Ideological Malware

Yesterday we called progressivism a monstrous ideology in the business of creating monsters. The first thing the monsters will say in response is that this kind of dehumanizing language is a call to violence. 

Perhaps we should define our term and determine if monsters actually exist. What to do about them is a different matter. I think we can all agree that Hitler was a monster. Nor do I mind comparisons to Hitler, except to say that very few people qualify for the comparison, e.g., Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot. It's a rather exclusive club. 

To even suggest Hitler was a conservative is absurd on its face, since he was a radical revolutionary who wanted to abolish, not preserve, the existing social and political orders. Nevertheless, the left never stops comparing Trump (or Charlie Kirk) to Hitler, even though Trump is literally an anti-Hitler:

In every relevant way, Trump is the exact opposite of Hitler. Hitler invaded Poland, France, Belgium, Russia, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece, and no doubt a couple more that don’t come to mind. Trump has invaded no one. Hitler murdered six million Jews; Trump is the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House, and has Jewish grandchildren. Hitler raised taxes and greatly expanded the powers of government. Trump has cut taxes and tried to reduce the scope of government. Trump is literally the anti-Hitler.

So, why the Hitler comparisons? Like so much of what goes on with the left, idiots and true believers at the bottom, manipulative swine at the top, the point being to get the idiots to do the bidding of the swine:

Groups of Germans tried to assassinate Hitler. How does history remember them? As heroes. If you are a loyal Democrat, and you hear your party’s leaders say, thousands of times, that Trump is the same as Hitler, what are you supposed to conclude? That anyone who assassinates Trump is a hero.

Likewise Charlie Kirk:

He has been ritually denounced as a “Nazi” thousands of times, day after day, for years, by influential Democrats. Why? Kirk was the exact opposite of a Nazi. I don’t think Democrats have so characterized Charlie by accident, or out of ignorance. I think they were deliberately trying to get him killed. And now they have succeeded.

*Ironically*, the left explicitly and transparently engages in the favorite propaganda technique of the Nazis, the so-called "big lie." That leftists by the millions have bought into the lie proves the effectiveness of the technique: people are more likely to believe a massive, audacious falsehood than a smaller, more plausible one. The sheer scale of the lie makes it seem unbelievable that someone would fabricate it.

Which implies that small lies aren't as effective as big ones, for example, that smallish lie Trump isn't a mainstream Republican, when the truth is he's just a Republican who keeps his promises. Plus, he's more of a mainstream 1990s Democrat, favoring tight borders, law and order, and fiscal responsibility. Does this make Bill Clinton -- or JFK before him -- Nazis?

I was around back then. Didn't conservatives demonize Clinton?

Yes, but I don't recall anyone calling him a Nazi or communist, rather, just a silver-tongued manipulator and general sleazebag, oozing insincerity from his pores -- more like Gavin Newsom. Obama too has the gift of vacuous bullshit, except that he sincerely holds radical beliefs. 

We don't yet know much about Charlie Kirk's assassin. What if he turns out to be, say, a conservative Jew hater who targeted Kirk because of his staunch support of Israel? In other words, because Kirk was an anti-Nazi?

I don't see how that can even be considered conservative, since the #1 thing we wish to conserve is Greco-Judeo-Christian western civilization. Animus toward Judaism is an attack on the roots of the American order itself. Our founders were well aware of the connection, and wrote of it frequently. There is a reason why the Supreme Court building has a marble frieze of Moses and the Ten Commandments. 

Speaking of law, yesterday I was reminded of Krauthammer's, that

To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil.

Therefore, if you think someone is merely stupid, ignorant, or misinformed, you go to their natural habitat -- mainly college campuses and newsrooms -- and try to convince them of their stupid errors. As did Charlie Kirk.

On the other hand, if you truly believe someone is an evil Nazi, the time for rational debate is over. You're not going to get anywhere by suggesting to Hitler that maybe he's being a bit rough on the Jews. Rather, you kill him.

I don't write much about politics anymore, but I still wonder about a hypothetical organizing principle or master key to left wing thought. For example, what is it in Greta Thunberg that makes her support both climate change fantasies and genocidal Hamas terrorists? And what do these have to do with "transgender rights," BLM, DEI, and other policies that unite the left?

What is the nature of the ideological malware that is installed into the leftist's head and makes them incapable of perceiving reality? Indeed, perception of reality is replaced by projection into it, such as the projection of Hitler into Trump, supremacism into whites, racism into police, toxicity into masculinity, malignant homophobia into benign heteronormativity, et al?

It seems that the malware must include both an ideological content and a "mechanism" that converts the content into the appearance of reality. What is the nature of this mechanism? It has to be something innate to the human mind.

It reminds me of how, say, a vaccine works, by "tricking" the immune system into attacking the virus injected into he bloodstream. Obviously the immunization doesn't have to invent the immune system, rather, just exploit it.

Analogously, the ideological manipulator doesn't have to invent psychological projection, rather, just exploit it. More generally, we are all prone to believing the worst of our ideological adversaries. For example, yesterday I was quick to swallow the story of the assassin's rifle and ammo being scrawled with Antifa and transgender messages.

No, check me on that: I suppose we should still adhere to the (at least) 48 hour rule, but the assassin is said to be "a 22-year-old antifa demon brainwashed by hateful leftwing professors":

The "cultural phrases" on the bullet casings turned out to be:

* "Catch, fascist"

* "Bella ciao" (a reference to an Italian song used by resistance fighters in WWII that antifa uses as military anthem)

* A confusing reference that is reportedly a tip-of-the-hat to the LGBTQ mafia's.... "furry community." 

So, ideological malware installed into the murderer's head and projected into Kirk. Mission accomplished, in that the actions follow the logic of the malware.

Another feature of the malware is to deny it is malware. Here again, the malware doesn't have to invent the defense mechanism of denial, rather, just exploit it:

MSNBC is deliberately misleading their left-wing viewers about the motives of the Charlie Kirk assassin.

The network claims there is "no theme" when it comes to Tyler Robinson's bullet casings.

He literally wrote "hey fascist! catch!" and Antifa phrases on bullet casings.

Just like there was "no motive" when a radical killed two children at a Minnesota church even though he had "kill Trump" and anti-Christian messages on the weapons.

And there was "no motive" when a 14-time repeat offender stabbed Iryna Zarutska and said "got that white girl."

What else is new? MSNBC has become an accomplice to political violence.

While, of course, projecting the violence into us. It's what monsters do:

The Democrat-Media Party Insists That It's Conservatives Who Incited the Murder of Our Most Beloved Conservative Influencer Charlie Kirk