Our enemies don’t think that we’re really human. Not that they know what “human” means, or even have a halfway coherent theory which they carry around in their heads.

Half the time, leftists take comfort in Darwin’s fable, and tell themselves that we’re just brainy apes. That’s the worldview they use when they want to dismantle something that stands between them and whatever they want at the moment. (For instance, when they’re faced with some moral taboo that Caesar, Mammon, or Sodom has decided is inconvenient.)

The other half of the time, leftists seem to believe that we are disembodied spirits — far “above” the mere demands of mortal flesh and bone. They whip that theory out when they face a different obstacle, for instance the stark biological chasm dividing male from female. Then they’re not trousered quasi-chimps but demons, defying the narrow confines of a creator who trapped their grandiose souls in frail, failing bodies.

Aha, I’ve Caught You in a Logical Contradiction! (Crickets)

You might think you’re being clever by confronting some Progressive with this howling contradiction. Don’t bother. He’ll just say something mindless in a condescending tone, like “That’s not the same thing.” But his face will give him away. It will wear the look a hungry dog does when you put up the bag of smoked duck’s feet. You’re not dealing with intellect but appetite.

The closest Progressives come to reconciling the tensions in their schizophrenic, alternating, subhuman/demon theory of what human beings really are is this: They are the real humans, who are ultimately guided by rationality and compassion, while everyone else is an unruly, aggressive animal. Economists and policymakers have even codified this shockingly elitist theory, and given a cute little name.

They call it “Nudge.” The smart and enlightened people who drive to their government jobs in their Priuses with Ivy League stickers on the back concoct policies that manipulate the public into … doing what’s best for them. (Based on the decisions of “experts,” “fact-checkers,” and “credentialed professionals,” of course. Don’t worry your pretty head about it.) These won’t rely on reason (poor dears!) but on behavioral psychology. That is, on the techniques picked up from studying rats and other animals in the lab. Essentially, it means designing mazes for us to run in pursuit of cheese.

Training You Like a Rat in a Lab

For a scholarly explanation of how this approach has invaded every level of governance and the behavior of our Oligarchs in media, see Matthew Crawford’s essay “The New Public Health Despotism” at the excellent centrist (!) online magazine Unherd.

Everything from the wording of public health announcements to the political manipulation of Google results emerges from the same dark, arrogant place. That is, from the relentless intent to “nudge” the general public so that it obeys the elites.

Wear a mask, take the vaccine, eat the bugs, replace your car with an electric, don’t have so many kids, don’t go to that church or vote for that candidate … and don’t ask any questions. And of course don’t dare to dissent, or you won’t get the cheese — in fact, you might get a little electric shock instead, like those warnings Twitter sends you before it finally shuts down your account.

The scientists in the lab coats, or the bureaucrats in Washington, will decide what is acceptable to think, say, and do. And if you know what’s good for you, you’ll just “get with the program.” If you don’t, you know the consequences.

The “N” Word for Christians

All of the above was necessary to unpack two grotesque examples of verbal manipulation used by the left (and its NeverTrump puppets) to silence debate on crucial topics.

I’ve already written here on the origins of the buzzword “Christian Nationalism.” It’s a phrase you shouldn’t use, unless you’ve decided to embrace it and throw it back in our enemies’ teeth. “Why yes, I’m a Christian Nationalist. Are you a Pagan Tribalist? Or a Pantheist Imperialist? Because those are the only logical alternatives.”

But no sane person or sincere believer ought to be taking seriously the dark forbodings and grim associations that leftists and Servile Christians imply when they use the term. It’s a piece of hate speech, to make certain people seem perfectly okay to hate. It doesn’t have any stable, real meaning, and we shouldn’t labor to give it one.

No, “Christian Nationalist” was coined by some IQ-95 intellectual to stifle debate, confuse the issues, and inhibit rational discourse. Instead of conveying information, it’s meant to scare people and shame them. That’s because it sounds so much like “White Nationalist,” and elites count on those whom they hope to control not to step back and do any thinking. No, they’ll just on some semi-conscious level make the connection and say, “Ooh, that must be bad! If I sniff that I won’t get any cheese — I’ll get a shock!”

Liz Cheney, Bolshevik?

The same kind of dreary, amoral behaviorist who coined “Christian Nationalist” must have come up with “Election Denier.” That’s the term recently used by the late Rep. Liz Cheney, whose political career died of Trump Derangement Syndrome this week:

It’s one thing for Pelosi and other Dem activists to use the *patently absurd* phrase “election denier” against people with legit concerns about recent election administration issues. No serious person should ever utter the phrase for Americans who want free and fair elections. https://t.co/ouSN3uxwpd

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) August 17, 2022

When Democrats denied that George W. Bush or Donald Trump were legitimately elected, were they “Election Deniers”? Of course not. They were “skeptics” or “election integrity activists” or some other happy word which brings with a nice dose of cheese. But those of us who noticed and complained about the massive irregularities, and provable fraud, in 2020? We are “Election Deniers,” a phrase that was coined to evoke “Holocaust Deniers.” And to make people wince at the prospect of getting a nasty electrical shock. Or going to jail for a year while the government railroads you into prison.

The Soviets made up “Kulak” as a synonym for “blood-sucking parasite” to justify hanging farmers who wished to keep the grain they’d grown, instead of handing all of it over to murderous atheist bandits. It’s wretched to realize that the Republican Establishment is willing to use such Bolshevik hate speech against its own political base.

That’s why we need to smash that Establishment into millions of little impoverished, forgotten pieces.

John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream and author or co-author of ten books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. He is co-author with Jason Jones of “God, Guns, & the Government.”