Leftist Solipsism

Listen, if you dare.

In a recent essay I discussed the dualistic political strategy the Left employs. Today, I want to discuss leftist solipsism and how it explains their incapacity to see the irony in their opposition to men such as Donald Trump.

Solipsism is the idea that all that can be known about life is found within one’s self. For someone who relies on solipsism, their self is the center of their reality, and by extension the whole of reality. If they do not know it from knowing their self, then it does not exist. They determine the validity of an idea or concept by examining the self.

It is not hard to see how this becomes problematic if your goal is to have a holistic understanding of life. It is impossible to be solipsistic and, at the same time, have any sympathy or empathy for people outside of one’s internal concerns. Solipsism can certainly aid an ambitious person who might otherwise be less so due to selfless inclinations. However, it also makes a person ignorant, wittingly or not, of other people’s perspectives, and therefore makes them unable to understand how those people think. For a solipsist, their own life experience is the universal experience. This makes them unaware, or indifferent, to how their political beliefs and the politicians they support impact others who hold alternative views.

It explains much of the seemingly autistic leftist behavior of late. Note that I use the word autistic not in any clinical or medical sense. Just as autistic people are unmindful of social context, leftists are obliviousness to the political context of a situation, because much of it exists outside of their immediate world. They cannot appreciate how a political stance that benefits them might be harmful to another; and if it does, they rationalize those issues away to preserve their beliefs. Ultimately, this rationalization is based on a form of solipsism.

If there is anything the Left is not, it’s introspective. The ability to examine one’s self from a critical lens requires stepping away from that self so that you can analyze it dispassionately. It also makes it impossible to change one’s opinion or perception of things even in the face of contradictory information. Perhaps it is why, as Vox Day has declared, social justice warriors always double down. There is no other option for a solipsist who encounters resistance.

As any right-winger can probably tell you, the Left has reacted to the rise of Trump as though the likes of him have never before been seen in American history. He is simply carrying out a right-wing vision for America through the same political mechanisms his leftist predecessors have  employed.

The Left’s solipsism also makes leftists incapable of perceiving the blatant double standards they apply to their enemies. They cannot see the connection between their political activities during the years prior to Trump, when they were in control of the federal government, and the consequences now he has assumed the power they helped amass.

As Tom Woods recently put it.

The left is in my view getting pretty much what it deserves, after having brought nearly all of life under the purview of the state. Not one tear should be shed for them.

And the double standards are ridiculous. Left-liberals who had precisely zero to say about Barack Obama’s connivance at the starvation of an entire country — Yemen — are hysterical about temporary immigration restrictions. I don’t know precisely where on the scale of state enormities those rank, but I’m fairly certain it’s somewhere below starvation.

Ashley Judd’s ear-scratching rant in the video at the beginning of the essay is a reflection of many forms of solipsism. Not only is she a politically autistic feminist, but she cannot look beyond her own interests as a feminist woman.

A while back Rollo Tomassi at the Rational Male quoted an infamous statement by Hillary Clinton representing the height of gynocentric-based solipsism.

Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat. Women often have to flee from the only homes they have ever known. Women are often the refugees from conflict and sometimes, more frequently in today’s warfare, victims. Women are often left with the responsibility, alone, of raising the children.

Rollo explains that Clinton was wholly blind to men’s virtual monopoly when it comes to waging war and the indescribable suffering it often entails because the plight of men does not exist within the self of a woman.  This does not mean women are incapable of acknowledging how awful war is to the men who must wage it, often against their will. It means that to do so, a woman must be able to look beyond her own self. This cannot happen if they rely solely on solipsism to derive truth, facts, and objective reality.

The idea that men losing their lives in warfare would make them victims at all (much less the primary victims) isn’t even an afterthought; all that matters is the long term security and continued provisioning of women and their imperatives.

Rollo defines female solipsism as “female-specific obliviousness to any concern – or lesser prioritized concern – of anything outside their immediate existential needs.”

Solipsism regarding political matters is plainly seen when we look at how leftists speak of themselves in the aftermath of the presidential election. For any objective person with sufficient intellectual honesty, the only conclusion you could draw is that the world they describe is a literal reverse of the one that exists. This fits with another one of Vox Days’ rules on SJWs is that they always project.

In a follow-up essay, Rollo made another great observation about solipsism that equally applies to leftists.

Women’s mental point of origin (solipsism) presumes the entire world outside of her agrees with her imperative and mutually shares the importance and priorities of it.

As anyone who has proposed right-wing ideas to leftists can tell you, their response isn’t so much outrage or indignation but physiological trauma. That there are actual people out there who disagree with them, in contradiction of this long-held presumption, can cause self-doubt as to whether they have a proper grasp of reality.

With that in mind, perhaps we can see the origin and true nature of college campus safe spaces . For a right-winger, the entire notion sounds bewilderingly preposterous. Even if offered a safe space for right-wing ideas, they would reject it and find the very idea infantile and insulting. However, for a leftist, the purpose of a safe space isn’t so much a sign of emotional immaturity on their part, but an innate desire to protect their mental point of origin and the presumptions it carries, in which everyone shares the same values.

The idea that pro-lifers, gun rights supporters, pro-traditionalists, and pro-Westerners have rights just as much as leftists do, and those rights have been undermined and violated repeatedly in the last eight years, is not given a single thought. Leftists do not care that while Trump’s rallies were either canceled or had violent, criminal protesters attacking innocent people, Clinton supporters gathered without a scrap of fear from nonexistent right-wing mobs hunting them down in the street.

Yet, to hear them tell it, you would think the reverse were true.

Try bringing up this fact to a leftist and see the response on their face. Chances are, their expression will convey the rationalization process occurring in their mind as they attempt to process these undeniable facts through examination of their self.

To paraphrase Rollo’s comment above, the fact that Trump supporters did not riot or protest at Clinton rallies and behaved much more civilized in comparison isn’t even an afterthought; all that matters is the long-term security of the leftist agenda. The Vision they have for society is their highest priority and therefore must remain paramount above all else. Truth and reality are secondary in the grand scheme. They pretend to care only to avoid open conflict as the Right would prefer.

In the short-term, this has a very alarming implications for the future of our country.



This entry was posted in free speech, general political thoughts, political campaign, political correctness, president, presidential campaigns, society, The Matrix and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Leftist Solipsism

  1. Gunner Q says:

    No alarming implications here, just expressions of belief. We use words to communicate ideas, they use words to communicate bullets. They only talk to attack. Once the atheist believes good and evil are defined by government policy, the logical next step is recognizing that’s the same belief as “might makes right”.

    And so they kill, steal and destroy with desperate fervor, because only if they win can they justify their behavior. Hence the Trump tears. “I’m an evil, evil person because Trump won.” Sweet.


    • The Question says:

      “No alarming implications here, just expressions of belief.”

      Their inability to perceive things outside of their own self is what could cause a war. Even if they lose (and they would), I don’t think the winners will necessarily be better off for it, because it would require brutal measures.

      This is why you deal with problems when they start, not when you must.


  2. Pingback: Right-Wing Solipsism | The Anarchist Notebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s