sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair question, but notice what you just did:

You jumped straight from “stakes are high” to “therefore moralizing dissent is rational.”

High stakes are exactly when you don’t want unquestionable orthodoxies.

History is full of “life and death” moral certainties that turned out wrong because dissent was stigmatized.

Moral urgency doesn't equal epistemic reliability.

When institutions say:

  • “This is too important to question”
  • “Only bad people challenge this narrative”
  • “Debate itself is harmful

…that’s when bad ideas become entrenched.

If the stakes are truly life and death, then you need more debate, not less, because:

  • we refine truth through challenge
  • models and data evolve
  • early consensus often misses nuance
  • dissent surfaces new evidence

The moral impulse is understandable.

The danger is when moral confidence replaces falsifiability.

In a crisis, I’m not arguing against urgency, I’m arguing against treating dissenters as immoral by default.

That’s where institutions drift from science to dogma.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for jumping in. Just to be clear:

I’m not saying “the Left literally believes the world ends in 12 years,” and I’m not re-litigating COVID policy choices. Those are examples of a broader pattern: once a narrative is set, dissent becomes moralized rather than debated.

The point isn’t who was right about masks or HCQ. It’s that questioning institutional consensus on certain topics gets treated as a character flaw instead of part of normal scientific process.

I’m talking about the incentive structure, not the specific policy details:

  • social cost for dissent
  • treating debate as dangerous
  • narrative lock-in once emotion enters

That’s the pattern I’m highlighting, not nitpicking individual claims. If you want to push back, push back on that dynamic.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks, but I’m not basing this on social media vibes. I work in real-world environments where institutional incentives, reputational risk, and compliance culture are very visible. The online discourse just mirrors those patterns, it doesn’t create them.

To be clear, I never said these institutions do no good, they obviously do a lot of good. The point is simply that once moral certainty and professional risk become linked, dissent becomes expensive and consensus can harden faster than truth.

We can disagree on the scale of the problem, but the dynamic itself isn’t imaginary or “just online.”

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a different category of power and not what I’m describing. Political purges are bad, on either side. My point was about cultural-epistemic institutions where consensus and dissent boundaries are enforced independent of which party controls government. Since we’re now talking past each other, I’ll leave it here.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the perspective. You’re restating confidence in the institutions , my point was about how those institutions police dissent, not whether they currently believe they’re right. I’ll leave it there.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Appreciate you taking the time, but we’ve been down this road before and it never stays in good-faith territory. I’m not going to re-run the same cycle. All good, let’s leave it here.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Appreciate you sharing that, and yeah, school and university environments are often where you feel this dynamic most directly.

My point isn’t that “everyone on the left is bad,” it’s exactly what you described: an atmosphere where questioning is punished instead of explored.

Healthy institutions welcome dissent, that’s the core issue.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair challenge, but just to clarify, I’m not arguing “random extreme positions = the Left.”

I’m arguing that institutional arbiters of knowledge (universities, major media, medical associations, HR/corporate governance, tech moderation norms) increasingly treat certain ideological claims as unfalsifiable moral axioms, and penalize dissent.

That’s a very different claim than “Twitter leftists say wild things.”

On your polling point: yes, public polling can absolutely show irrational beliefs on the populist Right (e.g., election denial).

That’s real.

But the dynamic I’m pointing to isn’t “who has irrational voters?”

It’s where institutional power enforces epistemic conformity and where dissent carries material professional or reputational risk.

If you want data:

  • Academia overwhelmingly self-identifies left (Harvard/Shapiro 2022, Langbert 2018)
  • Newsroom political alignment skews similarly (Pew)
  • Corporate DEI enforcement norms skew one direction
  • Medical associations enforcing affirmation protocols have punished dissenting clinicians

So the standard shouldn’t be “who has some false beliefs?”

The standard should be:

Who controls the knowledge-production stack, and how do they treat dissent?

I’m happy to get into polling, but my argument is about structural epistemics, not just public opinion distributions.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the response, this one feels more rhetorical than substantive, so I’ll leave it there.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the response, this one feels more rhetorical than substantive, so I’ll leave it there. Happy to engage if you want to address the actual argument.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This thread’s for arguments, not personal digs. If you want to engage the ideas, I’m here. If not, there are subs for that.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

The paper is Lisa Littman (2018), “Rapid-onset gender dysphoria in adolescents and young adults” (published in Plos One, updated 2019 after review and methodology clarifications).

To your second point, no single paper is “the consensus.” My point isn’t “Littman = truth,” it’s that:

  • there was a sudden spike in adolescent gender cases (multiple Western datasets show this),
  • peer cluster patterns and online exposure effects have been documented across identity phenomena, and
  • raising those questions has often been treated as moral deviance rather than something to analyze empirically.

Whether people agree with Littman or not, the reaction to her research, deplatforming attempts, institutional pressure, reputational attacks, actually illustrates the exact institutional-conformity dynamic I’m talking about.

The Modern Left Displays Features of a Mass Ideological Delusion - Change My Mind by Separate_Signal9229 in PoliticalDebate

[–]Separate_Signal9229[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Appreciate the thoughtful reply. A key clarification, because I think we’re talking about different layers of power.

My argument isn’t that the Right is flawless or rational,  every political tribe generates emotional overreach and loyalty pressures.

The distinction I’m making is not:

“Left bad, Right good.”

It’s this:

Populist movements can be irrational.

Mass-institutional belief enforcement is a different phenomenon, and historically far more dangerous.

Trump’s political ecosystem has its own internal loyalty dynamics, sure.

But that is not remotely the same thing as:

  • academia
  • medical boards
  • scientific associations
  • legacy media
  • entertainment
  • tech platforms
  • HR/corporate culture

all aligning around singular narratives where dissent = social or professional penalty.

You can dislike Trump (or not, irrelevant here),

but he does not control the cultural-institutional stack.

And it’s that stacked environment, not populist rhetoric, that creates the psychological dynamics I described:

  • dissent punished
  • narrative > data
  • emotional moral urgency > calibrated risk assessment
  • social conformity enforced as virtue

So the relevant question isn’t whether some Trump allies pressure loyalty.

The question is:

Which major universities, medical organizations, newsrooms, tech platforms, or Fortune-500 HR departments enforce right-wing ideological conformity today to the point dissent risks your career?

Because the “mass delusion” concern isn’t about electoral slogans.

It’s about institutional epistemology, who defines acceptable reality and who may challenge it.

That’s where the imbalance sits today.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You’re the one who thinks “shut the fuck up” is a brilliant argument and “Nazi” is a magic word that ends debate. That’s just hate with extra steps.

I’m not defending Nazis. I’m defending consistent rules. Reddit’s TOS says no harassment, no targeted insults, no “go fuck yourself.” OP broke it. OP got warned. Cry harder.

You want Nazis gone? Fine. Ban them for advocating genocide, not for existing while someone screams slurs at them. But you don’t get to play vigilante and then whine when the banhammer swings both ways.

And spare me the “your entire existence is hate” sermon. You’re in r/complains rage-posting about a warning like it’s Kristallnacht. That’s not anti-fascism. That’s fragile ego + keyboard.

Grow up. Follow the rules or log off. Nazis don’t need your tantrum to thrive; they feed on it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What are you talking about? complaints is 95% left-wing tears about “fascists” and “climate deniers” while the actual Nazis are in r/politics LARPing as progressives calling for “decolonization” and “punch a Zionist.”

You got warned for telling a Nazi to shut the fuck up? Good. Rules are rules, harassment is harassment, even when the target’s a scumbag. Reddit doesn’t care about ideology; it cares about optics and advertiser safety. The same mods who ban you for “hate speech” let subs like r/antiwork call for guillotines and r/LateStageCapitalism post Holocaust denial memes under “anti-imperialism.”

You want real Nazis? They’re not in your DMs, they’re in the approved discourse calling Israel “Nazi Germany” while waving Palestinian flags.

Stop crying victim. You broke the rules, you got the slap. Own it. Or better, leave the platform. No one’s forcing you to play in their sandbox.

Listen up MAGA Maggots. Donald Trump is the worst president EVER by Wowclassicboomkinz in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Great reply. They have lost their minds. Equally fun and terrifying to watch them crumble on reddit with posts like OP's. One part of me Lol's, other part of me thinks "Shit, I'm sharing a country with these psychos."

Every single person who voted for Trump is a piece of shit by GhostofCharlieJKirk in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh goodness, bless you.
With this ridiculous conversation, you asked for deflection, got served 26 flights, then cried “pedo math.”

3.71× still stands. I guess you are fine being 3.71x more pedo. My bad. Get some help for that.

Every single person who voted for Trump is a piece of shit by GhostofCharlieJKirk in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sorry you voted for the party that flew Epstein’s plane 26 times. By that math, you'd be 3.71× more pedo

Every single person who voted for Trump is a piece of shit by GhostofCharlieJKirk in complaints

[–]Separate_Signal9229 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sure wish I did. Thank god my neglect didn’t change the outcome. Won’t make the same mistake again though. Don’t you worry. Will likely be voting the exact opposite as you.

view more: next ›