Konstantin Kisin, channelling Thomas Sowell, explains the underlying reasons why progressives and conservatives think differently and how in extreme cases like the Hamas attack leftie dreamers are jolted and forced to confront the brutal reality of human nature.

That some people simply have no moral guardrails or brakes on their behaviour.

Basically it’s that because human nature is what it is, lefties are dreamers who believes that solutions to intractable problems can be forced while conservatives believe that at best they only be managed.

“…𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠, 𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐬𝐡 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬.

𝐀𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐦. 𝐀𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚 𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞𝐬.

𝐈𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐡𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬, 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫.

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟-𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐡𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐤𝐞-𝐮𝐩 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝…”

READ ON — Cut and paste below and full essay HERE

“….When Hamas terrorists crossed over the border with Israel and murdered 1,400 innocent people, they destroyed families and entire communities. They also shattered long-held delusions in the West.

A friend of mine joked that she woke up on October 7 as a liberal and went to bed that evening as a 65-year-old conservative. But it wasn’t really a joke and she wasn’t the only one.

What changed?

The best way to answer that question is with the help of Thomas Sowell, one of the most brilliant public intellectuals alive today.

In 1987, Sowell published A Conflict of Visions. In this now-classic, he offers a simple and powerful explanation of why people disagree about politics.

We disagree about politics, Sowell argues, because we disagree about human nature. We see the world through one of two competing visions, each of which tells a radically different story about human nature.

Those with “unconstrained vision” think that humans are malleable and can be perfected. They believe that social ills and evils can be overcome through collective action that encourages humans to behave better.

To subscribers of this view, poverty, crime, inequality, and war are not inevitable. Rather, they are puzzles that can be solved. We need only to say the right things, enact the right policies, and spend enough money, and we will suffer these social ills no more.

This worldview is the foundation of the progressive mindset.

By contrast, those who see the world through a “constrained vision” lens believe that human nature is a universal constant. No amount of social engineering can change the sober reality of human self-interest, or the fact that human empathy and social resources are necessarily scarce.

People who see things this way believe that most political and social problems will never be “solved”; they can only be managed. This approach is the bedrock of the conservative worldview.

Hamas’s barbarism—and the explanations and celebrations throughout the West that followed their orgy of violence—have forced an overnight exodus from the “unconstrained” camp into the “constrained” one.

The events of the last two weeks have shattered the illusion that wokeness is about protecting victims and standing up for persecuted minorities.

This ideology is and has always been about the one thing many of us have told you it is about for years: power.

And after the last two weeks, there can be no doubt about how these people will use any power they seize: they will seek to destroy, in any way they can, those who disagree.

This unpleasant conclusion is surprising only if you are still clinging to the unconstrained vision. But if there is any constant in human history, it is that revolutionaries always feel entitled to destroy those who stand in their way…”