Why do they Do It?

I constantly see erroneous conjectures on why liberals endorse the programs they do. People immediately discard the upfront explanation and search for ulterior motives, because they cannot possibly comprehend the original explanation. It is simply outside their mindset, their mental horizon, that such thinking is even possible. This is an error. Liberals are generally well meaning people, they're just as intelligent if not more intelligent than conservatives, they've studied these issues exhaustively, and simply come to opposite conclusions. They are neither evil, ignorant, nor stupid. They are irrational. And as far as irrationality goes, 'conservatives' are just as bad. Anyone who believes in God, an afterlife, souls, angels, or any of that crap can never, ever complain that their opponents are being irrational. After all, there is zero proof of any miracles, Gods, spirits, souls, or anything else existing in this world. All we have is assorted old books written by people with zero scientific knowledge thousands of years ago. And conservatives believe it all, they just take these old books on their word, without rationally considering or criticizing a single portion of these lurid fantasies. If I wrote a book and put it in a hole, then dug it up and claimed it was old, they'd probably believe this new religion too. Oh, they already did that. It's called Mormonism.

Are we seriously to believe that the tower of Babel was about to reach the heavens before God struck it down, and that linguistic differences were caused by God petulantly just rolling a die and changing up how people spoke, instead of the science of language that has studied comprehensively how languages spread and varied, and their ancient roots, that exactly parallels human migrations?

Are we seriously to believe that if you don't sprinkle a baby's forehead with water after he's born he will be tortured for eternity after his death?

Are we seriously to believe that the whole world was covered in water a few thousand years ago? That all we needed was two of each animal for all species on earth to recover and multiply? Even though we have the genetic data showing far more genetic diversity than one giant inbred nuclear family? That a ship could house and feed the entire earth's flora and fauna for weeks?

Are we seriously to believe that a virgin can give birth? Or that people can rise from the dead, good as new? When have we seen either of these things ever occur? They defy all reality.

Are we seriously to believe we're all descended from Adam and Eve, created whole and fully modern from the Head of God, not from the rest of the animal world, even though we share 99% of our genes with chimpanzees and tell-tale similarities with all other life forms down to bacteria, such that we can trace the common origin of life on Earth all the way down to its foundation?

Are we seriously to believe that an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-benevolent God created the world and all the evil we suffer in it and an afterlife devoted exclusively to infinite suffering afterwards?

The irrationality of conservatives is mind-numbing. The same conservatives who claim we are 'fallen beings' and therefore governments can't be trusted, turn around and say humans are absolutely perfect so long as they don't work for the government and the free market would never do anything wrong to anyone. They wave around ridiculous claims like the free market doesn't use force, and therefore can't harm anyone -- even though the very concept of property rights itself is a use of force (If one person owns something, it means the government shoots anyone else who tries to take it), and companies are ubiquitous in their use of fraud -- just turn on the TV and watch a few commercials and you'll find that if you just buy X, you'll have sex with a beautiful woman today -- EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL. They wouldn't air these commercials if they didn't work. So when people say, "oh that fraud isn't important because it's obviously silly." Well, it must work on someone, because in the end it makes money, now doesn't it? They also completely ignore the fact that business works WITH governments to take money from both employees (who aren't paid what they are worth) and taxpayers (who are made to finance corporate welfare). So long as business has any influence over the government via campaign funding, they can simply buy the government that favors them, and therefore gain the full use of force the government supposedly has a monopoly over.

If conservatives set up rules saying the government 'can't do this' or 'can't do that,' they have no system that can stop people from changing said rules seconds later. In a democracy, who will protect your precious constitution from being amended, reinterpreted, or simply voted out of power by a corrupted populace? And yet conservatives fervently support democracy as some sort of holy trinity alongside capitalism and Christianity. Belief in universal democracy is also completely irrational. It hasn't produced any good results anywhere on Earth. There is no theoretical reason why masses of stupid people can make better decisions than a few intelligent people -- it isn't true in corporations, it isn't true in science, it isn't true in math, it isn't true in art, it isn't true in war, it isn't true in ANY OTHER FIELD OF HUMAN ENDEAVOR, but supposedly it's true when it comes to government, which has power over and controls everything aforementioned. So masses of stupid people are completely incapable of progressing science, but they are perfectly capable of deciding what science should be taught, what science should be banned, what science should be funded, etc. In what world does this make sense? In the conservative world.

Conservatives have magical double standards like 'terrorism' is wrong because it hurts civilians, but WWII was the best war ever because we nuked and firebombed hundreds of thousands of civilians, intentionally targeting them for maximum effect, in the last year of an already won war. They say suicide bombers are 'cowards' but think air force bombers who shoot missiles from miles away are 'heroes.' I cannot imagine how much bravery it takes to be a suicide bomber. I cannot imagine the bravery it takes to be a terrorist, with a few thousand people and a few million dollars, taking on our trillion dollar a year military machine with all the fanciest weapons the world can buy and hundreds of thousands of troops. Only a conservative would spit in their eye and pretend they are somehow 'cowards' while our 'brave young men and women' are 'fighting for our freedom.' Our freedom to do what? Invade and occupy other people's countries? Isn't it the terrorists who are fighting for their freedom from foreign occupation? You know, like any people on Earth would do if they were invaded and occupied spontaneously, having not done a SINGLE DAMN THING to the USA beforehand?

So let's make one thing clear, I don't think conservatives actually enjoy frying babies with incendiary bombs or burning babies in hell for eternity -- and yet they still endorse both of these things, and will argue vociferously in favor of both, whenever it is brought up. It isn't because they are evil, ignorant, or stupid. It is because they are irrational. For instance, if a program doesn't compile, it's because a single line of code is bugged. It has an 'R' where there was supposed to be a 'T' or whatever. Coders search for the bug, correct it, and the program runs fine again. At no point do coders imagine the computer, when it fails to compile, is 'evil,' 'stupid,' or 'ignorant.' When a gene fails to transpose correctly and we have a mutation, producing some horrible result like brainless babies, we don't call the genome 'evil,' 'stupid,' or 'ignorant.' When a fuse blows and we have to replace the part, we don't call the electric grid 'evil,' 'stupid,' or 'ignorant.' We basically accept the fact that things that are 99% good can have one tiny error, just one little thing awry, and it crashes the entire system. We also accept the fact that 'what can go wrong, will go wrong,' or entropy, the fact that everything is degrading and breaking and only constant vigilance and maintenance can possibly keep a system afloat.

The same should be applied to our beliefs. People are not evil, stupid, or ignorant, just because they are wrong. Odds are, they are 99% good people, whose system would work perfectly if you just replaced one fuse, one bad line of code, one copy number variation, etc. If constant vigilance and maintenance were applied to people's beliefs, they could be corrected in time, instead of run wild like we see today. But a culture that has lost confidence in itself and therefore will not maintain itself, or doesn't even know what a correct computer code/dna strand/electric grid looks like, and therefore cannot maintain itself, is destined to produce the world we see today.

What is causing these short circuits of logic, these tiny irregularities, these busted fuses of the left? In short, where exactly are people being irrational, and what tiny correction would be required to redeem them from the horrendous harm they are doing the world, to the productive and helpful members of society they ought to be?

Liberals aren't liberals because they hate all life, because they are illiterate and innumerate, or because they have low IQs. All of the traditional explanations for why liberals are liberals are self-evidently absurd. (Which hasn't stopped equally irrational conservatives from clinging to these explanations anyway.)

Why do they do it? Let's break it into groups:

1. Blacks: Why are blacks liberal? Because it gives them money.
2. Hispanics: Why are hispanics liberal? Because it gives them money.
3. Why are single women liberal? Because it gives them money. Furthermore, it gives them the freedom to live however they like, no matter what personal or societal damage they wreak on others.
4. Why are other women liberal? Because they feel bad when they see people suffering and want to help.
5. Why are jews liberal? Because they know, they just KNOW, that any discrimination in any form against anyone would eventually lead back to discrimination against jews, the most historically hated subgroup on Earth.
6. Why are white men liberal? Because they are sick of social injustice. They tend to be blue collar workers who could never afford a decent life in America without liberals' help, gazing up at fat cats who make more money in a day than they'll ever make their whole lives.
7. Why are environmentalists liberal? Because they see quite clearly that the world cannot support 7 billion people living at American consumption levels, and conservatives will not let them control population growth or conserve more resources.
8. Why are Asians liberal? Collectivism is in their genes. Conservatives insist on being individualists. Family is important to them. Christianity insists that you hate your mother and your father, libertarians insist blood is meaningless and only merit, not kinship, should define who you love or support. Why would they be conservatives?

Why don't they accept HBD? Because we have never performed a perfect experiment where all environmental factors were equal -- so how can we possibly prove anything is genetic? Furthermore, we have never found the genes that determine intelligence, behavior, or personality, so what proof do we have? Why jump to conclusions which, if true, would call for a rather drastic revision of all thinking and all morality, when we can err on the safe side and just try to equalize environments first?

Why do they believe in Global Warming? Because greenhouse gasses really do heat up planets -- just look at Venus.

Why are they soft on criminals? Because criminals did not have a perfectly equal environment as non-criminals before they became criminals, this while they are children so they can't possibly be responsible for creating a good environment, so it isn't fair to punish them when it's really society's fault.

Why do they do it? Because nine times out of ten, there is an element of truth to what they say. Because if you look at it from their point of view, it makes perfect sense. Why wouldn't they? Are you telling blacks they should willingly prefer a meritocracy where they will all be left unemployed and impoverished? Why should they give up all of their advantages to live in a pitiless libertarian world of competition with people they cannot possibly compete with? Do we think women would think it is fair if we got rid of women's sports and demanded they compete 'evenly' with men -- disregarding the completely unequal advantages men have over women in sports? Why would they eagerly embrace this? Now imagine if its your livelihood on the line, the very bread on your table, and not a sports event? And we expect blacks to hand that all over in the name of FAIRNESS? It's like demanding a cripple race fairly without any handicaps against an olympic sprinter. In what world is this considered a fair and equal competition?

Anime understands this conundrum so much better than America does. In anime, both the hero and the villain have an interesting, and correct, point of view. For instance, the villain will see things from one perspective, and bring forth evidence showing he is correct. The hero usually grants that the villain is correct, but usually has not taken a broader perspective that limits their narrow truth and amends it into a better, higher truth which the hero holds. In anime, villains are routinely converted to heroes by showing where their thinking has gone wrong, where they have 'blown a fuse.' Oftentimes, villains are simply people who have the exact same feelings as the heroes, but have had too many painful experiences to believe in humanity's goodness anymore, and therefore come to some drastic conclusion as a response. Heroes cry tears of remorse and pity for these villains, even while defeating them. They never once label them evil, stupid, or ignorant. Anime's morality is so far above our pathetic level of discourse, it almost hurts to watch American TV. In America, if a villain ever does have a motivation, he is always exposed as a hypocrite, a liar, a selfish depraved scumbag, etc -- such that his arguments never even have the right to be aired. They always include on the 'rap sheet' of a villain some sort of senseless rape or murder spree, just so the viewer is SURE SURE SURE he's a bad guy, and nothing he thinks or says has any merit.

In America, it's surprising a villain doesn't immediately kick a puppy and then skin a cat after every speech they make explaining their motives, just to drive the point home that they are definitely, absolutely, wrong.

It doesn't help that the usual response to liberal insanity is conservative insanity, which liberals can cut to ribbons within seconds. But whenever rationality is offered to either of these groups, ingrained moral traditions rebel against them. It is very difficult to convince people we need to force women to marry and have kids, that we need to abolish democracy and return to a nobility, that we need to redistribute trillions of dollars a year so that everyone has a citizen's dividend whether they work or not, that there is no God, that genes do matter and the gaps between the races are unbridgeable no matter what environment we put them in, and so on. Partially it is because these things have simply never been tried before in history and therefore no one trusts their chances of success. Partially it is because the results of these policies are draconic and cause pain. Partially it is just due to the momentum of historical patterns of existence that made sense at the time but no longer do. For whatever reason, simply telling the truth and being rational does not magically fix every person you talk to who is 'broken.' In the end, the only way to create a healthy human mind is marry a like-minded spouse and raise like-minded children yourself, start to finish. Even then the result is partially randomized. Marcus Aurelius' son was Commodus. The gap doesn't get much wider than that. The only way to create a healthy community is to find already healthy people, get together, and intermarry as a group, raising said children together in the mindset of their parents.

But people CAN change their minds. We used to think the planets moved on circular orbits, but now we agree they move in elliptical orbits. We used to think the world was flat, now we grant it is round. We used to think airplanes were physically impossible. Now jets regularly fly through the air and space shuttles pierce the heavens. Once enough proof starts circulating in the cultural discourse, the truth eventually prevails. It's practically unstoppable. Someday the genes for intelligence will be discovered. Someday low birth rates (or skyrocketing birth rates in the case of the 3rd world) will compel governments to do something. Someday dysfunctional democracies will compel a military coup or secession. And so on. Bad ideas don't last forever, because they are eventually defeated by reality or the competition of better ideas. After all, babies with brains can't live. Broken fuses can't light up neighborhoods. Bugged codes don't compile. Bad beliefs cannot uphold humanity. They just can't. It might be a long and circuitous route, but there's really nothing liberals can do to stop the approach of destiny. A good argument won't change liberals' minds. But when they cause a new dark age, the error of their ways will become apparent even to them.