This week, the Washington Post issued a retraction, if not an apology, for their much mocked headline “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48”
Their retraction, which didn’t even include an apology, rings hollow.
By now this much should be clear: The Left simply hates the Covington boys more than they hate ISIS.
They “kinda sorta maybe” know that they’re supposed to hate ISIS, but they don’t really feel it. Not viscerally. You can almost hear the gears turning in their minds as they try to filter and qualify their words through a maze of learned woke concepts that confuse and block any connection between their observations of ISIS atrocities and their own negative emotions.
They have this respect for Islam and also feel that anything negative Islam does is probably America’s fault. When expressing any negative thoughts towards any member of any protected group their automatic filter says they can’t generalize or express any disrespect. Their ideology demands that they seek out as many excuses as they can dream up—one day saying that ISIS isn’t really Islam, only a pervision of it, and the next describing al-Baghdadi as a religious scholar.
Contrast that thought process with how they think, for example, of the Covington boys. They just hate those f’ing kids, period. There was no respect, no qualification, no search for what was good or fair to say about them. Neither was there any quest to “understand their scholarship” or anything else that might inform them. There was just pure hatred. They know they should hate ISIS but they actually do hate Covington. The connection through the mind in the Covington case was direct.
The wrong facial expression from Covington boy, Nick Sandmann, is extrapolated to a hatred of white patriarchal Christianity—his smirk is a symbol of global oppression spanning millennia. But ISIS burning people alive in cages, cutting off heads to post on the internet? Well that doesn’t really indicate much. They’re not really sure what it means but they are sure the real danger is to make it mean too much or to generalize it beyond a few individuals.
In their minds, the Covington boy’s smirk tightly connects him to slavery, whereas Al-Baghdadi’s actual slavery doesn’t really connect him to slavery. Fidel Castro was a literal plantation owner, who got rich by having black slaves pick tobacco. This did not connect him to slavery.
Intelligence is about connecting what you observe to what it means, and the connections must be accurate and proportionate. The cult of Marxist ideology demands stupidity because it breaks that process. For example a “microaggression” is a demand to treat a micro molehill as if it were a mountain—to take the tenuously connected or incidental and draw a huge connection or conclusion. Intersectionality demands guilt by association. On the other hand, their ideology simultaneously demands that things with a very strong direct connection are sent on a detour to oblivion. #NotAllMuslims, “you can’t generalize,” “you can’t stereotype,” “who’s to judge?”
Thus, to be in good standing in the cult you must be stupid. Equal application of connections is not allowed. You must directly connect the Covington smirk as a microaggression in support of slavery, and you must block Al-Baghdadi’s slavery from any connection to Islam. In fact, not only can you not generalize it to all Muslims, you can’t even generalize it to Al-Baghdadi’s whole life. Thus Al-Baghdadi is more connected to scholarship, than to slavery.
The cult of Marxist ideology requires stupidity: doublethink, wrongthink, 2 + 2 = 5. Communism disallows intelligence. Plastic straws are a huge threat but Marxist genocide isn’t. It’s not a one-off wrong conclusion. It’s the systemic altering of how the connections that make up thought happen. This is why their invocation of “science” is a joke. Where their science intersects with their cult, their cult’s dictates win.
The Washington Post apology is garbage. They don’t actually see what they did as wrong and they only took the tweet down because they got blowback. Why are we shocked that Al-Baghdadi is to them a “scholar” when the Left is still celebrating the “operatic life” of “family man” Che Guevara?
There is seriously something broken about their brains. They are not just incapable of seeing reality, they are required to apply irrational thought processes to be in good standing within their cult. Their moral compasses are broken. They support evil repeatedly. They lie in one direction repeatedly. They are enemies of rational thought, of liberty, of justice, of goodness. They are enemies of the people.