I’ve noticed a peculiar phenomenon prevalent with the liberals. They have an inclination to diminish the complexity of those they perceive as adversaries by reducing them to caricatures or dehumanizing representations.
For instance, they liken Xi to Winnie the Pooh, depicting him in a manner that belittles his position and influence. Similarly, Putin is portrayed as a mad king, exaggerating his power and malevolence for dramatic effect. They characterize Russians as orcs, implying that they are inherently evil and lacking in humanity’s essential qualities of compassion and reason.
This trend seems to suggest a reluctance among liberals to engage with opposing viewpoints on their own merits, instead choosing to dismiss them outright or diminish their significance through caricatured representations. This approach may serve as a form of psychological defense mechanism, allowing individuals to avoid the discomfort and cognitive dissonance that can arise from confronting unfamiliar or challenging ideas.
A group, claiming to champion values such as empathy, inclusivity, and respect for diversity, appears to be engaging in a peculiar behavior: dehumanizing their opponents by reducing them to caricatures or diminishing their complexity. This trend is as a form of naked hypocrisy.
Liberals don’t believe there are opposing view points. There’s the correct liberal facts and then there’s everyone else who isn’t as smart as them.
A lot of their arguments make a lot more sense when you come at them from this angle. They are the “correct” ones in all things, even something they didn’t know about 5 minutes ago, which means any attempts to educate are actually just attempts to win a debate and knowledge is irrelevant to how correct someone is on an issue. Which is why they so often dismiss a source that disagrees with them out of hand, even “trusted” liberal sources. Their position is already the correct one, which means any evidence to the contrary is just trying to trick them and they’ll use everything from dehumanisation to emotional manipulation to vague threats and insults to give themselves the mental wiggle room needed to continue ignoring it.
They claim inclusivity and empathy because they are the “good guy team” and the good guys support those things. Being a good guy is an inherent trait to them, like being tall. You’re either on the good guy team and all your actions are good (or justifiable) or you’re not, and your every action is an evil one by default. Which is how they can see things like China’s poverty alleviation program or Cuba’s massive success in medicine and conclude that these universal goods are actually evil, because the bad guy team is the one doing them.
Being a good guy is an inherent trait to them, like being tall.
This is pretty funny to me as I recently had a lib refuse to acknowledge that the height of the Chinese population has greatly increased over the past 40 years and is now equivalent to or slightly greater than the height of the average hog… libs love their racialized stereotypes.
Don’t forget how ableist they get if you disagree with them.
Not to mention homophobia or sexism. Bigotry is fine if its against someone who deserves it.
Oh, I’m wrong about the number of political parties in the People’s Republic of China am I? Well have you considered that you are gay with Xi Xinping?
“I’m, only saying it because Xi Xingping would have a problem, with it, not me. If you’re offended by my causal homophobia it’s because you’re the real homophobe!”
TBF I’ve seen people here and on Hexbear do a bit of that, myself included. Deing myself is a process.
Similarly I notice a lot of liberals resort to ableism/misogyny/racism in an attempt to belittle their opposition. I think that a lot of liberals just care about upholding an image rather than actually care about the groups they claim to fight for.
Yes! I have notices that this extends to what they believe, they almost never will tell you what they truly belive in plain english, they will say a nice sounding thing next to it, or similar to it, and when you counter they get upset and at some point will give up and rage and say “you dont understand” or they will say the original policy they meant.
Like I have had a lib tell me “You should always pay people what they are worth… but it is ok to make a profit.” or when they where describing “Time Theft” it took multiple minutes for me to get them to say they where not stealing anything but taking “too many breaks” and “not working hard enough”
