They'll Never Understand

Ace had an interesting post yesterday about the Democrats' utter failure to predict the repercussions of Obamacare. Basically, it's not helping anyone, and Dems are actually trying to avoid mentioning that they voted for it.

Some "reform" that was, you fucking shitstains.

But one particular part of the post caught my eye, because it touches on something I've mentioned a bunch of times here:

I asked Michael Barone about the Democrats' full year of denial, about when they finally started to grasp that this was genuine outrage, a citizenry aroused.

He didn't answer that, but he did offer this explanation: The Democrats assumed all the Tea Party rallies and Town Hall confrontations were astroturfed and filled with Republican operatives, because that's precisely how they gin up their public displays of support.

They almost couldn't grasp the possibility that our rallies, unlike theirs, might be real.

This, this, this, this, this. A thousand fucking times this.

I've been saying for years that a large part of liberalism is based on projection, and the idiots just keep proving me right. I know I'm probably wearing out this angle, but it bears repeating every time a new example comes along:

Liberals cannot fathom the idea of someone disagreeing with them in good faith. They just can't. They "know" their policies will work, and they "know" they care about helping people, even if they have to pass a bill before they can find out what's in it, so they just assume that everyone else "knows" these things as well. Therefore, when someone disagrees with a liberal policy, liberals assume that the person secretly knows said policy will have the desired effect, but is pretending to object because he can't stand the thought of anyone other than rich white males being happy. Either that, or the person has been paid off by "powerful special interests" or brainwashed by Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck/John Boehner/whomever the Alinskyites are targeting this week.

This also kind of explains why so many left-wing descriptions of the Tea Party can be summed up as "white people resent having a black president." They're not necessarily lying (although some of them probably do know better, as JournoList has shown), it's just that they can't imagine any other reason to object to a socialist utopia. Don't those stupid proles want free shit from greedy rich people?

Getting back to the AoS post, projection is also in play concerning Obamacare. The left got collectively drunk on self-righteousness, and as they do with most issues, they just assumed that the rest of the country agreed. All those town hall meetings, protests, etc. were just astroturfing (another lefty trait they project onto us) to try and keep power in the hands of the insurance industry and prevent poor people and minorities from getting the care they need. Nobody really thought healthcare "reform" would be bad for the country, because liberal opinions are as self-evidently true as grass being green and water being wet.

I don't get why the right doesn't exploit this massive blind spot more. Not only do liberals not understand the conservative thought process, they are quite literally incapable of doing so even with effort, because they lack true empathy (as my metaphor post from a few days ago suggests). The conservative approach to issues is something like "let's look at the facts and see what will work best," while the liberal approach is more like "we're liberal, and liberal=good, so whatever we do will work, and anyone who says it won't is a liar."

This is actually something else I've wanted to touch on for a while. Liberals seem to think that since they're so brilliant and unquestionably correct on everything, they don't need to actually examine the effects of their policies. I will again point out that we had to pass Obamacare to find out what was in it.

I have coined a term for these types of people: Poligicians.

Catchy, isn't it?

Poligicians reject the idea that lawmaking is about looking at a problem, gathering evidence in support of a solution, and then using that evidence to craft effective policy. Instead, they seem to think that legislating consists of magical incantations and wishing.

You say you want to fix the healthcare system? Well, let's just gather together the most brilliant people in the country (Congressional Democrats) and write thousands of pages of regulations. No, we don't know what they are. That part isn't important. What matters is that it's called "healthcare reform," and it was signed by the Obamessiah himself. It simply can't fail! Look, we even have our own version of magic wands in Pelosi's gavel and Obama's pens!!!

What's that? The economy is a mess? Why, we'll just spend billions of dollars on pet projects! As long as we call it a "stimulus package," it simply has to work! And since our ideas never fail, the following year must include a "summer of recovery!" There's no evidence for that, of course, but...liberals are never wrong, so the magic must be taking longer than we expected.

Want to create "green jobs," but don't actually know how to do that, or even if "green jobs" matter because some pesky scienticians may have misplaced crucial evidence of "global climate disruption?" The solution is simple: Call all federally-funded jobs "green jobs!"

More people need to realize this. When you argue with a liberal, you are often arguing against someone who believes that you are lying about your position. Liberals love personal attacks because they believe the point of a debate is to reveal the bigotry that is preventing someone from supporting what is clearly a good idea. Furthermore, you are arguing with someone who probably believes that opinions and words, rather than facts and actions, can make things real.

They will never understand us, and we need to take advantage of it.