Thursday, February 28, 2013

The Politically Leftist Rationalization Hamster

If you are unaware of what a "rationalization hamster" is, it is a metaphorical reference created by a man with the pen name "Roissy."  This metaphor is typically used in a romantic, sexual or psychological context, explaining how (usually) women will explain or "rationalize away" their conflicting or contradictory behavior.  The purpose of this "rationalization hamster" is to allow it's "host" the ability to live in denial, avoid criticism and shame, and to protect their ego at all costs.

For example the rationalization hamster will never allow a single mother of 4, at the age of 44, with a divorce under her belt to contemplate and self-inflect that maybe she chose the wrong guy and made a horrendous mistake in having children and has caused harm to those children.  The rationalization hamster will "spin its wheels" and desperately try to find a reason or "rationalization" as to why it is not the woman's fault and why she is 100% innocent and guilt free in the manner.  The ex was a "jerk," she loves her children, yada yada yada.  The rationalization hamster will also go to great lengths to shield said hypothetical person from her dating prospects.

"She's a MILF"

"She's a cougar!"

"44 is the new 24!"

"Watch Eat, Pray, Love, You'll See!"

In other words, the rationalization hamster is a coping mechanism because the host's brain cannot sustain the entirety of her situation otherwise she would be crushed and no longer able to function.

Naturally, as the hamster spins its wheel faster and faster, creating more and more excuses and rationalizations, it places its host on a trajectory of a delusional life, especially in the context of "sexual market value" (ie-you're always hot, you're always a catch, men are evil for not wanting to raise 4 other mens' children, etc.).  Since the host doesn't live, nor make decisions, based in the real world, this trajectory sends her at mach 4 into "The Wall."

"The Wall" is the theoretical point at which the empirical and anecdotal evidence is so numerous, compelling and condemning, the host has no choice but to ignore the rationalization hamster and accept reality.  The host is "all of the sudden" 55, men are no longer hitting on her, but her younger contemporaries, and despite being the hot thing back in the Reagan administration, she is effectively now a grandma, whether she has children or not.

Currently, there is debate if it is even possible for a host to hit "The Wall" in that it requires the host to accept reality.  Rationalization hamsters are INCREDIBLY powerful creatures driving women to think they're still sexy at the age of 70 (Jane Fonda any one?).  And no post-Wall-collision hosts have been identified in the wild, just women with their cats wondering why they can't find a man.  It is merely a theory our scientists are working on, akin to "can you escape the event horizon of a black hole?" and is one that may never be solved.

Regardless of the socio-sexual-romantic ramifications of the "Rationalization Hamster," the metaphor actually provides a great political model as well.  Specifically, a model that explains leftist thought and behavior, and can provide great insight and practical uses for those of us not on the left.  And once we see the similiarities between that of a (typically) female host of a sexual/socio rationalization hamster and that of a politically leftist rationalization hamster, we can start to draw from it.

First, and most obviously, both are impervious to logic, reason, and above all else empirical data.  There is no shortage of instances in my life where I have shown a leftist charts, data, and statistics, of an unbiased nature proving they were flat out wrong, but they STILL came up with a reason or rationalization as to why I was wrong (my favorite being a philosophy doctorate inevitably saying her "perception was reality" and that all of what we were arguing about ultimately didn't matter - she is now a stay at home mom married to a very unhappy surgeon with buyer's remorse).

The reason why is that both types of hosts (socio/sexual, or politically left) do not live in reality.  And it's not so much that they don't "live in reality" as much as it is their value is based on lies.  If you look at the typical 44 year old single mom with a divorce and 4 kids under her belt, her life is effectively over until the youngest graduates from high school.  That is the truth. However, that is a harsh truth to accept and so a rationalization hamster is needed to either help her digest that truth or (as is more commonly the case) deny it outright.  For the leftist host of a politically left rationalization hamster the thought process is the same.  Most leftists do not achieve anything great in life.  Either because of incompetence, incapability or (as is most often the case) laziness.  Of course, their egos are far too big and fragile to accept that truth, so their rationalization hamster comes up with rationalization as to why they're

1.  oppressed
2.  kept down by the corporations man
3.  not understood
4.  conspiracy theories

etc. etc.

Second is the emotional reactions hosts of rationalization hamsters (social or political) have.  Notice when you ask a conservative or a libertarian to describe themselves they will say a "plumber" or a "cop" or a "surgeon."  Their trade or job is what defines them first and foremost because that is the value they produce in life.  When you ask a leftist to describe him or herself they really produce nothing of value, and so they cite their political ideology as a descriptor of them.  Even if they do have a job, the job itself is typically nothing more than a euphemism of their political ideology (activist, crusader, CSR head, director of worthless non-profit, etc.).  But further proving the point is what happens when you criticize a host infected with a ratioanlization hamster about their ideology.  If you criticize a conservative about being a plumber, let a lone a conservative, they might get irked, but they will dismiss you.  They are secure and comfortable in being a plumber and a conservative.  YOu criticize a leftist for being ignorant of government finances or that they're not really an "artist" because nobody wants to buy their art, they get ENRAGED.  Not because you are being rude, but because you are pointing out the hypocrisy in which they live their lives.  You are getting too close to the truth, and you are sending the rationalization hamster into overdrive.

This can been seen in how quickly a debate with a leftist turns into name calling.  If you don't like Obama, you're a racist.  If you don't want to tax the rich more, you're a sexist.  If you want to balance the budget and cut back social security/medicare, you're an "ageist."  And dare you insist on dating chicks in shape, you are "shallow" and a cad.  Doesn't matter that your concerns are based in reality, reality doesn't occur to them.  Their egos MUST be defended at all costs, even if that means ignoring reality.

Third, look at the sheer effort and energy that goes into feeding a political rationalization hamster.  If you look at what the primary job of a leftist is, it is to come up with excuses and reasons to be entitled to other people's money.  There's never enough money for educating the "childdddreeeeennnnnn."  Nearly all leftist arguments culminate into the class the rich "doesn't pay their fair share" (while never specifying what is that "fair share).  Feminists claim 1 in 3 women are raped so they can get their precious university funding for a "sexual abuse center" that provides them worthless jobs....errr..."protects women from rapists."  And the black community, if there ever was an example, is the saddest and most pathetic epitome of how much a group of people will destroy themselves and their lives because cowardly blaming their problems on racism is easier on the ego than acknowledge illegitimacy rates and fatherlessness.  Leftists are no less delusional than the middle aged women consuming Harlequin romance novels, reading feminist articles, watching Sex in the City, all while getting her "Masters in Fat Acceptance."

Fourth, they become "zombies."  I believe after a while, the human brain is so indoctrinated and pickled in the propaganda it receives (either because of "pro-women, you go grrrl!!!  Grrrrl power media" for sexual/socio rationalization hamsters or leftist indoctrination  for political rationalization hamsters) it rejects reality, even without thinking about.  You could have the most factual statistics and data that would turn their lives around, but because it doesn't jive with their leftist ideology, they immediately reject it (while of course calling you a racist). You have probably seen this when listening to leftists debate.  I don't even think they're cognizant of it.  Their brains have been so hardwired and maladjusted that they IMMEDIATELY have the talking point ready to retort your empirical facts and data.  It's worse than having no desire to be intellectually honest.  It's that they no longer have the capacity to.

I call this this "Zombie Liberal" and its ramifications are quite macabre.  Because if the economy ever were to collapse, do you see reasoning with the hordes of starving liberals and leftists whose mental capacity is to blame "everything on Bush?"  Do you see a raving leftist, in desperate need of insulin, who, coincidentally by the way, has been brought up to have an entitlement mentality, wanting to sit down and rationally discuss with you about how the "debt to GDP ratio" got too high and when China pulled the plug and the US credit rating went down, that's why gas prices got so high insulin couldn't be transported into the city?  The only reason they're reasonably well behaved now and not rioting in the streets is because the lights are still on and they're (in one way or another) getting their government check.  Wait for an emergency or when there's no goods to buy with the government check and see how reasonable they're going to be.

Certainly, there are many more parallels between the socio/sexual rationalization hamster and its political brother, but in the end you have effectively the same thing - a person with a mental disorder.  Being infected by a rationalization hamster, whether sociol/sexual or political, is nothing more than living a delusional life.  And I say this not to be mean, but to try to help these people.  Because it isn't the libertarian or conservative who has to wake up day in and day out and lie to themselves about how the real world works.  It isn't the plumber or the surgeon who has to rationalize taking other people's money from them for nothing in return.  It isn't Tina the engineering major who needs a government program in "Women's Studies" to find employment.  It isn't the Walter Williams of the world who play the victim/race card to explain the poor decisions they've made in the past.  And it isn't the conservative lying on his deathbed wondering if he's pissed his life away as a "professional activist" (because, well, he was an accountant).  It's the cowards and intellectual weaklings of the world who plain don't have the stamina, fortitude, work ethic and maturity to become independent adults and enjoy the real world.  


Martel said...

What you describe is largely a function of the leftist tendency to mix up two of Western Civ's foundational principles.

There is what is, and we all have some concept of what should be. Leftists don't understand people as they are but instead view them through the prism of what they think they should be.

For example, they think that if you increase the minimum wage that employers will simply suck it up and pay their employees more. After all, they're "rich" and they should respond to redistribution schemes by simply complying. They don't, unemployment increases, and then they blame greed.

Human nature is what it is. A is A. Instead, they believe that their fantasies of what people should be (caring & loving & impervious to self-interest)can actually come to fruition. They never do, the need for more control becomes more and more apparent, so welcome to totalitarianism.

Queen Hamster clouds every aspect of their conception of reality. A $16 trillion debt is a pittance (we should spend even more). "Gun-Free Zone" signs will somehow dissuage homicidal maniacs. The list goes on forever.

Of course, when it comes to politics, they're the realists and conservatives and libertarians are the dumbass idealists. They're policies are completely incompetent, but they're fantastic at implementing them.

I explore this in more detail here:

Great post.

Anonymous said...

" Instead, they believe that their fantasies of what people should be (caring & loving & impervious to self-interest)can actually come to fruition. "

They really don't believe that. They are COUNTING ON IT. Their lifestyle depends on the generosity of OTHERS, whether with money or with solidarity. So they must live in place where that exists (forced or otherwise). Notice they never live by what they preach, when was the last time Bill Gates or Warren Bafoon paid more taxes than they absolutely had to?

The absolute ability not to see something when staring right at it is a thing to behold.

robins111 said...

I had two of these 44 going on 19 working for me in an office environment, I finally put my foot down and told them, I didn't give a shit what their personal lives were like, unless they stopped the high school cheerleaders nonsense, I'd reassign them to a place where the only company was mosquitoes and deer flies.

Naturally I was called in by my supervisor, (elected position) for a discussion.. Won that one too.

Personally I think all three involved, including supervisor, have made a career choice of lying to themselves..

chitown said...

A was discussing politics a couple of years ago with a liberal at work and after he was frustrated with the facts I was bringing up said "I don't care if Charles Manson is the presidential nominee I would vote for him as a Democrat over any Republican." I made no personal judgements, just discussed actions (profligate spending) by the government. Obviously there was no reasoning with his world view no matter the facts so I dropped any discussion of politics around him.

Off topic.. Looking forward to the Wild rematch on March 5th. Still trying to determine what it feels like to lose in regulation.

Also bought 'Enjoy the Decline' today to make up for the snark.

Anonymous said...

this is my favorite post of yours. great insight.

Dave said...

Nature is not kind to the deluded. If, for example, you think the grizzly bears won't eat you because you're their friend, this delusion will end with your death.

Many of us took years to think our way out of liberal fantasies. When the welfare-state Ponzi collapses, these hamster-hosts will have (at most) a few weeks to re-educate themselves or die.

In the absence of effective law enforcement, predators won't just run up to liberals and kill them. They'll be more subtle, pretending to be liberals themselves, gaining confidence by being polite, non-white (you're racist if you don't trust me!), and expressing correct opinions. Then another liberal white girl wakes up chained to a bed in a Mexican brothel, or missing a few vital organs.

White Knight Leo #0368 said...

I will admit sometimes I turn away from reality, but only in the sense that I let myself forget for a while. Not because I dislike reality, mind, but because it gets overwhelming watching the sheer stupidity and gullibility and Conflict of Interest decisions made by politicos and voters sometimes.

Anonymous said...

"The Wall" is a mythical structure unreachable by most of the hamsters. No matter how hard they try...

Anonymous said...

great rant. dont waste time arguing with liberals. the rate of return is not worth it.

Anonymous said...

What happened to the "you don't own you home' posting?

Eric S. Mueller said...

Awesome analysis. I saw a perfect example yesterday. A friend I've learned NOT to discuss politics with sent me a FaceBook message in response to something I posted about the federal debt.

I tried to get clarification, and ran it by another friend to make sure I understand correctly . This is what I believe he was saying:

"It's not the debt that is the problem. It's the trillions in tax cuts the Republicans gave to the wealthy. The Republicans and the weathly are the problem. The Democrats will save us all if only the Republicans weren't there."

That is in my words, but I believe an accurate representation of what my friend (leftist) was saying. Oh, and he even said the Republicans want me to believe neither party is any good, therefore not being a Republican supporter is exactly what they want me to do. That one lost me. I'm a Libertarian/Anarchist because that's exactly what the Republicans want?

I closed the chat window and walked away. Life's too short.

Anonymous said...

I know you read these, so I found a site you might want to put up right next to the bitterbabe.

Some excerpts from when she hits the wall, but doesn't get that she can't marry an alpha:

"When I met Steve I was 35. I was an accomplished, independent, grownup woman. Steve told me on our third date that he would never marry me.
I was crushed when I realized the truth and I finally left. I cried my eyes out for months. "

Help share the schadenfreude.

UberrRich said...

Excellent truth. Liberals think like irrational women.

Bobbye said...

This website has one of the best explainations of feminism, libralism, marxism tied together by Hegel's dialectic that I have ever read.
disclaimer: I do not know the blog owner nor am I trying to promote it. But it is a good read.

Bill said...

Good article, Cap'n. The population explosion in rationalization hamsters (need the Latin term for that) is tragic, yet there is a bright side: getting the rationalization hamster spinning is entertaining providing there is nothing more pressing to do.

I think it was Dalrock who used the analogy of disturbing an ant hill when you simply utter a few key words in the presence of women or liberals. Like ants they immediately react to repair the damage, or perceived threat of damage, caused by your utterance.

For example, you take a sip of your drink and then make this contribution to the conversation: "ummm... but universal day-care would be unaffordable." Say something like that and watch the ants flip into damage control immediately.

Look at your drink and remark you need a refill, walk off and don't come back. Move to another ant hill.

Man Mountain Molehill said...

It was leftists who claimed that the personal is political. The corollary is also true, to them the political is personal. Their politics is who they are. Which is why they can't tell the difference between a rational argument and an ad hominem attack. To argue with their politics is a personal attack. And why they think sliming conservatives with crude insults is the height of sophisticated discourse.

Or they're just dumb, ignorant jerks.

Anonymous said...

Leftists say there is no human nature.