More Evidence That It’s Opposite Day
/
One of my mom’s friends posted the above meme on her Facebook page. When my mom sent it to me, for a moment we both wondered if it was meant as a joke about the Left, which obviously does or has done all of the things listed. But when my mom commented on the post, writing: “The Left did deny the results of the election in 2016,” the friend who posted this meme promptly deleted her comment.
Apparently the poster really did mean to only describe the Right — and has no interest in recognizing how absurd that is.
Let’s take it piece by piece.
“Like the left is running around carrying assault rifles”
It would be almost impossible to have missed all of the many instances of left-wing protesters and demonstrators “running around carrying assault rifles” during the endless 2020 protests.
Does anyone else remember CHAZ? The autonomous zone was defended by men carrying assault rifles. The above photo is of a volunteer acting as their security, according to this Newsweek article.
That’s not the only time the Left has shown up to a protest heavily armed. Here's an example of armed Black Lives Matter protesters marching through Louisville, Kentucky demanding justice for Breonna Taylor.
This politico article gives examples of armed demonstrations from the Left, specifically involving assault rifles, in states including Georgia and Oklahoma. Excerpt:
In Stone Mountain, Ga., an open carry state, at least 150 African Americans asserted their Second Amendment Right as a tool of protest. Dressed in black and armed with semi-automatic rifles, the group marched through Stone Mountain Park to protest its depiction of Confederate generals. A similar march organized by black gun owners took place in Oklahoma City in June, timed to President Donald Trump’s rally in nearby Tulsa.
The above image is from a protest in Georgia following the Rayshard Brooks incident in June 2020.
Since the pandemic and Black Lives Matter protests began, gun sales and registrations have gone through the roof. As reported in Politico,
Philip Smith, president of the National African American Gun Owners’ Association, said his organization’s annual membership has increased by much as 2,000 new members per day — a figure he used to see annually.
But let’s set aside gun rights for a second. Which is the critical issue — gun ownership, or the precipitation of violence? Because when it comes to who has precipitated more violence — the Left or the Right — there’s simply no comparison: This was the summer of “mostly peaceful” protests by Black Lives Matter and the radical left. These protests included rioting, arson, looting, and a general disintegration of civil society that made ordinary citizens fear for their lives and property.
I would say the Left very much is running around. If they have not always carried assault rifles, they certainly have done so on many occasions; and with or without the assault rifles, they have certainly carried out assault.
2. “Denying science”
One of these days, I’d love to get a definition from the Left as to what they think “science” is.
This is the Manhattan Contrarian definition of science: “Science is a process for understanding reality through using experiment or data to attempt to falsify falsifiable hypotheses.” In that post from September 12, 2020, the MC definition is contrasted to an alternate definition that appeared in an article in Scientific American on September 7, which asserted that the “strength of scientific conclusions” is based on the “consensus judgment” of “credible experts” who call themselves scientists.
Which of these definitions actually represents “science”?
As an example of what real science would look like, let’s use the current pandemic.
When the pandemic began, health officials warned the public not to wear masks — as captured in this MarketWatch article from March, 2020. A few months later, they did a complete 180. Just this month, the CDC recommended “universal mask wearing” for the first time. Was the reversal based on data that falsified a falsifiable hypothesis? Not that I can find.
The Left’s view seems to be that we should uncritically follow the advice of “the experts,” even when they withhold their data and completely reverse their views with no explanation.
An actual scientific approach to the issue of mask wearing would be to look at places that have mask mandates, and places that do not, and specifically look for evidence that would potentially falsify the hypothesis that masks are useful to slow the spread of the disease.
Sweden, which has famously resisted strict lockdowns and mask mandates, currently has a rate of deaths/1mm population of 779. Contrast that to various jurisdictions that have long had strict mask mandates, such as France (912 deaths/mm), UK (971 deaths/mm), Michigan (1182 deaths/mm), Minnesota (836 deaths/mm), New York (1856 deaths/mm) and New Jersey (2049 deaths/mm). The current world statistics are here, though they are not broken down by month. U.S. statistics broken down by State are here.
In addition to mask mandates, there have been several unscientific responses to the pandemic.
There is no scientific evidence behind closing schools. As I wrote back in July, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended keeping schools open. My article on the subject is here. The AAP report is here.
New York Governor Cuomo just closed indoor restaurant dining in New York, again, even though only 1.3% of Covid cases in New York can be traced to restaurants. In California, Los Angeles county similarly closed all of their outdoor restaurant dining, despite public health officials admitting there is no scientific data to suggest a link between restaurant dining and the current spike in Covid cases.
And don’t even get the Manhattan Contrarian started on the complete absence of falsifiable hypotheses in the entire field of climate “science.”
3. “Not accepting the results of an election.”
When Donald Trump won the election in 2016, Democrats immediately started a “resistance” movement. A few notable hashtags included #notmypresident and #lovetrumpshate.
Here is a list of the members of Congress who did not show up for Trump’s inauguration and their comments about the illegitimacy of his presidency.
And that pales in comparison to the Russiagate narrative that dominated the news cycles for 3+ years. “How Russia Helped Swing the Election for Trump” was a common news headline and constant CNN talking point.
The New York Times won a 2018 Pulitzer Prize for their National Reporting for “reveal[ing] the Trump team’s connections with the Russians and the attempts to sway the F.B.I Director James Comey.”
The Washington Post won the same Pulitzer the same year for their “revelatory examination of Russian interference in the 2016 election.”
These attempts to undermine faith in the election result worked pretty well. In 2019, after the Mueller investigation concluded that Russia interference in the 2016 election had been insignificant at best, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found that nearly 50% of Americans believed Trump had worked with the Russians to influence the election results.
Democrats couldn’t get him on the Russia narrative, but they didn’t give up. In December 2019, they impeached Trump on grounds that he had bribed Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Of course, much later we would find out that Hunter Biden was already under investigation by the F.B.I.
Has any political party ever worked so hard to undermine an elected president? For the past four years, Democrats have been writing the “We Won’t Accept the Results of This Election” handbook. Now they’re surprised their opposition party might follow their lead. They call that a threat to democracy.
*****
The Facebook meme that inspired this article was obviously meant for a social media echo chamber where it will only get claps and likes and amens — a place where all dissent can be deleted. But what it shows me is a complete lack of self-awareness, a complete abdication of responsibility for any of the discord in this country.
The Left scoffs at the idea of being called “radical.” That term is reserved for an evil, deplorable other. But they don’t see they have become exactly whom they claim to fear. As long as they can’t admit to being part of the problem, their calls for unity are beyond obnoxious — they’re impossible.