These people are rabid. A bunch of rabidals.

PC and Pop Culture turn off their minds and turn on their hysteria. They are afraid of reason and thought. They love the sound of their own barking and growling.

They are logophobes. They fear logic and thought.

In the end, people prefer FEELING RIGHT than being right. Of course, people want to be both Feel Right and Be Right. But once their emotions become invested with a certain view of the world, their feeling of rightness becomes invested with that perception of the world. Rightness leads to righteousness, and righteousness makes them feel good and morally superior. So, righteousness comes to trump rightness. If new findings were to challenge the rightness of their views, it means they will also threaten their sense of righteousness. Righteousness is so crucial to their self-image that they prefer righteousness by clinging to disproved truths than new-and-improved rightness that requires them to let go of their righteousness(associated with what was once thought to be true but has since been proven false).

And this is a problem not only of the ‘left’ but of ‘right’, not only of religious folks but secular ideological folks. This is why the story of Galileo isn’t so much about science but pride and righteousness(and thus can be applied universally, indeed even against scientists who prefer dogmatism over facts). The Church wasn’t opposed to astronomy per se. What it found as unacceptable was this discovery that totally overturned the much vaunted pride and expertise of the Church.

People want to feel justified, and this is not necessarily a bad thing. It is a good thing and the basis of moral sense. It’s like what the old timer says in RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY: “I want to enter my house justified.”

https://books.google.com/books?id=sk81WCRMP8sC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&dq=%22I+want+to+enter+my+house+justified.%22+ride+the+high+country&source=bl&ots=T56Tg0FdwI&sig=zU75wUlo24661fcxKH-7rOhonsU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiz7qXeoYHSAhUB7oMKHapNB6oQ6AEIJzAC#v=onepage&q=%22I%20want%20to%20enter%20my%20house%20justified.%22%20ride%20the%20high%20country&f=false

But once a person’s sense of justified-ness becomes associated with a certain worldview, it is difficult to let it go because the loss of that worldview also means loss of one’s sense of justified-ness. (For older people, it means the thing that lent meaning to their whole life had been false. Their entire life’s struggle or crusade was based on a myth. For young people, who are still emotionally immature and easily made fanatical, it means their pure youthful passion is based on BS, thus a joke.) This is why we can easily change our minds about things that don’t affect our righteousness. Suppose we long believed that hyenas are closely related to dogs. But then, we read an article that says hyenas are actually closer to cats than dogs. Okay, we say, and we go with that, the new fact. I mean who cares.

But suppose we not only believed that hyenas are closely related to dogs but staked our reputation and pride on that ‘fact’. We went around acting like we know so much about zoology and lectured about hyenas being dog-like, etc. Now, if we were to come upon an article that says otherwise, we would find our emotions resisting this fact. It ‘offends’ and threatens our sense of pride and justified-ness.

It’s like an argument I had long ago on bears. The kid was very knowledgeable and said grizzlies and brown bears are separate species of bears, and I said they are of the same species. The reason why it became somewhat emotional is because I considered myself a bear expert, and he thought he know so much about biology and zoology. So, our sense of righteousness was at stake. I told him to go to the library and check the facts and then admit he’s wrong. So, a week passes, a month passes, but he says nothing about it. He dared not bring it up because I WAS RIGHT!!! Sumfabitch was too shamefaced to admit it, and I had to press him on it before he finally admitted I was right. So, what could have been a dry objective discussion turned into a subjective one as well cuz our pride-of-knowledge was at stake.

Academia is supposed to be the mandarin and brahmin class. It is supposed to be the bastion of truth and facts. Over the yrs, it’s been taken over by PC-meisters who are convinced that they are totally right, and the debate is over, so either repeat after me or AH SHADDAP!! Is it any wonder that Berkeley is not a SHUT UP ZONE? It’s run by Shutters.

This PC is not some dry academic assertion but impassioned and righteous declaration of expertise and truth. They know, they know so much, and we better obey because they know and we don’t. What we know must follow what they know because they are so justified with higher knowledge.

Anti-PC voices that dare speak the truth or deviate from the narrative or talk back(instead of just shutting up and then repeating their mantras) threaten their ‘sanctuary cities’ of PC.

PC is so untrue that it needs to be protected from the truth(that ruthlessly attacks BS). Truth shows no mercy when it encounters falsehood. It is fitting that both PC and illegal aliens are united in Berkeley. Both have no legitimacy under the truth or the law. So, they violently strike out against any truth or law that might seep in to prick the bubble. (Shia Laboof says “You will not divide us”, but it is the Truth that has a unifying effect on all those who embrace falsehood. They all feel threatened by it. Trump is actually a unifier of his enemies since, being so full of lies, they can only find unity in their shared fear of truth and sanity.)

And it’s not just about professional security or economic advantage(of being an illegal in the US, which sure beats being back home in a poorer nation). It’s about addiction to righteousness. Because PC has made certain people — prog academics, globo media types, illegals, non-whites, and white cucks — feel so justified and righteous in their worldview, they fear any countervailing view that may take away their security blanket of sanctimony and moral narcissism. After all, if progs and non-whites were ever to face reality, the consequences wouldn’t only be necessity of adjustment in their factual or intellectual worldview. The shocks would be emotional and ‘spiritual’ since the very thing that makes them feel SO JUSTIFIED, PROUD, AND RIGHTEOUS would be taken from them.

This was why it was so difficult for Marxist true-believers to let go of their ideology. It wasn’t simply about changing their minds about some dry academic theory but about losing the very thing that lent moral and spiritual meaning to their lives and made them feel justified and righteous and morally superior to those who didn’t agree.

Some ideas have more moralistic content than others.

Argument about taxes among capitalists has some moral argument but not much. Suppose one capitalist leans more to libertarianism while the other leans more to social-democracy. So, both believe in the usefulness of capitalism, but the libertarian believes it is less moral for the big government to impose high taxes(and violate individualism) whereas the social-democrat believes it is more moral for the state to adjust tax rates so that rich pay more for the collective good. They may disagree, but it’s not a life-and-death struggle. They are not gonna want to kill each other over it.

But Marxism came with high moral content. It condemned capitalism as greedy, exploitative, and unjust. And it portrayed the proletariat as a noble historical force of honest toiling workers. So, anyone who came under its spell felt intensely righteous and justified, like Jews with the Covenant and Commandments. Also, because Marxism claimed to be ‘scientific’ and intellectual, it instilled its believers with a sense of pride. They KNEW and UNDERSTOOD what the dummies and ignorami didn’t.

Marxism and Communism lasted as long as they did because of this sense of righteousness. One might say communism didn’t last long — it rose and fell in the 20th century — , but considering its failure as an economic idea, it is surprising that it lasted as long as it did. By facts and reason, communism shouldn’t have lasted 10 yrs. But it made its adherents feel so righteous and proud to be associated with a great moral and scientific system of ideas. They clung to it because of its emotional content.

So, even when Marxism finally died, its ‘moralistic’ content of righteousness and pride remained and latched onto new causes like homomania and global-warming-scare and cult of ‘inclusion’. What is called ‘cultural marxism’ is really ’emotional marxism’, a need to feel righteous, justified, and proud. Such emotions feel threatened by anything that undermines their worldview. This is why the Progs see Free Speech as a threat and ‘hate speech’. Truth hates their bubble. PC is bubble as bible.

💖 Woes is so cute.. and that voice is dreamy.

That’s just what they said in Rhodesia … then they got hungry.

The Scots.Irish were at the heart of the making of the American dream.The Celtic thought process is inclusive of other cultures but deeply resistant to 5th columnists that would hijack self determination.I live in the UK.We are principally a Celtic Nation.We should stand up for our race ,our values and principles against those malignant forces that would depose our White heritage in North America and Europe.