acceptable then there is a clear sign there is an issue.

As far as how to ask the question and to recognize what is happening in a given mindset is non trivial, we are left to study and assume, which clearly creates a large misunderstanding, such as with the horse.

The best thing we have to rely on is language communication revealing the initially mentioned lack of logical processing.

2
Primate98 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just so.

When given the opportunity, if someone really wants to understand what's going on with the phenomenon present before us roughly described as "Leftism", I always advocate that they should listen very, very carefully to what Leftists say, most particularly when they're "just talking amongst themselves". It is very surprising and enlightening.

Sure, no one wants to hear it and it's infuriating, but when it just so happens to come my way I mentally step back, put on a lab coat, and stare at the rats running around the maze. Which sounds bad, but then again they're the ones speaking aloud for all the world to hear.

For example, you'll hear them say contradictory things to one another, but just move right on because they're "on the same side". When pushed into a rhetorical corner, you can't ever detect the point psychologically "landing" on them at all like, "Okay, maybe I need to look at that one again." Also, they will never indicate an awareness of their own ignorance in any way, even with something as simple as, "Oh, I didn't know that before."

You'd think some "scientists" would have studied this all long ago, but "Asch conformity" is about the closest I know. I suspect that no one is going to give me a grant for it either. Why it's almost as if this "feature" of human cognition has been weaponized against all of us.

2
HonestTruth [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rest assured it has been studied for many ages. The entire conflict of man resides in the bowels of this design.

I like to imagine early human life, simple cave life for example, in this system we can assume that there was some form of leadership and with that it is likely that some form of 'might is right' logic prevailed, because mixed in this human is the desire to maintain self preservation. Given all the inputs we keep refining these control mechanisms preying on the weak and needy to embolden the forward direction.

2
Primate98 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ah, regrettably I see that we differ here. I have come to very different conclusions about the story of the human race, and how that story shapes human affairs to this very day. I'd link you to researchers holding a similar worldview to mine but there aren't any.

I'm sure you'll be seeing bits of it in other posts. I try to wedge it in where I can :)

2
HonestTruth [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Feel free to ensure I am looped in, I am always interested in new information and ideas.

As far as my current understanding or beliefs, they are based on the little information I have managed to collect thus far, and in saying that much of it is in flux on what is seemingly a daily basis.

2
Primate98 2 points ago +2 / -0

Will do!

And I can't tell you how long a period I went through after I discovered r/conspiracy, just scrolling through it every day and going, "Wait--what?!?!?" a dozen times.

The signal-to-noise over there has gone way down over time, so the silver lining is I can get through browsing quicker.

3
janglepuss 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think it's a result of deliberate programming. All forms of media in the West (radio, news, tv, movies, music, social media, etc.) are used to create a false consensus that far left views are mainstream.

Most people don't get their views from internal dialogue and a careful consideration of the potential outcomes of a given worldview or the adoption of a given set of principles. Rather, they simply look around them for cues on what views to adopt. If they won't (or can't) arrive at their own conclusions, the safest move is to just adopt the majority (real or manufactured) position.

There are people who have a real interest in the destruction of the West and they know that leftism is the religion of self-hate and self-destruction. Forget traditional warfare. It's much easier to foment decadence, degeneracy and despair among the majority of people who cannot or refuse to think for themselves. To set forth a rot from within, until the structural integrity of the pillars upon which a society stands is so weakened that the entire thing collapses.

1
HonestTruth [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Great inputs.

The reality is we are facing a supremacy system that seems to have a hold on much of the history we can easily reference. The obvious design is a representation of modern day survival for a given social group taken to the next level, where survival is about conquering all competitors.

In this system one would deploy any and all modern day ideas that can be used to benefit, for a system that has possibly been running for thousands of years to come upon a ripened age of tooling that enables conquest is an interesting thought.

It is an interesting time to live watching them deploy their war machines against culture and civilization while the world sleeps.

1
Enlightenment_Now 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's true.

However, I think there are layers.

Some become passionate SJWs because they've been abused as children and no one helped them, so they want to help everyone else.

And they look for an authority to step in where none did in their past.

Heal child abuse and you heal the world.

2
DregaN 2 points ago +2 / -0

"The hooters chick sign is hilarious "Nobody wants that' 🤣

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yes...but so is fanatic right wingers. Both are mentally ill. Just different illness.

There is no 'side' which doesn't imply a mental illness....it literally says you are different and unable to be like the other people because of your mental beliefs....

2
HonestTruth [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is a cop out. The reality is not everyone is living with a mental disorder. Just the people that have them.

To proclaim all do, is simply just ignorant and attempting to downplay the seriousness of wanting someone to control you, or any of the other mental disorders they display.

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +1 / -0

What you don't realise is that all mental illness is just definitions based on not fitting I with society at large.....

Ergo.....if society is mentally sick itself....you have a mental illness if you are healthy....but if you chose to consider your own values....you have a mental illness unless those values are shared by the majority....

1
HonestTruth [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is just more incorrect belief sets that you have been programmed to accept, it is not anywhere near based on logic or reason and perhaps this alone reveals your preference in believing what you write.

There is the slight chance* you are joking, and if that is the case, it is not funny.

Suggesting you have a mental disorder because you do not agree with the majority is the most asinine shit I have read in a long time, are you a leftist?

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +1 / -0

It was written under the satirical state of the world as it is defined by the DSM lol.

I think it is retarded myself, but if you look into the DSM...it's pretty much says anything can be a mental illness if you have an inability to corr Carly function with the world at large which implies you need to function according to the society at large to avoid having a disorder...and then if you look at what can be considered a disorder you realise it is a spectrum of pretty much all human flaws ... So unless you are flawless the DSM will find some way to link up a possible 'diagnosis' which happens if you are not able to function in society at large.

So technically it's true. Not that I agree with it. It's just how they process stuff these days....

2
HonestTruth [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yea, so basically written by the same people who suggest they can cure insanity by removing teeth, or by having a lobotomy, I generally do not adhere to such claims as they make them, for me to accept it, there has to be solid logic and reasoning behind it.

If someone was to tell me that what we are doing in the world is normal because they said so, I would tell em to get stuffed.

2
MindlessRationality 2 points ago +2 / -0

Agree there 🤝

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +2 / -1

I haven't met a person without a mental illness.....most are very small and negligible...but everyone has them.

Most people live very simple contained lives and they found ways early on to cope with whatever issues they have....it's only when the coping mechanisms break down that people declare it a 'mental illness' because they are no longer able to fit in with society.

But those underlying coping mechanisms are the only thing keeping the illness at bay.

1
HonestTruth [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, this is a bit of a stretch. Basically now you would have to proclaim that personality quirks or other such distasteful behavior composes a mental disorder. This is just a twisted way to view things, basically what we do is this.

As a human develops, they can pick from let's say a 'pool' of personalities, there are a finite amount in the pool, you can pick and choose as many as you like and mix and match them to your pleasure. You can return them to the pool or retain them and hone them for use.

At the end of the day a mental disorder should be reserved for cases where the mental processing one uses and the outcomes one obtains are not inline with logic or reason. That is a mental disorder.

Anything else is just making people uncomfortable and frankly, thinking one must completely conform to some specific behavior patterns is in itself a form of mental disorder.

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +1 / -0

You just made up a bunch of shit...and said that is hould be that way.....no reasons...

Sorry but your assumptions are not accurate...and you cannot assume that so easily.

You assume that only X types of people can. Exist.....so....already I have a problem with your simple assumption

1
HonestTruth [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

..... You need a rename. Mindless irrationality.

You clearly do not understand the analogy I provided which describes how human personalities are operated, I could care less if you agree, it is a statement and it is based on the experiences many people have had, for you to proclaim it is made up, reveals your lack of information on the matter.

If there we even 100 personalities, it is a very large combination.

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +1 / -0

And I fundamentally disagree...you can try to reduce human kind to 100 people types, but that merely shows your ability to measure 100 types....for another may see 20....and another 1000....

The idea that it is reductionist is flawed....you can model it. Sure....but it isn't the case....and is not anything other than what the model is limited to showcase.

1
HonestTruth [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Allow me to give you an example of the combinations available in a choose 100 system. so you pick personality 1, and then you pick personality 3 you mix them together, you are not the same as 1 or 3 you are a combination. So you can pick as many as you want and you can operate them together or separately.

As you can see, tons of combinations are available, but still constrained to some small number (100 is just an example, there is no empirical limit here)

Once you are traveled enough, to have met enough people you will understand this to be fact.

Implying you are highly likely to keep meeting some basic personality features embedded in people, but it does not disclose their entire personality capability.

This is far more complex than you are letting on.