Teflon Intellects

The below guest post is an?abridged?version of the original which can be viewed at?Red Pill Jew.

Leftists are herd-beasts. They move together. They think together. They studiously avoid thoughts that are not of The Collective. A former co-worker was, one day, ranting about evil?Conservative attacks on Planned Parenthood; he then commented: ?I don?t know anyone who is against abortion.? I raised my hand, and he sneered and dismissed me outright. That reprises the?apocryphal quote??I can?t believe Nixon won. I don?t know anyone who voted for him.?

They subconsciously insulate themselves from anything that might disrupt their already-extant views.??Their intellects are Teflon because nothing new sticks.??Not only that, they intentionally discourage anyone else from hearing anything outside the collective knowledge of the Hivemind

Take their utter hatred for Rush Limbaugh (and Conservative talk radio in general). For years I had heard only the worst about him. Racist. Misogynist. Selfish.?Hater! I very deliberately avoided listening to him because of what my peers said about him. One day I was radio-channel surfing in my car and I stumbled across a man talking. I didn?t know who he was, but he had a nice voice and what he said intrigued me. I listened to him, agreeing with most everything and accepting the well-laid-out persuasiveness of his argument when he identified himself before a commercial break.

I was utterly floored. I had been assured that Rush was one small step away from the Devil himself, but I?m agreeing with him. Rush had two books out The Way Things Ought to Be?and?See, I Told You So?so I bought them and devoured them. Wow. Even, at the time, still believing myself a liberal I found very little to disagree with him. It was then that I realized:?maybe I?m not a liberal.

There?s a far-Left blogger whom I read regularly. They and I actually agree on some non-political things, which is what they normally write about.??On those topics, my occasional comments typically make it through moderation.

Lately, though, and particularly in the wake of the Parkland shooting, they?ve broken their own rule about politics, guns, and religion and posted several columns about it.?Naturally, I?ve commented, with the majority of my comments being removed.??Even when my thoughts get through, they reply but my rejoinders do not.

This is now becoming typical.

One article praised ?edgy? art and specifically mentioned the infamous and utterly nauseating?Piss Christ?(I?m not even a Christian but I still took offence at it). I asked when they might open an exhibit with a Koran smeared with faecal matter or a hammer and sickle in urine. My question was removed.

Another article had a lengthy reaction of the local Fakestinians to Trump?s declaration that US law would be followed and Jerusalem would be recognized by America as Israel?s capital (imagine, a country having the temerity to decide what city is its capital and expecting other nations to respect that [sarcasm]).??I responded to that article by fisking the Fakestinian claims, with over 20 references backing up said fisking. My comment was removed.

Similarly I?ve commented on countless pro-choice articles, pro-gun-control articles, other pro-Fakestinian articles, pro-Left-wing-causes-in-general articles? virtually all get?disappeared?when my responses made strong points or asked uncomfortable questions that might force anyone with a shred of intellectual curiosity to ? you know -?think.

The conclusion is plain: Leftists intentionally spike thoughts that differ from The Collective.??The Narrative must be preserved, and uncomfortable thoughts must be kept from the herd lest anyone in the herd start thinking for themselves.??(That?s why they turn on each other so readily when one does stray; witness the vitriol aimed at Candace Owens and Kayne.)

There?s a great Thomas Sowell quote, which (paraphrased from memory) is a person who has tied their sense of moral superiority to specific beliefs cannot be debated.

And that?s what so many on the Left have done.??They?ve based their perception of themselves as good people as being founded on specific beliefs.??Thus, when you challenge their beliefs? (even only one) you are threatening their perception of themselves as good people.??This quote by Frantz Fanon is perfect:

Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.end quote.

It boils down to the Conflict of Visions, outlined in Thomas Sowell?s?excellent book?and well-summarized by Bill Whittle: Quote.

If you are good and virtuous, as the Left believes themselves to be,?because?you believe certain things ? pro-choice, the crisis of climate change, Israel (and America and the West) are evil, gay marriage and more are just fine, etc., etc., etc. ? then anyone and anything that challenges that belief challenges your view of yourself as a good person.End quote.

We Jews love to argue and debate.??Many quips outline that love; one of my favourites is ?Ask two Jews a question, you?ll get at least three answers.???Of course, this love of discussion/debate is not limited to Jews.??Several friends of mine, none Jewish, have gotten in my face intellectually and gone toe-to-toe with me on numerous issues.?Each time I?ve enjoyed it because those discussions have broadened my perspective.??I do not flee the field of intellectual battle, and almost always I?ve learned something even if I?ve not changed my mind. On more than one occasion I?have?modified what I?ve believed, or at least acknowledged that the topic is far more shaded and nuanced than I?d initially thought.??In other words, debate and discussion broaden my mind? why on earth would I fear that?

Someone who cannot debate, who flees discussions in the face of information outside the circle of what they already ?know? is true, and who avoids new sources of information is to be?pitied as an ossified intellect.

Consider the loss to society of countless Teflon intellects, unable to engage in discussions that introduce new information whether in the political venue, or the workplace.

What a loss.??Where might humanity be with that added brainpower working to solve problems in the ?marketplace of ideas? rather than fleeing discussing them?