By Mike Smith
22nd of June 2020
In psychology, cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable mental state that occurs when a person holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. It can be mild, but it can also cause severe psychological stress in a person. The stress normally comes when a person has fixed beliefs and at the same time is confronted with new information or facts contradicting the fixed beliefs. Such a person will then try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.
Nowhere is this more pertinently visible than in the indoctrinated Looney Left.
Their fixed beliefs normally did not come from critical thinking and evaluation of evidence, which they are usually incapable of, it is rather the result or product of years and years of emotional propaganda playing on their feelings of wanting to do good and be a good person.
In the end you sit with a mental case; a hypocrite, a parrot with horribly skewed and contradictory beliefs. Someone who doesn’t know right from wrong or reality from fictitious beliefs.
Their cognitive dissonance actually starts with their belief that there are no absolutes (Moral Relativism). No right or wrong…but at the same time they believe that their view is the only right view and everyone else is wrong. See what I mean? There is no right or wrong, but if you hold an opposing view to theirs, you are wrong.
This kind of absurdity is rife amongst Libtards. I actually gave up trying to convert them. Nowadays I believe that the only cure for liberalism is a bullet to the brain; a mercy killing to help them out of their misery.
Libtards and their views on race.
If you point out to them that Obama is half white, they completely ignore it. Try to point out that Obama is a liar, a mass murderer and an idiot in love with radical Islamists and terrorists, you just get a blank stare. Point out that Obama received the Nobel peace prize about five minutes into his presidency, that he never earned it and probably only got it because he was “black”, they call you a “racist”.
Obama’s presidencies were full of paradoxes. The charismatic, “Hope-&-Change” president ordered the bombing of Libya and Syria without a declaration of war or even informing the house killing thousands of innocent people. He ordered more extra judicial killings and drone strikes on supposed Islamist leaders, but in effect killed more innocent Muslims, even American citizens and children.
Under Obama, tortures of innocent Muslims at places like Diego Garcia and Guantanamo Bay, often resulting in death, increased. He spied on allies like Merkel , but at the same time made a nuclear deal with the totalitarian Islamist regime in Iran allowing them to continue their development of nuclear weapons.
Obama is no champion of minorities and darker races either. Under his watch 2.5 million illegal immigrants were deported. In 2015 when black racial rioters torched 19 buildings and about 150 vehicles in Baltimore, Obama called them "Criminals" and "Thugs"
None of this matter to libtards. They still reckon Obama was the best American president ever, just like they worship terrorist Nelson Mandela as the great peacemaker.
Ignoring the truth and reality is called “Confirmation Bias”
Libtards have a big problem with it. They only read articles and books that confirm their fixed beliefs. They only associate with people who share their fixed beliefs. They don’t critically question where these fixed beliefs come from. Somehow these beliefs became axiomatic general “truths”.
One of their fixed beliefs is that they are NEVER racist. However, when you point out to them that simply referring to Obama as a “Black” president is racist then you get that blank stare again. I mean if they were truly “non-racial” they would simply refer to him as a president and not even mention his race.
Simply using the word “racist” is “racist”. If you accuse somebody of discriminating against other races, then you admit that other races exist. If there were truly no races, there would not be any racial discrimination and “racists” would not even exist. You cannot have the one without the other.
Black Lives Matter?
Point out the racism in that name or slogan and you get the libtard stare. If you were truly non-racial it would simply be “lives matter”. Why add “Black” to it?
Libtards are the worst stereotypists. The will be quick to tell you that you shouldn’t generalize and stereotype, but at the same time they do exactly that when they speak of “White Privilege”… as if all whites grew up rich and privileged.
The left’s preoccupation with race
In fact, libtards, Social Justice Warriors and the rest of the progressive, Looney Left have a total fixation with racial injustices. They also keep the wounds of racism fresh and alive, and they allow liberal viewers to bask in cheap moral righteousness with Hollywood movies about past racial injustices.
At the same time Universities and the MSM, that are all Leftist today, highlight every shred of evidence of “racism” that they manage to uncover.
Societal disparities always have a racial stench to it. These disparities can only be attributed to “Whites” oppressing “Blacks” (all whites oppressing all blacks; don’t forget the generalization and stereotyping).
History has shown that as long as there is a “ Looney Left”, racism will never die out.
The more racial barriers fell over the years and the lesser open bigotry and prejudice became; the more the Left focused on the most mundane manifestations of racism, such as whites using the “N-word” or dressing in blackface. White girls aren’t even allowed to wear hoop earrings or dance in a specific way, because it might offend blacks…yet they refuse to acknowledge that race or racial differences exist.
When you confront them with the reasons for these Societal disparities then it is always due to “deeply imbedded racism” in society. “Hang on, but I thought you said race doesn’t exist?”
So if race doesn’t exist then there shouldn’t be any economical disparities along racial lines now should there?
It is an endless, dog-chasing-its-tail situation with libtards.
In my experience, very few whites are actually “racist” and the little bit of racism that is there exists in diluted form.
Let us hypothetically say that the people in Orania or Conservatives in the Freedom Front Minus are classed as “racists” by the Looney Left…
Are they the reason why blacks are poor in Khayelitsha or Diepsloot?
Sorry, but I fail to see how a group of people minding their own business on a plot of land on the banks of the Orange River near Hopetown is responsible for the societal disparities between the people of Dainfern and Diepsloot.
I fail to see how white girls not wearing hoops are going to solve this societal, economic disparity. I fail to see how demonstrating for BLM, looting stores and tearing inanimate statues down will solve these disparities.
If whites in South Africa are privileged and blacks are not, maybe the reason might not be “racism”…
Let us say it is “racist to use the N-word….How is whites not using the N-word going to solve the fact that 62% of N-word children grow up without an N-word father?
South Africa's missing fathers
But that is not the problem according to the Looney Left. “Racism” is the problem.
Is race truly just a social construct?
One often hears the leftist argument that we share 99 % of our DNA with each other and therefore the DNA that gives us racial differences are insignificant and can be ignored. Of course, they keep on reading material that supports their confirmation bias and any opposing view on race, no matter how scientific is automatically classed as pseudoscience.
Therefore, well researched books like “The Bell Curve” (Murray and Hernstein), “IQ and the wealth of Nations” (Lynn and Vanhannen) and “The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications” (Christopher Brand) are made off as junk pseudoscience. Even peer reviewed, academic journals like “Mankind Quarterly” are simply made off as junk science.
In fact, scientists with opposing racial views quickly find out that there is no such thing as “Academic Freedom” when it comes to race and they can get their funding stopped and their careers and reputations ruined. Professor Christopher Brand’s book was withdrawn (de-published) and he was fired from his job at Edinburgh University, a post he held for 27 years. Brand appealed and sued the University for unfair dismissal, and received £12,000 (in those days the maximum obtainable from an Employment Tribunal) in an out-of-court settlement.
You can download his book free at this link: The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications
Where does the phrase or statement that “Race is a social construct” come from?
Once you start digging into this, you quickly find out who the REAL junk scientists are.
It comes from none other than the thoroughly Communist United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) who in 1950 issued the junk statement on “The Race Question”.
The man behind the statement was a British Sociologist and a draft dodging Lithuanian Jew called Morris Ginsberg. Ginsberg himself studied philosophy, political science and sociology in the UK…he knew NOTHING of genetics or the biology of race.
Yet his view on race is today preferred over that of true geneticists like Dr James Watson, a distinguished American molecular biologist, geneticist and zoologist and the man who received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of DNA (together with Crick and Wilkens).
Dr. Watson, apart from being a genius, is also extremely race conscious. Watson has repeatedly asserted that differences in average measured IQ between blacks and whites are due to genetics.
Yet you will never find that view pushed. Just the unscientific UNESCO version which everyone thinks is based on scientific evidence.
UNESCO's original The Race Question of 1950 was heavily criticized and changed several times over the years (1951, 1967, and 1978).
UNESCO later published other similar junk statements on racism.
In 1978, the UNESCO "Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice" stated that "All peoples of the world possess equal faculties for attaining the highest level in intellectual, technical, social, economic, cultural and political development" and "The differences between the achievements of the different peoples are entirely attributable to geographical, historical, political, economic, social and cultural factors."
In 1995, UNESCO published a “Declaration of Principles on Tolerance” to add to its dialogue about racial equality with recommendations for tolerant treatment of persons with varied racial and cultural backgrounds. It stated "Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is fostered by knowledge, openness, communication, and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference. It is not only a moral duty; it is also a political and legal requirement. Tolerance, the virtue that makes peace possible, contributes to the replacement of the culture of war by a culture of peace."
The United States withdrew from UNESCO in 1984, citing the "highly politicized" nature of the organisation, its ostensible "hostility toward the basic institutions of a free society, especially a free market and a free press", as well as its "unrestrained budgetary expansion", and poor management under then Director General Amadou-Mahter M'Bow of Senegal.
In 2013, UNESCO announced that the collection "The Life and Works of Ernesto Che Guevara" became part of the Memory of the World Register…glorifying a mass murdering Communist Terrorist.
This is the organization that gave you, “Race is just a social construct”…with no scientific proof whatsoever, yet dismisses all scientific proof that shows the exact opposite.
Nevertheless, the question is how much DNA do we really share and does it matter?
When we look at different species and the DNA we share with them there are two approaches. From our perspective and from the other organism’s perspective.
For instance, 67% of our DNA can be found in mice, but mice can find 88% of their DNA in us. With Chimpanzees it is 79-98%. We share about 60% of our DNA with bananas and about 90%with cats.
Dr. Ellis Silver puts it into perspective and describes it like this…
“Our complete set of genetic material is called our genome, and it is huge. The human genome contains more than 3 billion base pairs. If you printed it out on regular printer paper using regular-sized font, it will fill a million pages. If you printed it on both sides of the paper, it would make a stack 82 feet (25 meters) tall.”
“We share 99% of our DNA with each other. The 1 percent difference (10,000 pages) accounts for all the differences between you and any other person on the planet, including all the different races. All of the different races are biologically compatible and can interbreed with each other.” (“Humans are not from Earth; a scientific evaluation of the evidence”, Ellis Silver, PhD. page 310.)