Features Australia

No logic please, we’re Leftists

Woke inconsistencies provide boundless unintended humour

24 October 2020

9:00 AM

24 October 2020

9:00 AM

Leftists have herd immunity to humour. Nowhere is this more evident than with ABC ‘comedy’ (there’s a series impending that will touch new depths of witless vulgarity) where studio audiences, and the woke watching in their warehouse conversions, laugh like automata at sex, crudity and blasphemy but never, which is the key to all real humour, at themselves.

That doesn’t mean that there’s nothing for the rest of us to laugh at. Leftists themselves inadvertently generate humour and fall into laughable inconsistencies when holding forth on their various obsessions. Take that perennial leftist favourite, ‘overpopulation’. Australia ‘should be leading a global discussion’ on reducing the world’s population, declared enviro-relic Bob Brown recently. Coming at a time of worldwide pandemic that’s almost hilarious. A discussion chaired by who? China? ‘Human population,’ chimes in the British-based organisation Population Matters, ‘has grown beyond Earth’s sustainable means. We are consuming more resources than our planet can regenerate, with devastating consequences.’ In a stroke of inadvertent comedy, Population Matters has appointed among its patrons a female race car driver called Leilani Münter, also described as an ‘environmental activist.’ Active at what? Noise pollution? Pumping fumes into the air? Oblivious to irony, Leilani informs us that the ‘ultimate intelligence of our species will be determined by whether we face our population issue and get it under control.’ Vroom vroom with that.

Tim Flannery and his fellow thinkers at Sustainable Population Australia will gladden Bob’s heart. They’ve set themselves the goal of ‘ending population growth in Australia…’ Happily for multiculturalism they’ll do it ‘while rejecting racism’ which presumably means not targeting philoprogenitive migrants. That’s a laugh, since Anglo-origin populations are already barely replacing themselves.

Then there’s Sir David Attenborough, who has simultaneously turned himself into a world heritage monument and nature into a version of Disneyland, with, as in all Disney movies, its dark side (too many people). He warns us somewhat self-evidently that population growth ‘means more carbon footprints, more cars (sorry Leilani) and emissions.’

So what do these neo-Malthusians think should be done? Population Matters helpfully advises that ‘You can make the biggest difference of all. You can choose to have a smaller family and enjoy the benefits this brings.’ Not that the ‘benefits’ add up to much. ‘By choosing to have a smaller family you are also putting less strain on the Earth’s resources and reducing the detrimental effects we are having on our environment.’ Presumably if you’re a leftist parent that would give you a rewarding glow.

Oddly, one thing Population Matters omits to advise is something everyone preaching against overpopulation could do right now, as their very own personal contribution to reduce ‘the detrimental effects we are having on our environment’. They could make a start to limiting the number of people on the planet by subtracting themselves from the scene.

Of course they won’t – and here we have a classic example of the kind of contradiction inherent in propositions of the Left. The proposer invariably sees himself as extraneous to the proposition. If there’s a sacrifice to be made, other people have to make it.

You see it with our ‘invaded’ country. We realise, having heard it ad nauseam, that the dispossession of our so-called ‘first nations’ was illegal, etc., and it’s a pity that the Aborigines, among the vast achievements of their civilisation, as Bruce Pascoe has assured us, didn’t have tanks and battleships to chuck the invaders out. But they didn’t, and the Left now considers Australia occupied territory. So why do leftists, who get themselves into quite a state about it, go on living here? Aren’t they perpetuating the invasion? In fact, aren’t they, by descent, the invader?

Shouldn’t they remove themselves to somewhere more congenial – Venezuela suggests itself, or to indulge their anti-Britishness, the Irish Republic or Brussels – and leave this country that much less ‘occupied’?

When it comes to the ‘climate emergency’ leftists get positively schizophrenic. On the one hand there are (or were but will be again) celebrities spouting eco-crank pieties as they jet around the world, and on the other the rest of us who are told by the same celebrities to go by bus – or better, Shanks’s pony – for Gaia’s sake. But what about the belief that there is an emergency? Leftists tend not to believe in God because they can’t see Him. But they can’t see any evidence of climate apocalyptics either, yet they believe because they have been told the emergency exists by ‘settled science’, just as Christians believe what the Bible tells them.

‘Fat-shaming’ is a sin leftists have invented. They see it as a kind of racism against gluttons. Yet leftists in the bureaucracy and in such bastions of leftist orthodoxy as the Age and the Sydney Morning Herald regularly run panic campaigns against ‘obesity’. And those same organs carry drooling features on food and drink that Lucullus might find excessive.

They also slavishly adopt American locutions – ‘guys’, ‘train station’, ‘rookie’, ‘ball park’, ‘chopper’ while often editorially displaying a visceral anti-Americanism in politics and culture. Younger leftists see no inconsistency in pronouncing estate, address and schedule the American way.

Leftists regard capital punishment as barbaric but abortion as a civilised human right (don’t say woman’s right because leftist doctrine on ‘gender fluidity’ must surely mean ‘men’ can have abortions too). Their approach to marriage, likewise, is in logical disarray. Feminists called marriage domestic slavery until they recognised its possibilities for undermining social stability with a same-sex version. They’re in tacit connivance with Muslims, who not only loathe gay ‘marriage’ but mutilate women and murder gay males without a word of protest from the feminists and gays whose supposed ‘sisters’ and ‘brothers’ are their victims. Why? Because Muslims are against the West, and leftists hate the West, even though it’s where they live their privileged existences and they would never dare sample life in Iran or Saudi Arabia. How many inconsistencies in that?

But of course, if you’re on the Left, they’re not inconsistencies. They are alternative realities. Which is why Marxist philosophers have abolished objective truth and declared that logic is a white supremacist ‘construct’: so that leftists can witter on with their contradictory nonsense. We shouldn’t complain: it gives the rest of us something to smile at in the bleak world those same leftists are successfully foisting on us.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments