Miranda Devine, The Daily Telegraph September 20, 2017
THE loving, compassionate left are in the grip of a mass delusion. They believe they are just and moral and the rest of us are evil. Not just wrong. Literally evil. Even when the consequence of their folly hits them in the face, they don’t see.
So you had Kevin Rudd saying he was a compassionate guy by ripping up our border controls, and we got 50,000 fake refugees on boats and 1100 drowned at sea. Nothing to see here. Move right along.
They lecture us about love while indulging in demented displays of hatred just because someone writes “Vote No” in the sky.
No loss of freedom, nothing to fear, they say, yet university students turn violent at the sight of an “It’s OK to say No” sign on a kebab stand, and people like small business owner Madlin Sims boast about sacking a staffer who hadthe temerity to express support for the No campaign.
Even though this behaviour is utterly self defeating, and has already cost the Yes campaign one million votes, they march on, blinded by their own self-virtue.
They say the only way to stop the drug epidemic is to make more drugs available. And when more drugs create more drug problems, their solution is make more drugs available.
They say its racist to stop people spending their dole on grog and drugs even when indigenous leaders beg for welfare to be quarantined to give kids a chance in dysfunctional communities.
When inevitably they lose elections because most voters don’t inhabit their planet, they pretend, like Hillary Clinton, that they didn’t really lose. Pretend long enough and even Brexit will go away.
Or when, like Angela Merkel, they invite a million young male Muslim asylum seekers without documentation into their countries, and sex attacks, terrorism and social unrest ensue, they pretend there is no connection.
And they get away with it, because the grown-ups keep waiting till the penny drops, when they admit their mistakes and logic reasserts itself. But it never will. Because if you believe that you are intrinsically good and those who disagree with you are evil, you can justify anything.
We see the price of bleeding heart delusion in Europe every other week. After the London Bridge attack in June, the commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police, Cressida Dick, proudly boasted of the “diversity” of the victims, as if this was a virtue that transcended death.
This week two refugees, aged 18, and 21, were arrested for a bucket bomb which blew up on The Tube in the morning rush, injuring 30 people, including children on their way to school.
We’ve paid the price ourselves, with homegrown terrorist plots committed by refugees including Iranian Man Haron Monis at the Lindt cafe, Afghan Numan Haider, 18, who stabbed two police officers in Melbourne in the name of Islamic State, Iranian Farhad Jabar, 15, who murdered police accountant Curtis Cheng in Parramatta in 2015.
Two of the men convicted over the Holsworthy Barracks terror plot in 2009, Saney Aweys and Nayef El Sayed, and Islamic State capo, Mohammad Ali Baryalei, accused of conspiring to kidnap and behead a random Australian, are all refugees.
Most were given the benefit of the doubt, even when they told obvious lies, as refugee activists screamed blue murder if any connection were made between terrorism and a border overrun by fake refugees.
What does it take for the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to accept someone is of bad character? (Pic: Terry Pontikos)
Even ASIO boss Duncan Lewis, who knew better, ran the politically correct line when he told a Senate committee this year: “I have absolutely no evidence to suggest there is a connection between refugees and terrorism.”
So when a convicted Palestinian terrorist who lied on his application to come to Australia had his visa rejected by Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, of course the decision had to be overturned this month by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
Almost a third of Dutton’s or his department’s decision to refuse or cancel visas, reportedly have been overturned by the AAT’s Migration and Refugee Division in the past three years.
What does it take for the AAT to accept you are of bad character? A child rapist, drug dealers, killers? No problem, they’ve waved them through. The feelings of foreign fraudsters take precedence over the safety of Australian citizens.
The Palestinian, convicted by an Israeli Military Court in 2006 and jailed for conspiracy to “cause intentional death”, has married an Australian woman he met on the West Bank, with whom he now has a two year old daughter.
The AAT reportedly deemed their welfare outweighed any risk to the Australian community, and medical treatment needed for a long-term illness would be superior in Australia.
Despite a nominally conservative government having been in power for four years, despite dozens of Coalition appointments to the AAT under both the Abbott and Turnbull governments in an attempt to weed out virtue-signalling leftists, outlandish decisions roll on.
If you ask ministers and ex-ministers, or even tribunal members, no one really knows why. Each case has its own unique logic.
So the mass delusion endures, soaked into the corners of the bureaucracy, impervious to the government of the day.
1/ Pic: Terry Pontikos
Hurt “feelings” are all any criminal has as an excuse, as the cause-and-effect facts are always against them.
Therefore they are also the only thing that ever matters to criminal (leftist) legislators, lawyers, and judges.
Since rational people get angry with criminals for their predatory choices, and criminals insist they have no choices because we’re all equally victims who should therefore tolerate the diverse differences between the kind of victim who attacks innocent others first, and those who don’t, they insist pity is always good and anger is always bad.
The meaning of life is to fix the mistakes and solve the problems which cause the damage which causes the pains we fear the most. There is no safety or security. Repeat endlessly.
And to do this, one must use one’s own natural pattern-recognition software to discriminate and sort through all the various symptoms of principles and all the divide-and-conquer synonyms criminal liars made up to obscure them; aka THINKING.
OR one can give up and become a part of the problem, gaining instant wealth by failing upwards because there’s no money in solutions, and popularity because people like to be tempted, coddled and indulged in being poor victims.
Logically all criminals demanding equality of outcome (enslaving their victims) must also demand that other people (their victims) must not hurt the lazy criminal parasites’ feelings!
Which leads to a lucrative career in championing “victim’s rights” (to remain irresponsibly wrong) by extorting their real victims: honest folks who tell them to stop being lazy & blaming others for their lack of motivation.
Therefore pity is held as the highest virtue, and anger as a vile sin.
Because in order to pose as a champion and extort one’s real victims, one must not only play the victim while accusing one’s own victims of being the real criminals, one must also insist that there are no real crimes nor criminals, because even if attacking “first and second” do exist, we’re still all too stupid to understand cause and effect, and so we’re all really only ever helpless victims, entitled to pity, and the only real crime left is to get angry and accuse “another victim” of being a criminal just because they got caught committing some crimes!
People like to dummy down their thinking to a basic binary “Good/Bad” rule emotive level. This pits the dynamic feeling of ANGER against the static feeling of PITY.
Encouraging delinquency is what ALL criminal and idolatrous leftopaths call “Progress!”
When Conservatives and Libertarians get angry at criminals and demand they make better choices, that’s “evil” to the delinquently indulgent criminally negligent leftists who then try to ban that righteous and productive anger as “hate” (the perfectly natural human response of perpetual anger at ongoing crimes). They prefer to do nothing in stead of risking themselves, and so choose to pity and coddle all the criminals as victims, and so encourage their bad choices. So in the end, which of us is truly evil? Which is the worse choice – anger, or pity? I think we all know the answer.
So to these thought-killing literally psychopathic idolaters, people who only feel pity towards criminals, are pitiful, and good and so deserve only pity; while those who feel anger towards delinquency are ‘hateful,’ and so only deserve hate and scorn.
It’s the most childish and lazy – and, ultimately hypocritical and masochsitic – stance of tu quoque “projection” they can take.
Most people are instinctive hypocrites, endorsing to and for others what they would never condone being done to them selves.
When confronted by anyone in any situation, being asked if they think ANYONE, ever, is either a criminal or a victim, most people will instantly and automatically choose to virtue-signal “VICTIM!” – because it’s easier and less risky than calling a potentially dangerous criminal out by accusing them of their crimes, and it gets to show off to others how tolerant and virtuous one is – all without ever having to take even a second to think!
Whee!
Besides, since the default virtue is to hold everyone as Innocent Until Proven Guilty, they get to pretend to be acting morally and within the law, too! So it’s win/win for them, every time! And they don’t care that what they’re encouraging is granting all criminals a permanent excuse state of ” Innocent Until NEVER Proven Guilty,” either – because they’re not in charge, not authorities, but can still pretend to be!
And unfortunately, this plays into the criminals’ Brazen Rule of Chaos, where, since all is allowed unless and until very specifically forbidden (which implies all rules can be challenged, cancelled or abrogated under different circumstances, including the mere passage of time) then the only crime is to try to prevent anyone from doing whatever they want to, to whomever they want to, and whenever they want to. This explains liberal defiance.
People are easily-manipulated by the most simple, binary emotions.
Since everyone accused must be considered innocent until proven guilty, the criminal left in stead focuses on the victimhood of the accusers, reversing the onus of proof by demanding that the defense has to prove a negative – “We don’t have to prove you offended and oppressed us, because you first have to prove that we aren’t victims!”
In other words, as long as we’re presumed victims, whomever we choose to blame and extort is presumed oppressive!
Works. Every. Time.
i.e: They guilt the politicians by emotively asserting that THEY are accusing them of NOT-being “real” victims!
If the politicians (and here I include the media) had any guts or preference for rationality, logic, and facts, they would insist:
“No, you still have to prove that assertion, with, you know, ‘evidence,’ not merely extortive appeals to our emotions, too!”
To reiterate: Leftopathic Virtue-Signalling Explained!
I don’t want to be angry with criminals for their predatory choices, because that’s “hateful!”
I’d rather pity them as fellow victims, as that’s less risky and only costs YOUR tax dollars!
The mere emotion of Pity = the highest Virtue.
The mere emotion of anger = the most vile Sin.
Whee.