How Do We Explain The Irrationality Of The Left?

As I have discussed many times before, and we all understand that many on the left approach their desire for equality with fanatical enthusiasm. Their brains are wired to detect and oppose equality denied to certain minority groups. I use the word certain because it doesn’t apply to all groups. For example, the left does not care about disadvantaged white people because they are on the wrong side of the oppressed-oppressor dichotomy.

They do not care about Asian people because they have worked hard to reach a high achievement level, without the help of the left, so they don’t fit the narrative. They do not care about Jews, since Jews have been labeled as oppressors of the Palestinian people.

The fuel causing the left to act follows from the identification of oppressed groups and the launching of efforts to protect them. Grievance is the catalyst for their work, and it all began when Women’s Studies programs were created at universities in 1969, marking academia’s first departure from the tree of human knowledge.

Up until that point, all academic scholarship was based on the division and advancement of existing knowledge. Natural history became biology, ecology, and geology. Natural philosophy became physics, chemistry, and astronomy. The social sciences grew out of natural history as a way to understand humans, just as we try to understand plants and animals. The tree grew larger and larger over time as our knowledge expanded, and each subject had a pedigree.

Women’s Studies and its companion disciplines had no pedigree, were agenda-driven, and powered by grievance. The scientific method was not relevant, because the answer that women were disadvantaged was already known. All that was needed was a focused effort to remove that disadvantage.

Here are four recent examples of irrational left behavior. I can’t relate to them because their behavior goes against what I consider normal.

1. A delivery nurse who works at Baptist Hospital in Boca Raton, Florida, posted a message on TikTok expressing the wish that Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Levitt, would have a difficult childbirth experience and suffer for a long time afterward. She was immediately fired.

2. A Nurse working at Virginia Commonwealth University posted a video on TikTok recommending that people consider ways to poison ICE personnel. She said in part, “anybody got any poison ivy, poison oak in their yard? Get some of that, obviously with gloves, and put it in some water. Like a gallon of water. And get the poison ivy/oak water, and I’m going to put it into a water gun. Aim for faces, hands.” “Sabotage tactic, or at least scare tactic. All the medical providers, grab some syringes with needles on the end,” she said. “Have them full of saline or succinylcholine, you know, whatever. Whatever. That will probably be a deterrent. Be safe.” She also encouraged women to go on dates with ICE agents to spike their drinks. She was also fired.

People have crazy thoughts all the time that enter their minds or are generated by anger. But broadcasting messages like these in public space is crazy. Did they think about their careers at all? Or did they believe the ICE issue was bigger than their careers? Self-harm generated by enthusiasm is hard to contemplate.

3. Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, was shot and killed by a federal ICE agent in Minneapolis on January 7, 2026, during an immigration enforcement operation. ICE’s response was based on her refusal to get out of her vehicle and her attempt to drive away, which included striking an ICE officer and causing internal bleeding to his torso.

Why didn’t she obey the ICE agents, who would have quickly defused the situation? The public knows that when a policeman (or policewoman) perceives a threat to their lives, they can respond with lethal force. Why do people create situations that force law enforcement to make that decision? Just obey the police when they tell you to do something.

4. On January 24, 2026, Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse for the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, was shot multiple times and killed by United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This incident occurred amidst the widespread protests against Operation Metro Surge following the killing of Renee Good on January 7 by a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent.

The investigation of this shooting is ongoing at this time, although it’s a fact that Pretti brought a loaded gun with him to the rally. Why would someone take a loaded gun to a rally, unless they thought they might need to use it? Having the firearm on his person constitutes a threat to law enforcement.

The only explanation for the behavior illustrated in these examples is a drive for equity that outweighs rational decision-making. The police are oppressors, according to their ideological dichotomy, and must be resisted. This attitude is similar to the “Defund the Police” movement, which sought to eliminate society’s most important tool for maintaining law and order. No law enforcement = anarchy.

Across many surveys over decades (Pew, Gallup, ANES, GSS), it has been shown that conservatives are much more likely to trust police, say police use appropriate force, believe people should comply with officers even if they disagree, and see the police as a legitimate authority. Liberals are more likely to be skeptical of police use of force, emphasize civil liberties and individual rights during encounters, and view police through a lens of systemic bias or overreach.

Conservatives certainly do things that open themselves up to criticism, but making public threats l and confronting law enforcement are not among them.

Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author’s own.