Yeah, we say it all the time; leftism is a religion, a sickness and a mental disorder.  But how do we exactly go about proving that?  After all, if I adhere to certain views without an ounce of proof, someone could just as easily call what I believe to be pure zealotry.  And, to be fair, people on the right have done that very thing; Todd Akin comes to mind when he claimed women rarely get pregnant from “legitimate rape” as a defense for the pro-life stance.  And, boy, did the liberal media have a field day with that one.

Liberal and conservative are just concepts that have little meaning out of context.  After all, I DO stand for classical liberalism – free market, low taxes and economic liberty without much government intrusion – but, the modern left is anything but liberal.  It’s ironic that the leftists make fun of evangelicals so much when they hold to their views with a religious fervor that puts evangelicals to shame.  In order to maintain their narrative, they’ll defy any logic and fact based reasoning, and I shall demonstrate this with three basic examples.

1. The alleged gender based gap in pay equity: 

   Feminists and leftists contend that women only make $0.77 for every man’s dollar strictly because of gender based discrimination.  Of course we all know that’s bullshit, so we tell these feminists that the reason women only make $0.77 of every man’s dollar is because, when women go to college, they choose fields that are less marketable, such as sociology, women’s studies and communications, rather than more marketable majors such as engineering or math.  They also tend to work fewer hours and take on less stressful, less dangerous and thus less well paying jobs.  In fact this Huffington Post article says that very thing, and, if that ain’t cognitive dissonance, then I don’t know what is.  Of course a reasonable person would then say, “oh, cool, so there isn’t gender based discrimination.  I’m glad that battle is over!”  However the leftist or feminist will call you a misogynist pig or, at very least, tell you “huh, well I don’t agree with that!”  Ergo maintaining faith in the narrative.

2.  The need for more gun control: 

   This one is really tough for leftists.  The question is always put to them whether they a. are trying eliminate guns altogether or b. whether they just want to make it tougher to obtain guns.  If their point is a., then you’re dealing with a whole different debate in which you can give all kinds of obvious and absurd examples of how useless eliminating guns would be and how that could lead to the slippery slope of implementing knife control, like they do in England or even worse pepper spray control, like they do in Finland, where they teach women to defend themselves from rapists by using the force (notice how the “potential rapist” is a lily white guy and not a Muslim Arab, because portraying the population that ACTUALLY commits the crimes is “racist”).  However, if you’re talking to an honest leftist (which is rare) and this person doesn’t actually want to eliminate guns, but just wants to make it harder to get them, you simply point out that the places with the highest gun crime rates have the strictest gun control measures and that the crimes are committed by hood rats who own illegal firearms.  On top of that, show them that nice areas with nearly zero gun control have zero gun crime, in spite the fact that most of the citizens have a mini arsenal in their homes.  This Bill Whittle video should do nicely.  There, proven!  The person should have one less leftist belief, right?  Well, according to my former friend and ardent, dedicated leftist zealot Ernesto Yermoli: “I’m not watching a video where the guy calls people ‘weanies’.  Edwin, I have friends in Europe who are TERRIFIED of our pro-gun culture.”  Well, Ernesto, I have friends who are terrified of black people, what of it?  The narrative will be maintained.

3. White police officers are out to get blacks: 

   As the clear and simple evidence shows, police officers are bigots and it’s open season on unarmed, black teenagers.  After all, Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown and Brown was unarmed.  Now, all you have to do to debunk this absolutely silly notion is remember how Michael Brown was strong arming the owner of a convenience store for cigarettes, charged a police officer and tried to grab a gun away from him and that all of the witnesses who allegedly saw the incident lied about it.  On top of that, you have to consider that, like the Trayvon Martin case, the media decided to make it a national news story, rather than a local one and, in the latter case, turned the Hispanic George Zimmerman into a white man.  You also have to look at the statistics, which say that police officers shoot white people way more than they shoot black people, that officers have actually become more reluctant to shoot at blacks for fear of being accused of racism and that the net result of cops deciding not to do their jobs for fear of being accused of racism lead to a huge spike in the murder rate in Baltimore, in which gangs settled all of their scores.  It doesn’t hurt to mention that people living in black neighborhoods prefer to have a police presence to keep their neighborhoods from turning into total bedlam.  Of course, once you explain all of that, hopefully that’s one less leftist view that person will have.  But, things aren’t that easy.  The leftist is sick in the head doesn’t think that way.  Instead he/she/it will say, “YOU’RE RACIST!!! MICHAEL BROWN WAS UNARMED AND DARREN WILSON SHOT HIM!!!  DARREN WILSON IS WHITE, MICHAEL BROWN IS BLACK, THEREFORE RACISM!!!!” Again the narrative will be maintained.

Sometimes I wonder where this extreme narcissism and inability to listen to facts comes from.  My friend Dan told me that, as long as I have solid evidence with which to present my points, then people will be reasonable and listen.  If that was the case, then why does Bernie Sanders have a career?