There's a lot more where this came from--but where is it all coming from? We spoke with Paul Ditto of the University of California, an experimental social psychologist, to give us insight into the liberal mind.
RealTrueNews: Dr. Dimos does science now say there are real, structural differences in the liberal or conservative brain?
Dr. Paul Dimos: We say there are correlations in visible brain structures and observed political beliefs. For example, liberals tend to have an enlarged anterior cingulate cortex whereas conservatives have an increased right amygdala. It's important to note that while we observe this, the mechanism isn't clear. These distinctions in structure probably lead to subtle differences in cognitive processes that tend to incline one to a given world-view of one sort or another rather than being somehow "coded into the brain."
RTN: I think I understood that.
DPD: That's only the beginning though. By the time someone reaches adulthood they have a wide variety of other adopted thought-structures that lead to more explicit differences in thinking.
RTN: For example?
DPD: Well, the big one is what we call naïve realism. This is a HUGE factor in liberal thinking and is strongly minimized in conservatives. That is a person's belief in their own objectivity and that anyone who disagrees with them must be wrong, deluded, biased, or lying. This is really a combination of the realism, a so-called bias blind-spot, where the person is unable to recognize their own bias--no matter how extreme--and what we describe as false polarization.
RTN: Can you make it a little simpler?
DPD: Certainly, liberals, of which I should say, I am one, believe their own opinions are certifiable facts. That's naive realism. They--we--are unable to recognize our own bias, no matter how pronounced. Thus, when confronted with a Christian baker, we are unable to see that we would force them to participate in a Same Sex wedding--but cannot imagine doing the same to force a Muslim to participate in a Christian wedding against their wishes.
The false-polarization and another part of the model, reactive devaluation, happens when confronted with an opposing view, the liberal ascribes to stupidity, laziness, or outright hostility or poor character. We also engage in reactive devaluation where we assume that anyone with differing views from us must be some kind of extreme radical.
RTN: We've . . . observed this.
DPD: Liberals have a few specific "constraints" they've adopted which lead to all the conclusions you're seeing these are things like:
Fear of Autonomy: Liberals don't feel safe making their own decisions or taking responsibility for their own actions. That's why we, for example, don't like firearms. I would rather myself and my family be raped and killed than have the responsibility of protecting them with a dangerous murder-tool.
Belief In The Media: The mainstream media is often contradictory, illogical, and firmly and blatantly biased. For us, however, this is as invisible as the water is to a fish. This actually creates a reality around us that is like a soothing song.
Exaltation of Victims: Liberals, more than anything else, want to be victims. Victims are comforted. Victims are afforded righteousness for our rage. Victims are allowed to lash out at their "bullies." For liberals it is of paramount importance that they be victims and thus we fear any relationship where we are clearly empowered. Of course we still want to be in charge--we just don't want anyone to acknowledge that. It's also why we have things like "micro-aggressions" and "trigger warnings" so that we can claim an affront for the smallest thing and then be justified in any action that follows!
Rage: Liberals are very, very angry. We hate being on top of the world--the primacy of America is a constant irritant to our need for victim-hood. We need to be rich--but we resent it. We need to be right all the time--but other people keep referring to facts which contradict us. This is a position that makes us furious. We have to take it out on people. That's why you have liberal, but not conservative riots, for example.
RTN: You're saying this is characteristic of Liberal Thought?
DPD: It is the foundation of Liberal Thought. It's what's taught formally in sociology classes, philosophy classes, and really any liberal arts curriculum. We teach a false consensus to ensure that the mainstream media narratives are believed. This creates an impression that the bulk of society actually agrees with the liberal world-view and that they are in the majority. It helps keep everything orderly.
RTN: Orderly? How so?
DPD: Well, as you're aware, ideas are weapons. Right now some "ideas" in the forms of computer viruses are capable of actually killing people without human intervention, Other ideas, such as an objective view or race or sex would lead to the conclusion that some people--and genders--are simply inferior at some things or have a societal "role to play." It's been well established--but it is utterly against the order we are seeking.
RTN: What . . . order . . . is this? What are you talking about?
DPD: The Second Enlightenment. We are building The Simulacrum. Each new child who is raised with the properly guided mind will become another brick in its foundations. Once complete we will--
RTN: Dr. Dimos?
DPD: Did I pass? [ sounds agitated ]. This is the EXAM, isn't it? You're the EXAMINERS? You're with the AEONS? I . . . I passed, didn't I?