by Justin Deschamps
In a short video, Paul Joseph Watson exposes the illogical and outright wrong fallacies of the emerging radical left. The left has historically been associated with liberalism, social equality, and egalitarianism (the ideal of fairness in society). Leftists should ostensibly be rallying to support the downtrodden and disenfranchised (across all walks of life), those who were the victims of hatred, violence, and oppression. But a new brand of leftism is sweeping the world. Within this movement, respect for others, tolerance and non-violence rhetoric is uttered, but what actually happens during events contradicts these ideals. This neo-leftist radical movement has been gathering support and is diametrically opposed to traditional leftism, seemingly unbeknownst to its members. In effect, the left is being deceived into accepting increasingly radical and violent methods for promoting their often irrational and unrealistic views on the world—largely founded on globalist propaganda. Younger generations being swept up into mobs that act with intolerance and violence while in the same breath crying for an end to intolerance and violence.
When Tolerance Becomes Hate
In other words—and I mean this with all due respect to my fellow human beings and spiritual brothers and sisters—the radical left, on the one hand, promote tolerance, fairness, an end to prejudice, racism, and bigotry. But in executing their agenda, they use hate, prejudice, bigotry, and racism—although this isn’t apparent to the vast majority of proponents or the sleeping masses. The hypocrisy pouring out of this emerging movement is palpable for anyone who has the capacity to think critically and discern reality first hand.
The fact of the matter is, only a person incapable of seeing the incongruity of their actions would continue to participate in such a hypocritical venture. Of course, unless the precept of “do as I say, not as I do” is a founding tenet of this movement—which would make a lot of sense.
But seriously, what is more likely the case is that there are swaths of well-intentioned people who, due to their unmastered and immature consciousness, are being used as pawns in a game of global domination and control.
Here’s the video by Watson.
Now to be clear, I am not saying all Democrats, feminists or liberals are contradictory, irrational, and hypocritical—only a portion of self-identified liberals seem to be radicalized into acting with intolerance and hatred.
Anti-Trump Violence, Intolerance, and Hatred
Most of the radicalized liberals assume Trump supporters are racists, bigots, and anti-women. And a rash of anti-Trump violence has spread within this group of perception-distorted anti-Trumpers.
Shortly after the election, a ten-year-old boy was violently beaten by his peers for voting for Trump in a mock election at school.
11-Yr-Old Boy Attacked at School & Put in Crutches for Voting Trump in Mock Election
And who are the real fascists right now? pic.twitter.com/8hYwpLkeEU
— Pamela Moore (@Pamela_Moore13) November 11, 2016
A California girl named Jade Armenio was attacked by her peers for posting her support for Trump on Instagram.
And in early January of this year, four anti-Trumpers kidnapped a mentally disabled man, torturing him live on Facebook for over a half hour.
Of course, these cases cannot be used to characterize everyone in the growing radical left. But they do provide a source of raw data for deductions about the psychology of such individuals to be made.
And finally, in what could be the most blatant example of hypocrisy on the part of U.S. law enforcement, Madonna spoke at the March saying that she thought “long and hard about blowing up the Whitehouse.”
Madonna, in an indirect way, is effectively rallying the crowd to commit an act of terrorism, although she doesn’t say this explicitly. Through her status of celebrity, she influenced those there, cementing their anti-Trump views.
In this way, Trump has become a poster child for a radicalized leftist who attributes to the newly elected president the status of arch villain, who is somehow responsible for all manner of evils. And yet, the group also supports Sharia law and Islamic traditions that are arguably the most oppressive policies towards women on the planet.
Clearly, there is a serious amount of cognitive dissonance at play, something the social engineers are quick to make use of.
The common theme of seemingly all radical groups, across all walks of life, is what can be thought of as Image Blindness.
Image blindness is an unofficial term I am coining to refer to a person who cannot see that what they believe is different from reality itself. It can also be described as the condition of self-imposed ignorance that creates a state of severe cognitive dissonance, to the point that a person is incapable of auto-correcting ideological discrepancies—self-correcting erroneous views as a result of perceiving reality directly.
For example, someone who can’t recognize that the war on terror is terrorism itself, has image blindness. Someone who prejudges a person’s ideas based on their physical appearance has image blindness. Someone who says they want to be healthy, yet can’t recognize that their food is poison, has image blindness. Someone who fights for freedom by using oppression and violence is suffering from image blindness.
When a person’s perceptions of reality—their beliefs, worldviews, and biases (images)—prevent them from seeing the truth. I would consider this person person image blind—their image of reality blinds them from the real truth.
Simply put, mentally immature people are generally laboring under some form of image blindness. But this isn’t a statement of elitism or superiority. I am not judging people harshly for their mental status. But I am able to recognize when someone lacks skill in using their innate mental abilities. Just like I can recognize when a child hasn’t learned how to walk yet—doing so doesn’t mean I think they are inferior or that they won’t ever walk.
Symptoms of image blindness are:
- an inability to directly perceive reality;
- an inability to differentiate between beliefs and reality;
- a tendency to obsess over, or fixate on, a belief or perspective that is untrue, even when evidence exists within experience to disprove it;
- an inability to think logically and use reason to discover the truth;
- an over-reliance on emotion and “the gut” to determine right and wrong, truth from fiction;
- a tendency to succumb to groupthink or mob mentality—going along with the crowd;
- the dogmatic adherence to inaccurate beliefs or ideas in favor of maintaining a belief system that provides emotional support;
- an inability to gain intrinsic knowledge and understanding—reliance on experts, authorities, and leaders;
- lastly, and most importantly, the tendency to ignore reality in favor of one’s beliefs.
A person with Image Blindness, literally, at a cognitive level, cannot see reality—they can only see images or their representations of reality.
Arguably most of the population is operating at this level of cognition—a symptom of overstimulation during the formative years and social programming in the human heard of society towards dogmatic adherence to social norms.
In effect, culture completely suppresses the evolving mind, by way of behavioral augmentation techniques—social programming from parents, family, school, the media, and society at large. The innate inquisitiveness, curiosity, and love of learning that all children come into this world with are slowly and surely quashed under the foot of culture’s all encompassing hypnotic din. Between the ages of zero to ten, when the right brain and the subtle aspects of consciousness and identity are forming, the volume of cultural noise is at its peak. These environmental factors ensure that the vast majority of people never discover their inner voice or develop their intrinsic capacities to discern, think logically, and assess reality at a personal level.
Codependency on the State and Destruction of Critical Thought
Image blindness is a symptom of co-dependency on society and others, for one’s understanding of reality—overreliance on the State.
In effect, whole portions of the human population never developed their logic and reason skills—those mental attributes needed to discern and make right choices. They never had to develop these skills because the environment in which they were raised suppressed personal inquisitiveness in favor of authoritative compliance. Modern day educational standards, Common Core, favor mindless memorization over critical thinking and inquisitiveness—ensuring that when one graduates from school, they will probably be incapable of doing anything but blindly believe what others tell them. The use of behavioral modification techniques (punishments and rewards) further compel one to downplay their innate capacities for social acceptance.
The societies we inhabit encourage mental infancy and dependency on the state and authorities of all kinds. Americans pledge allegiance to a flag, supposedly in reference of the ideals of freedom, prosperity, and fairness for all, while the same flag is synonymous with oppression almost everywhere else on Earth. Yet almost no one can see this, and when someone takes a stand, like the NFL player Colin Kaepernick, the image-blind masses spew vitriol against them, failing to see the hypocrisy.
Information is obfuscated, compartmentalized, made overly complex, and hard to understand in almost all fields of study and academia. Experts and scholars use complex language and systems of representation that make it hard for the layman to grasp.
Add an endless array of distractions (bread and circuses), such as social media, television, video games, and so on, and most people see no value in developing their mental faculties.
Who wants to read books, learn critical thinking and discernment, when there are Pokemon to catch, celebrities to ogle over, games to play, and sitcoms to watch.
The makers of the film Idocracy—a comedy depicting a future wherein the vast majority of the population has been dumbed-down to the level of preschoolers—is disturbed by how accurate it is some ten years after its initial release.
The man behind the 2006 cult sci-fi film “Idiocracy” is lamenting that his fictional movie appears to have become reality.
“I never expected #idiocracy to become a documentary,” tweeted screenwriter Etan Cohen in an apparent jab at the 2016 presidential race.
Together with “Beavis & Butt-head” creator Mike Judge, Cohen co-wrote the time-travel comedy. The plot revolves around the misadventures of a man who wakes up in a futuristic America only to discover that everyone around him, including lawmakers and government officials, is an idiot.
“I thought the worst thing that would come true was everyone wearing Crocs,” Cohen told his Twitter followers.
“Idiocracy” star Terry Crews, famous for his role as President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho, also used the satirical film to take a shot at the surreal election cycle.
All of this suggests that society as we know it is intentionally being dumbed-down. The globalist controllers, the would-be masters of this world want a world full of people with image blindness because they are easy to manipulate and are incapable of questioning the memes, dogma, and doctrines of culture.
Radicalizing the Image Blind Masses
Of course, the topic of social programming and cultural conditioning is an all-encompassing aspect of human life today—to vast too fully cover in this article. But in regard to the recent Women’s March that took place the day after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, there are several clear examples of what I would calls mass mind control manipulation of feminists and the radical left.
Simply put, if someone is incapable of discerning the truth, and is prone to groupthink due to image blindness, all that need be done is to tell them something they want to believe and provide an outlet to express it. Promote the idea in the media, use slogans, captivating advertising, and human interest stories to pull in the image blind masses.
Arguably all of the social movements that were state sanctioned over the past one hundred years were made possible by image blindness in the masses. These were made possible via social engineering or mass-mind control operations that exploit a lack of discernment.
Related Tavistock Institute: The Best Kept Secret in America — History of Propaganda, Mass-Mind Control, and the Secret Manipulation of Society (Reality Management)
Related Fabricated Social Change: Drug Counter Culture, New Age Movement (a Course on Miracles), and many more, were Manufactured (MK Ultra) | Manufacturing the Deadhead: A Product of Social Engineering…
In the case of the Women’s March, there were millions upon millions of people angry and upset over Trump winning the presidency. They were already sold on the idea that Trump is a racist, women-hating, gay-bashing whtle-male who should be hated and reviled.
But the vast majority of such self-identifying Trump-haters are probably suffering from image blindness—they lack a personal comprehension of why Trump allegedly hates all these people. Matter of fact, to question the rhetoric, in most cases, earns one a round of heckling. These image blinded people, who unquestionably believed the leftist propaganda media, are easy pickings for globalist controllers operating from behind the scenes, like George Soros.
An article featured in the New York Times, revealed that Soros was connected to over 50 of the groups that helped organize the Women’s March. And there was a serious ideological contradiction between the pro-Islam rhetoric during the event and the ostensibly feminist overtones of those in attendance.
By my draft research, which I’m opening up for crowd-sourcing on GoogleDocs, Soros has funded, or has close relationships with, at least 56 of the march’s “partners,” including “key partners” Planned Parenthood, which opposes Trump’s anti-abortion policy, and the National Resource Defense Council, which opposes Trump’s environmental policies. The other Soros ties with “Women’s March” organizations include the partisan MoveOn.org (which was fiercely pro-Clinton), the National Action Network (which has a former executive director lauded by Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett as “a leader of tomorrow” as a march co-chair and another official as “the head of logistics”). Other Soros grantees who are “partners” in the march are the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Constitutional Rights, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. March organizers and the organizations identified here haven’t yet returned queries for comment.
On the issues I care about as a Muslim, the “Women’s March,” unfortunately, has taken a stand on the side of partisan politics that has obfuscated the issues of Islamic extremism over the eight years of the Obama administration. “Women’s March” partners include the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has not only deflected on issues of Islamic extremism post-9/11, but opposes Muslim reforms that would allow women to be prayer leaders and pray in the front of mosques, without wearing headscarves as symbols of chastity. Partners also include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which wrongly designated Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim reformer, an “anti-Muslim extremist” in a biased report released before the election. The SPLC confirmed to me that Soros funded its “anti-Muslim extremists” report targeting Nawaz. (Ironically, CAIR also opposes abortions, but its leader still has a key speaking role.)
Another Soros grantee and march “partner” is the Arab-American Association of New York, whose executive director, Linda Sarsour, is a march co-chair. When I co-wrote a piece, arguing that Muslim women don’t have to wear headscarves as a symbol of “modesty,” she attacked the coauthor and me as “fringe.” (Source)
The fact that Soros has ties to the march—given his past propensity for inciting political change using so-called color revolutions—is prima facie evidence that this radical leftist movement is part of the globalist agenda. And like the Germans that were used in World War II to breathe life into the Nazi’s, the undiscerning masses are being used to foment division of the people.
Now let me be clear in saying I am not a Trump supporter, nor am I anti-liberal, anti-Democrat, or anti-feminist. I support life, liberty, and the honorable pursuit of happiness for all. All people, everywhere, deserve justice, truth, and freedom from oppression.
Genuine altruistic movements are, of course, worthy of support. Striving to realize equal treatment under the law and in society is a worthwhile goal. Seeking to end harm, oppression, prejudice, bigotry, and intolerance is something that will ultimately be of benefit to the human family.
But we can’t fight fire with fire.
What’s troubling about some of those in the radical left is their intolerance, hatefulness, and bigoted behavior towards non-adherents. This, in and of itself, is hypocritical in relation to the stated goals of ending intolerance and oppression.
In an article published last week, we covered the story of a black Trump supporter who was heckled during an interview at the event last week.
The man was simply sharing his opinion, exercising his right to free speech in a non-aggressive way.
Instead of onlookers using this as an opportunity to invoke tolerance, acceptance, and fairness towards their fellow human being—instead of honestly listening to what he had to say and giving his perspectives a fair appraisal, he was cursed, shamed, and scorned by the very people who claim to be protesting against bigotry, intolerance, and hate.
The hecklers likely felt they were fighting for the cause but were too blinded by their egocentric vitriol to see that they were actually the most intolerant and hateful people during the encounter.
To add another layer of cognitive dissonance to the situation, consider that the ideals of feminism are almost diametrically opposed to Sharia law.
Feminism and Sharia Law — Oil and Water
The radical left seem to think that Trump is anti-Muslim, and as such, appear to have taken on a pro-Islam stance.
The Women’s March had several events that featured pro-Muslim demonstrations. There are glaring ideological differences between Feminism and Sharia law, which make the idea of feminists dawning Hijabs as a gesture of solitary arguably the acme of hypocrisy.
Linda Sarsour is the Palestinian-American activist and pro-Sharia law spokesperson who was one of the key organizers for the Women’s March. She was revered at the March for her remarks, yet actively promotes Sharia law that is oppressive against women.
There are several controversial issues surrounding her involvement. Firstly, the March was ostensibly for all women, yet only pro-choice anti-Trump women were encouraged to attend.
There are dozens of women speaking out against the Women’s March for its myopic stance. Here is one perspective:
Secondly, Sharia law is arguably one of the most anti-feminine patriarchal systems on the planet, actively suppressing women in brutal ways to this day.
Here are some points from Sharia law that underscore it’s anti-feminist nature:
- Women are worth less than men-their lives; valued as property, and girl babies are often discarded
- Under Islamic law, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses. Women who allege rape, without the benefit of the act having been witnessed by four men who subsequently develop a conscience, are actually confessing to having sex. If they or the accused happens to be married, then it is considered to be adultery.
- Women are required to be completely covered, except their eyes. The reason is that it is supposed to curb the sexual appetites of passing men when women travel outside the home. Women are also not allowed to travel by themselves, or be alone with a man who is not a relative. It is not optional as a form of reverence, but rather the law, punishable by beheading.
- Sharia law permits a husband beating his wife. However, the beating must cease if the woman complies with her husband’s demands. Beating is also intended to be the last resort of coercing submission, behind verbal abuse and abandonment. According to testimony in the Hadith, Muhammad physically struck his favorite wife for leaving the house without his permission. It is not known how he treated his less-favored wives.
- A Muslim man can divorce his wife by repeating “I divorce you” three times. It’s a controversial practice called the talaq or “triple-talaq.” A husband may say to his wife at anytime she is not menstruating, “I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you,” and this effectively throws her out on the street.
- Adultery, (also rape, see above) is punishable by death
- A Muslim man can marry as many as four women, and have sexual relations with an unspecified number of slaves as well. Muhammad had eleven wives at one time.
- Men have a loophole to allow “sex on demand” outside of marriage. This allows men to have sex when he chooses. It is called Nikah Mut’ah, a fixed-time arrangement between a man and a woman that dissolves once the duration expires.
- Islamic law teaches that homosexuality is a vile form of fornication, punishable by death. Beneath the surface, however, there are implied references to homosexual behavior in paradise, and it has been a part of historical Arab and Muslim culture. In the news recently, a new Fatwa (new decree) has called for sodomy in an effort to widen the anus to allow for the carrying of more explosives for Jihad. (source)
Given these alleged tenets of Sharia law, one would think that any self-respective feminist would never condone the religion, let alone protest for it. And yet this is precisely what has happened.
But the good news is real altruists, who sometimes support feminist agendas, are speaking the truth about the inherent hypocrisy of Linda Sarsour.
While I would like to say that the trappings of image blindness are fading away, it actually seems to be getting worse.
The past one hundred years has been a renaissance of social engineering, mass-mind control, and groupthink-based social movements. The powers that should not be have seemingly perfected their tools of control and enslavement by slowly destroying critical thought and free thinking at an individual level in society. Today, thinking for oneself is a crime punishable by being labeled as a conspiracy theorist.
Amid this climate of social conditioning, the masses are easily swept up into any imaginable social cause—often failing to see any duplicity present.
The fact that so-called feminists and liberals can be led, en masse, to support a movement that is antithetical to feminism is sobering evidence that the human race is almost completely on its knees.
But the more ignorantly and mindlessly our fellows act the more it seems to help others wake up.
In truth, the problem of image blindness is much older than we might think. The people are susceptible to propaganda and mind control because we’ve forgotten how to judge well. It seems easier to rely on the priesthoods of truth than to learn the skills of discernment. But this mental laziness comes at a terrible price.
While I can’t predict the future, I do suspect that as the unthinking masses fall deeper and deeper into mental infancy, those who value personal discernment and truth will become more active.
Perhaps we are witnessing the death throes of the memes of unconsciousness, and a wave of awakening is to follow.
But unless we, as individuals, do that inner work of seeking truth and asking questions, lies will always be accepted as truth.
You, with your consciousness, mind, and ability to think is the biggest weapon we have against intolerance and oppression, whether from despotic elite controllers or misguided sycophants.
The preceding text is a Stillness in the Storm original creation. Please share freely.
About The Author
Justin Deschamps is a truth seeker inspired by philosophy and the love of wisdom in all its forms. He was formally trained in physics and psychology, later discovering the spiritual basis of reality and the interconnected nature of all things. He strives to find the path of truth while also walking it himself, sharing what he knows with others so as to facilitate cooperative change for a better future. He is a student of all and a teacher to some. Follow on Twitter @sitsshow, Facebook Stillness in the Storm, and steemit @justin-sits.
Like our work? Support this site with a contribution via Paypal.
This article appeared first on Stillness in the Storm.
This article (When Tolerance Becomes Hate — Image Blindness and Cognitive Dissonance | Women’s March, Sharia Law vs Feminism, Soros and Linda Sarsour) originally appeared on StillnessintheStorm.com and is free and open source. You have permission to share or republish this article in full so long as attribution to the author and stillnessinthestorm.com are provided. If you spot a typo, email [email protected].
Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Do you think this article needs a correction or update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.