ATEISTIEN SELITYKSIÄ PELOISTA
http://www.davesag.com/unabomber/2leftism.html
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.
7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology. (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)
8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They may seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to ours. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hyper sensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.
13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)
14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative," "enterprise," "optimism," etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve every one's problems for them, satisfy everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagohistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
18. Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.
22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.
25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a nonmoral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]
26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to conform to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human being inflict on one another.
27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals [3] constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most leftwing segment.
28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes [4] for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion aginst it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects most leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible," they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial- technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.
30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumbnail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.
32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.
http://www.davesag.com/unabomber/2leftism.html
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM
6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.
7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology. (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)
8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.
FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY
10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.
11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftish anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They may seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to ours. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hyper sensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)
12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families.
13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals) or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology.)
14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.
15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.
16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative," "enterprise," "optimism," etc., play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve every one's problems for them, satisfy everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagohistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.
17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
18. Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.
19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.
22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
OVERSOCIALIZATION
24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.
25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a nonmoral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]
26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to conform to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human being inflict on one another.
27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals [3] constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most leftwing segment.
28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes [4] for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.
29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion aginst it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects most leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible," they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial- technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.
30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumbnail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.
32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.
Vastaukset 12
Vanhimmat
Ateismissa heikkoutta pitää tehostaa jumalanpilkalla ja uskovia solvaamalla.
Ateismin ei pitäisi olla omia jumalapelkotiloja.
Menikö taas puurot ja vellit sekaisin? Ateismi ei ole vasemmistolaisuutta, eikä toisinpäin. Vasemmistolaisuus on poliittinen suuntaus, ateismi on sitä että ei usko jumaliin. Ja ei muuta kun lisää paskaa housuun.
Samalla lailla kommunistit ja ateistit pelkäävät jumalia, kristittyjä ja uskontoja.
Yhdistävänä tekijänä ovat samat pelkotilojen kohteet.
Myös kommunismi on jumalauskon puuttumista mutta kuuluuhan kommunismiin muutakin ideologiaa lisäksi.
minä olen ateisti ja myös kommunisti. ei minua kuitenkaan olemattomat jumalat pelota. kuolaavat kiilusilmä hellarit ovat kyllä hieman pelottavia.
kritiikkiä tuo minusta oli. Ateismi on jumaluskon puuttumista, eikä mitenkään politiikkaan tai maailmankatsomukseen sidottua. Tunnen palstoilta konservatiivisia/oikeistolaisia ateisteja.
Itse teksti oli huono. Leftist-proffat sitä, leftistit tätä, vihaavat valkoisia miehiä (!) ja Amerikkaa.
Todistaa pelkotilasta jota amerikan hihhulit tuntevat ei-äärioikestolaiskristittyjä kohtaan, jos ei kuulu kirkkoon tai ku klux klaniin, on automaattisesti kommari-ateisti. Sitä se kristitty rasismi ja pelko teettää.
Ps. Miksi linkissä on unabomber mainittuna, diggaako kirjoittaja terroristeista?
Ateismi on mielestäni totuuden vastustamista - ja koska laitoit tuon engalanninkielisen tekstin, niin sama teksti kokonaisuudessaan löytyy myös suomenkielellä. Kyseistä kirjoitusta luetaan kuulemma yliopistoissakin. Itse en todellakaan ole läheskään kaikesta samaa mieltä mitä tuossa kirjoituksessa sanotaan, mutta on siinä asiaakin. Ateistisen ääriasenteellisuuden ja kristinuskon vihaamisen syytkin liittynevät monien kohdalla alemmuuden tunteisiin ja epäterveeseen itsetuntoon.
http://www.geocities.com/aivokuume/txt/unabomberin_manifesti.htm?200826
Kirjoittaja on entinen yliopiston professori joka syyllistyi myöhemmin jostain syystä rikoksiin. Kirjoitus on helppo leimata kiihkoilijan hengentuotteeksi, mutta asia ei ole niin yksioikoinen.
Vasemmistolaisuudessa hyvää ovat mielestäni eräät arvot jotka liittyvät oikeudenmukaisuuteen ja heikommassa asemassa olevien puolustamiseen. Kielteisintä vasemmistolaisuudessa on se, että vasemmistolaisuuteen liittyy usein ateistisuus ja uskonnollisuuden - ja kaiken henkisyydenkin - vastustaminen. Arvopohja ei siten ole terve.
Vasemmistolaisten joukossa on monenlaisia ihmisiä - myöskin ideologiaa ja ihmisten hyväuskoisuutta kylmästi hyväkseen käyttäviä opportunisteja.
Monet vasemmistolaiset ovat asenteiltaan erittäin mustavalkoisia ja vastustavat lähes kaikkea mikä heidän mielestään on oikeistolaisuuteen jotenkin liittyvää. Ei henkisyys ole oikeistolaista, eikä mitään muutakaan poliittista väriä edustavaa.
Lainaus:
"15. Vasemmistolaiset ovat taipuvaisia vihaamaan kaikkea, mitä pidetään vahvana, hyvänä ja menestyvänä. He vihaavat Amerikkaa, länsimaista kulttuuria, valkoihoisia miehiä ja järjenmukaisuutta. Syyt, joiden takia vasemmistolaiset sanovat vihaavansa länttä yms., eivät ole sopusoinnussa heidän todellisten motiiviensa kanssa. He SANOVAT vihaavansa länttä, koska se on sotaisa, imperialistinen, seksistinen, ryhmäkeskeinen jne., mutta kun nämä samat viat ilmenevät sosialistisissa maissa tai alkukantaisissa kulttuureissa, vasemmistolaiset keksivät niille tekosyitä tai korkeintaan myöntävät VASTAHAKOISESTI niiden olemassaolon. Kuitenkin he INNOKKAASTI (ja usein suuresti liioitellen) huomauttavat, että nämä viat havaitaan länsimaisessa kulttuurissa. Niinpä on selvää, että nämä viat eivät ole vasemmistolaisen todellinen syy vihata Amerikkaa ja länttä; hän vihaa niitä, koska ne ovat vahvoja ja menestyviä.
Lainaus:
"18. Nykyajan vasemmistolaisilla filosofeilla on taipumus hylätä syy, tiede ja objektiivinen todellisuus ja väittää kivenkovaan, että kaikki on kulttuurisesti suhteellista. On totta, että voi esittää kiperiä kysymyksiä tieteellisen tiedon perustasta ja siitä, kuinka - jos mitenkään - voidaan määritellä todellisuus, mutta on ilmeistä, että nykyajan vasemmistolaiset filosofit eivät ole kylmäpäisiä loogikkoja, jotka järjestelmällisesti erittelevät tiedon perustaa. He ovat syvästi sekaantuneet tunteineen hyökkäykseensä totuutta ja todellisuutta vastaan. He hyökkäävät näitä käsitteitä vastaan omien psykologisten tarpeidensa vuoksi: ensinnäkin heidän hyökkäyksensä on vihamielisyyden purkauskanava ja - jos hyökkäys on tarpeeksi laaja ollakseen menestyksekäs - se tyydyttää heidän voiman tarpeensa. Vielä tärkeämpää on se, että vasemmistolainen vihaa tiedettä ja järjenmukaisuutta, koska ne luokittelevat tietyt uskomukset tosiksi (so. menestyviksi ja ylempiarvoisiksi). Vasemmistolaisella on niin voimakkaat alemmuuden tunteet, että hän ei voi sietää, että jotkin asiat luokitellaan menestyviksi ja ylempiarvoisiksi ja toiset epäonnistuneiksi ja alempiarvoisiksi. Tämä selittää sen, miksi monet vasemmistolaiset hylkäävät käsitteen "henkinen terveys" ja eivät hyväksy älykkyysosamäärätestejä. Vasemmistolaiset vastustavat geneettisiä selityksiä ihmisen kyvyistä ja käyttäytymisestä, koska niillä on taipumus saada toiset ihmiset vaikuttamaan ylempiarvoisilta tai alempiarvoisilta muihin nähden. He haluavat mieluummin antaa yhteiskunnalle kunnian tai moitteen jonkun yksilön kyvystä tai sen puutteista. Niinpä yksilön "alempiarvoisuus" ei ole hänen vikansa vaan yhteiskunnan, koska häntä ei ole kasvatettu kunnolla."
Kommentti:
En ole varma, mutta saattaa olla, että tekstin kirjoittaja tarkoittaa narsistisen luonteen omaavia vasemmistolaisia, jotka usein ovat hyvin älykkäitä, mutta luonteeltaan kieroja. Monet narisistit ovat älykkäitä, mutta aitoa sivistyneisyyttä (=viisautta) heiltä puuttuu. He pyrkivät kääntämään ja vääntämään asioita haluamaansa suuntaan, mutta objektiivista TOTUUTTA he eivät usein välttämättä halua kohdata.
Kirjoittajan mielipiteen mukaan "vasemmistolainen vihaa järjenmukaisuutta". Se pitää paikkansa nimenomaan ateistien suhteen, joista monet ovat tunnetusti vasemmistolaisia. Toisin kuin tekstin kirjottaja väittää, vasemmistolaiset (ateistit) eivät vihaa tiedettä, kuin siltä osin kuin se ei palvele heidän tarkoitusperiään ja etujaan. Ateistithan nimenomaan vetoavat materialistiseen tieteeseen perustellessaan ateismiaan ka materialistista maailmankatsomustaan. Henkisyyteen ja totuuteen pyrkivä tiede heitä sen sijaan ei miellytä. Järjenmukaisuutta vihaavat myös ns. tiedeuskovat joilla on materialistiseen maailmankatsomukseen liittyviä omia etuja puolustettavanaan (yleensä hekin ovat ateisteja).
Vasemmistolaisia on monenlaisia, mutta ateisteja on vain kolmenlaisia;
1. älyllisesti epärehellisiä
2. tietämättömiä ja ymmärtämättömiä
3. teeskentelijöitä.
Vai, miksi jyrkimmät ateistit sulkevat muunmuassa kuolemanjälkeisen elämän ja sielun olemassaolon MAHDOLLISUUDENKIN pois?
kirjoittaja olikin se terroristi. Mitähän kivoja tyyppejä siteeraatte seuraavaksi?
"Oikeuspsykiatri totesi Kaczynskin sairastavan paranoidista skitsofreniaa"
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Kaczynski#Motiivi_ja_tutkinta
Valehtele lisää, unabomber kirjoitti manifestinsa pommitusten alettua.
"Kirjoittaja on entinen yliopiston professori joka syyllistyi myöhemmin jostain syystä rikoksiin. Kirjoitus on helppo leimata kiihkoilijan hengentuotteeksi, mutta asia ei ole niin yksioikoinen."
"Vasemmistolaisia on monenlaisia, mutta ateisteja on vain kolmenlaisia;
1. älyllisesti epärehellisiä
2. tietämättömiä ja ymmärtämättömiä
3. teeskentelijöitä. "
1.On siis älyllisesti epärehellistä olla uskomatta todisteiden puuttuessa.
Uskotko sinä vaaleanpunaiseen yksisarviseen, jos et, miksi et?
2. Tietämättömiä ja ymmärtämättömiä jumalien ynnä muitten satuolentojen suhteen, vai samalla tavalla tietämättömiä ja ymmärtämättömiä kuin kiihko-uskovaiset melkein kaiken suhteen mitä ei raamatusta löydy
3.Mitä teeskennellään, ihmeparantumisia, lähimmäisenrakkautta, suvaitsevaisuutta niinkuin uskovaiset, vai mitä tarkoitat?
"Vai, miksi jyrkimmät ateistit sulkevat muunmuassa kuolemanjälkeisen elämän ja sielun olemassaolon MAHDOLLISUUDENKIN pois?"
Miksi pitäisi uskoa johonkin varmuuden vuoksi, silloin pitäisi varmuuden vuoksi uskoa kaikkiin jumaliinkin.
kirjoittaja syyllistyikin tuomittaviin tekoihin, niin eikö tekstin asiasisältö ole tärkeintä?
Kirjoittajan motiiveja en tunne - ne saattoivat olla osittain rasistisiakin - tai liittyä hänen työhönsä yliopistossa. Kuitenkin ko. tekstissä on paljon sisältöä joka herättää ajatuksia ja luultavasti se on havaittu myös kouluissa
jossa sitä luetaan.
Vasemmistolaisilla on taipumusta vastustaa tiettyjä asioita - ja usein juuri TOTUUTTA - ja kirjoittaja analysoi mielestäni paikoin osuvasti vasemmistolaisuuteen liittyvää psykologiaa. Eikä tuota tekstiä ole syytä väheksyä mielestäni myöskään siitä syystä, että kirjoittajalla on todettu skitsofrenia.
Mikä siinä oikein on, että te (ateistit) ette ota kantaa asioihin mutta leimaatte, syyllistätte, väheksytte, vääntelette, kääntelette ja kiertelette...Nähdäkseni syynä voi olla ainoastaan epärehellisyys ja motiivit jotka eivät ole oikeamielisyyteen perustuvat.
----------------
>>"Vai, miksi jyrkimmät ateistit sulkevat muunmuassa kuolemanjälkeisen elämän ja sielun olemassaolon MAHDOLLISUUDENKIN pois?"
Miksi pitäisi uskoa johonkin varmuuden vuoksi, silloin pitäisi varmuuden vuoksi uskoa kaikkiin jumaliinkin>>
Ei, vaan miksi jyrkimmät ateistit sulkevat kuolemanjälkeisen elämän ja sielun olemassaolon mahdollisuudenkin pois? - Kieltäminen ei perustu tietoon, joten kyse on asenteellisuudesta johon täytyy olla jokin syy - ja sitä kysyin.
"Kuitenkin ko. tekstissä on paljon sisältöä joka herättää ajatuksia ja luultavasti se on havaittu myös kouluissa jossa sitä luetaan."
Olisi mielenkiintoista nähdä jokin lista kouluista, ja myös tieto siitä millä tunnilla manifestia käsitellään.
"Vasemmistolaisilla on taipumusta vastustaa tiettyjä asioita - ja usein juuri TOTUUTTA -"
Oletko katsonut peiliin tänään? Sinulla on oma versio totuudesta, jos ei siihen usko on älyllisesti epärehellinen, tietämätön, ymmärtämätön ja teeskentelijä.
"Mikä siinä oikein on, että te (ateistit) ette ota kantaa asioihin"
Miksi sinä tulkitsit manifestin ateismin vastaiseksi, vaikka kyse oli vasemmistosta?
"mutta leimaatte, syyllistätte, väheksytte, vääntelette, kääntelette ja kiertelette...Nähdäkseni syynä voi olla ainoastaan epärehellisyys ja motiivit jotka eivät ole oikeamielisyyteen perustuvat. "
Niin, oletko katsonut peiliin tänään?
"Ei, vaan miksi jyrkimmät ateistit sulkevat kuolemanjälkeisen elämän ja sielun olemassaolon mahdollisuudenkin pois? - Kieltäminen ei perustu tietoon, joten kyse on asenteellisuudesta johon täytyy olla jokin syy - ja sitä kysyin."
Usko ei perustu tietoon, joten on varminta uskoa kaikkia satuja mitä kerrotaan, nehän voivat olla totta, niinkö sinä ajattelet?
Minä en usko, koska mitään syytä siihen ei ole ilmaantunut.
Itse olet heikkoutta, senkin kakkipylly!