The Leftist Personality: Left-Wing ideology as a biological phenomenon

I have been noting for many years that the twin studies show political orientation to be highly inheritable genetically but have made only desultory comments about what in detail is inherited. The article below remedies that deficit rather well -- with detailed support from the academic journals

1. Defining “Leftism”

‘Leftism’ is characterized by ideas like equality, fraternity, “progress,” societal reform, and globalism. This manifests politically as support for feminism, homosexuality, wealth redistribution, immigration, and racial egalitarianism, combined with opposition to the family, nationalism, and traditional culture.

The rejection or embrace of hierarchy (i.e. inequality) is the fundamental difference between Left- and Right-Wing worldviews. Right-Wingers believe that hierarchy is inherent to reality and part of the natural order, while Leftists claim to believe that all men are fundamentally “equal” [1] [2].

2. Leftism and Physical Biology

Countless studies have shown that physical characteristics closely align with political orientation. AI facial recognition can accurately predict a person’s political alignment 72% of the time, outperforming chance (50%) and human estimation (55%) [3].

Taller [4] and more attractive [5] people are more likely to identify as Right-Wing and more likely to actively support Right-Wing parties, policies, and politicians. In America, Australia, and Europe, Right-Wing politicians are more likely to be physically attractive than their Left-Wing counterparts [6].

Men who are physically stronger are more likely to oppose wealth redistribution [7] and other forms of sociopolitical egalitarianism, even if they are poor themselves, and opposition to egalitarianism grows as men spend more time in the gym [8]. Similarly, men with more masculine facial features are more likely to support explicitly prejudiced ideas [9], and men who are better fighters are more likely to support warfare and hold “self-favoring” (non-Leftist) political beliefs [10].

In summary: Leftists are shorter and uglier, and Leftist men are weaker, less masculine, and less capable of fighting — characteristics that are not conducive to success in any human civilization.

3. Leftist Psychology 101

Studies on Left- and Right-Wing psychology have consistently found that Leftists are more likely to exhibit manipulative, self-serving, and generally antisocial personality traits. For example, Leftists have abnormally low disgust sensitivity [11]. A person’s political alignment can be predicted with 95% accuracy by observing their brain’s response to one disgusting image [12].

Despite Leftist claims that their ideology is “just being a good person,” support for wealth redistribution is best predicted by the psychological traits of “communal fairness” (egalitarianism), malicious envy, spite, being self-interested, and willingness to inflict “instrumental harm” (hurting innocent people for “the greater good”) [13]. The stereotypically Left-Wing behavior of “victimhood signaling” correlates with personality traits such as narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism (amoral manipulation) [14]. Victimhood signaling is best described as an emotional manipulation technique used to obtain free resources.

On average, Right-Wingers are much happier than Leftists. This phenomenon has been attributed to a variety of factors, including the ideological rationalization of inequality (“inequality is natural” vs “inequality is unfair”) [15]. However, the most logical explanation is that Leftists are predisposed to mental illness [16]. Numerous studies have found that Leftists are far more neurotic than Right-Wingers [17] and that White Far-Leftists are four times more mentally ill than moderate Right-Wingers. It is currently unclear whether Leftism causes mental illness or whether mentally ill people are instinctively drawn to Leftism. Both may be true simultaneously.

The psychological differences between Left- and Right-Wing people can be partially attributed to physical differences in brain structure. For example, Right-Wing views are associated with a larger amygdala [18], which is associated with higher emotional intelligence (e.g. reading facial cues or personal space) [19] and the ability to maintain more complex social networks [20]. The amygdala also plays a causal role in threat detection [21]. This data contradicts studies by Far-Left sociologists, like Alain Van Hiel, which claim that Right-Wing beliefs are defined by low emotional intelligence.

4. Left- and Right-Wing Moral Foundations

The Moral Foundations Theory, originally coined by psychology professor Jonathan Haidt and colleagues, proposes that Left- and Right-Wing people build their worldviews on five major “Moral Foundations.” Leftists are disproportionately high in the individualizing traits of Harm Avoidance and Fairness, but disproportionately low in the group-orientated traits of In-Group Loyalty, Respect for Authority, and Purity/Sanctity. In contrast, Right-Wingers express all five traits equally [22] [23].

Countless studies support the Moral Foundations theory, but one statistic related to in-group preference is particularly significant: White Leftists, who are by far the most mentally ill demographic, have a negative in-group preference, meaning that they genuinely despise their own race and will always prioritize the group interests of foreign races above their own.

A 2019 study investigated the self-reported “moral circle” of Left- and Right-Wing people [24]. Participants were asked to assign 100 “moral units” to 16 categories, ranging from their “(1) immediate family” and “(2) closest friends” to “(15) all natural things in the universe” and “(16) all things in existence.” The categories did not overlap, so points attributed to ‘higher’ categories (e.g. the universe) were not shared with ‘lower’ categories (e.g. the family). Leftists claimed to care more about “all natural things in the universe including inert entities, such as rocks” than they do about their own family and friends.

Leftists may well disdain their family and friends, but the information listed in section 3 of this article casts severe doubt upon the sincerity of their “universal love.” It seems much more likely that an immoral, narcissistic, and manipulative psychopath would use performative virtue signaling to conceal their malevolent and self-serving intentions. This is supported by new data from a 2022 study, which found that self-reported “good moral character” actually predicts moral hypocrisy, rather than good moral character [25].

5. Conclusion: A profile of the average Leftist

Using the data compiled above, we can construct a basic psychological profile of the typical Leftist. This will not apply to every Left-Wing individual, but it can serve as a general framework for understanding and dealing with Leftists. So, generally speaking…

Leftists believe that life is fundamentally unfair, likely due to their undesirable physical characteristics (shortness, ugliness, weakness, etc.).

This causes neuroticism and leads to self-obsession and spiteful envy.

They lose all concern for group interests and focus exclusively on advancing their own standing in society.

As they cannot get ahead in fair competition, they resort to underhanded, manipulative, and psychopathic strategies.

This manifests as behaviors like victimhood/virtue signaling, gaslighting, and other forms of coercion and emotional abuse.

To disguise their nefarious and self-serving aims, they proclaim a universal love for humanity, nature, or the even entire material universe.

They collaborate with other outcasts and potentially dangerous out-groups to exact vengeance on their perceived “oppressors,” by which they mean normal people.

However, they will happily betray (“cancel”) their friends and allies, who they value as little as inert objects like rocks, for social gains.

Leftist ideology can thus be summarized as an attempt to climb the social ladder via underhanded tactics, such as eliminating the competition by promoting “equality,” i.e. dragging everyone down to their level: The gutter. Leftism is a strategy for losers to take power and resources from winners.

The key takeaway is this: When it comes to Leftists, we are not dealing with honest people who want what is best for society but are tragically mistaken about how this can be achieved. Such individuals certainly exist on the Left, but the average Leftist is spiteful, malicious, and vindictive. They cannot be reasoned with or rationally convinced of their “mistakes” because they are driven by deep-rooted biological and psychological issues that, in many cases, cannot be resolved. Use extreme caution when dealing with them. They would think nothing of using the system to destroy your life.

6. Addendum: On Leftist ideological hegemony

Some readers have correctly pointed out that many “Left-Wing” people are simply indoctrinated into Leftism by default because it is the hegemonic ideology of the current Globalist regime. Leftism (or “wokeness”) dominates every facet of Western society: Media, academia, governments, corporations, and so on. Westerners are born into Leftism like fish into water, and many are blissfully unaware that they are under an ideological spell.

Genuine “biological Leftists” (often described as “spiteful mutants”) should be distinguished from the indoctrinated masses who merely repeat and believe what society tells them is right and true. Without the corrosive influence of Leftist hegemony, such individuals would be normal, loyal, and valuable members of society. However, the “true Leftists” would probably be just as vicious, defective, and subversive as they are today.

https://biopolitics.substack.com/p/the-leftist-personality-left-wing

*****************************************************

Pushing Back Against the Cultists

The media have successfully convinced millions of Americans that protecting kids from being “gender-affirmed” is a threat to their health and well-being. Even worse, many states have enacted legislation to keep parents out of the discussion to media accolades.

That’s how we know conservatives have completely lost the narrative to the gender-confusion cultists.

Of course, as long as the Leftmedia control the flow of information, they’ll always have the upper hand. For example, a recent NBC article makes victims of kids whose parents try to shield them from being transitioned. The article claims that Missouri “restricts the rights of trans people,” that LGBTQ rights are being “targeted,” and that more than a dozen parents of trans children in the state say the climate is hostile, with one histrionic parent calling it “a dystopian nightmare.”

We don’t think that word means what that parent thinks it means.

One family mentioned in the article is thinking about moving from solidly red Missouri to Illinois, where Chicago Democrats ensure they can freely transition their child without meddling lawmakers who seem to have a problem with drugging and mutilating children.

Just this week, the Missouri legislature passed two bills that ban so-called gender-affirming care for minors, ban men claiming to be women from competing against women in sports, and forbid healthcare providers from performing gender-transition surgeries. Puberty blockers and hormone treatments for minors would also be banned until 2027.

The state’s efforts to address these issues were in part sparked by whistleblower Jamie Reed, a former case worker at the St. Louis Children’s Hospital’s Transgender Center who, according to NBC News, “alleged the facility was harming children by not conducting thorough mental health assessments before providing patients puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy.”

One parent who sent her child to the center felt bullied into approving treatments that ultimately caused her son to experience significant mental and physical health problems, including thoughts of suicide.

Who could’ve imagined?

Reed, who describes herself as queer and politically to the left of Bernie Sanders, was appalled at the way children were pushed into transitioning by staff there. She wrote, “Many encounters with patients emphasized to me how little these young people understood the profound impacts changing gender would have on their bodies and minds.”

Furthermore, Reed described how giving estrogen, testosterone, or other drugs to children comes with a range of harmful side effects and that children simply aren’t able to comprehend the implications of these treatments. Reed added, “Another disturbing aspect of the center was its lack of regard for the rights of parents — and the extent to which doctors saw themselves as more informed decision-makers over the fate of these children.”

As the horror stories continue to pour out of transgender facilities across the country, it’s clear that conservatives aren’t the ones victimizing the youngest and most vulnerable members of our society. No matter what the so-called mainstream media have to say, those of us on the Right are these children’s defenders and protectors. We’re the ones telling them the truth.

Unfortunately, America is the world’s leader in pushing this mindless, baseless, and dangerous “gender-affirming” cult onto impressionable kids and their parents. In particular, the corporate media have locked arms and repeated the same phrases to convince us that “gender affirmation” is settled science and that anyone who opposes this view is a science denier or a transphobe.

What’s interesting, though, is that the rest of the world isn’t following America’s dystopian lead.

As columnist Wesley Smith writes: “It turns out that countries such as Great Britain, Sweden, France, and Finland — not exactly Bible Belt nations — have disembarked from the gender-affirming train. Why? According to these nations’ respective health authorities, the scientific data do not unequivocally support the gender-affirming approach, gender incongruence in youth is often transitory, and, further, medical interventions such as puberty-blocking and surgeries may cause more harm than good. Sweden’s national board of health just updated its guidelines to reject the kind of blanket gender-affirming approach advocated by the Biden administration.”

So much for “settled science.” This is more like mad science, and it’s time to stop it.

The good news is that more Americans finally seem to be waking up and taking a stand against these monsters. And not a moment too soon.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/97243-pushing-back-against-the-cultists-2023-05-12

****************************************************

Durham report: Russiagate wrongfully predicated, no real remedy offered

Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement in response to Special Counsel John Durham's final report to Attorney General Merrick Garland:

"The Durham Report outlines 316 pages of Obama administration Justice Department, intelligence agencies and State Department abuses during the Russia collusion hoax. The report vindicates President Trump, who was wrongfully targeted by an alphabet soup of agencies that resulted in nearly three years of unwarranted investigations. These included the flagrant abuse of the FISA court system, which allowed for electronic surveillance for almost a year of the Trump campaign, transition and administration predicated on nothing more than the wild lies of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC.

"It is disappointing that Durham failed to provide Congress with a reasonable remedy to these abuses other than former Justice Department General Counsel and former Twitter general counsel Jim Baker's recommendation 'for an official to challenge both a politically sensitive FISA application and other stages of the investigation' during and after FISA's ex parte proceedings. Trusting the Justice Department to not lie again is not a solution to the destruction of individual liberty that the FISA warrant abuses have revealed. Abusers of this system must be held legally accountable. Either all those involved were dupes, and future penalties for federal officials should range from losing your job and pension if you're too stupid to ask any questions about spying on presidential campaigns and/or significant prison time if you're found to have been actively attempting to change election results or take down an elected president under false pretenses with spying."

https://getliberty.org/2023/05/durham-report-russiagate-wrongfully-predicated-no-real-remedy-offered/

********************************************

If I Forget Thee, O Jerusalem . . .

Goy though I am, That hymn always gets to me. I will never forget Jerusalem

By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, and we wept when we remembered Zion.
We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.
For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.
How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land?
If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.
If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; If I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.

* * *

That psalm was the editorial in the Sun as Israel declared its statehood 75 years ago today. The declaration was the culmination of the revolt against the British mandatory power in the land of Israel. Today it’s being reported that King Charles III would like to make a trip to Israel — the first British monarch to do so — and that planning is underway. It would be a wonderful coda to the triumph of the Zionist idea.

We were put in mind of the question last week because Dominic Green, writing in the Wall Street Journal about Charles III, noted that no reigning British monarch has visited Israel, not even Elizabeth II, though her mother-in-law, Princess Alice, is buried at Jerusalem. Then a report in Times of Israel suggests that in respect of Israel a special feeling lurks in the breast of the new King, anointed with oil sanctified in Jerusalem and crowned with a hymn to Solomon.

The prospect of a visit by the House of Windsor to the House of Israel is one of those tricks of history that we tend to enjoy. It was the declaration by Lord Balfour in 1917 that conveyed Britain’s “sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations” and announced that “His Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Thirty years later, David Ben-Gurion declared one.

England, though, had frustrated the return to Zion with its White Paper limiting immigration, even as Auschwitz churned with its charnel work and Churchill spoke of Europe’s “darkest hour.” The white paper was a death sentence for many, and Ben-Gurion promised to “fight the White Paper as if there were no Hitler and fight Hitler as if there were no White Paper.” The Irgun bombed the British military headquarters at the King David Hotel.

Yet the Irgun’s leader, Menachem Begin, and the future king eventually enjoyed warm relations. We glimpsed this in 1982, when we, then with the Wall Street Journal, interviewed Begin in Jerusalem. When the name of Prince Charles came up, Begin, by then a Nobel laureate in peace, told us that he had sent, on the birth of Prince William, a friendly note of congratulations to the new father and future king.

Suddenly, Begin turned to his famed secretary, Yechiel Kadashai, and asked him to fetch the letter that had come back. It turned out to be a very friendly note from Charles, and his wife, Princess Diana. When Kadashai returned with the letter, it was passed around with great pride by the premier who had once topped a wanted poster of the British Mandate. It was a short but warm note, signed “Charles” and “Diana.”

As a prince, Charles twice visited Israel, for the funerals of Prime Minister Rabin and President Peres. William, now Prince of Wales and heir, paid the first official royal visit to Israel, where the Jewish state’s then-president, Reuven Rivlin, greeted him as “prince and a pilgrim.” He prayed at the Western Wall, but feet from where Zadok, invoked in the coronation service, would have sauntered in his priestly vestments.

The words of the psalm above, among the most famous ever, were written by King David. When they were reprinted in the Sun, no headline was appended or needed. Two days later, the Sun issued its editorial declaring that the “civilized world must see to it that” the Jews of Palestine be given “every fair chance” to defend “the most glorious event in some 2,000 years of history.” It was, they did, and it is, among other things, a stage set for a king.

https://www.nysun.com/article/if-i-forget-thee-o-jerusalem ?

****************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*****************************************