The left, this self-proclaimed bastion of justice and compassion, reveals itself through a deeply disturbing double standard that undermines the very foundation of universal ethics.
Their moral reflex appears not as principled but as tribalistic: loyalty to one’s own group overrides any consistent norm, and the result is an ethic morally corrupted to its core – a perverted version of humanism that serves power games rather than human dignity.
This becomes particularly visible in reactions to political violence. When a brutal tyrant such as Khamenei – a man who imprisons dissidents, crushes opposition and suppresses millions in Iran – is killed in an assassination, indignation explodes. The condemnations arrive immediately, accompanied by dramatic warnings of escalation and destabilisation, while the tyrant’s own abuses suddenly disappear from view, as if his victims were worthless in their calculated narrative.
But when a conservative Christian such as Charlie Kirk – a political activist who primarily represents ideas they themselves despise – freedom from state interference, individual responsibility, free markets that promote innovation and prosperity, limited government that protects personal rights, and economic independence without socialist coercion – becomes the target of similar violence, something strange and deeply disturbing occurs.
Then the lofty moral principles disappear entirely. The comment sections fill with laughter, schadenfreude and claims that this was essentially “deserved”. The same violence that was just presented as a moral catastrophe is suddenly tolerated, explained or even applauded. This asymmetry is not merely inconsistent; it is a moral scandal of demonic proportions, an ethical bankruptcy in which the left reveals itself as a gang of hypocritical opportunists who sacrifice principles for tribal hatred.
What is revealed here is a mechanism in which morality is no longer assessed according to the nature of the act, but according to whom the act strikes – a primitive, barbaric logic that reduces ethics to a tool for group survival. Enemies can be demonised, ridiculed and ultimately dehumanised, while other actors – even brutal tyrants – can be treated with a peculiar moral caution if they fit into a political narrative. The same violence can thus be barbaric one day and understandable the next. Principles do not shift because reality changes, but because the identity of the group demands it – a corrupted morality that is as poisonous as it is self-deceptive.
The result is a political culture in which morality is reduced to an instrument of tribal instinct, a malignant form of tribalism in which group loyalty blindly overrides universal justice. This is a mimetic cycle of violence, in which the left needs scapegoats such as Kirk to maintain its internal unity, while Khamenei becomes their sacred victim – a symbol of “anti-imperialism” used to rally the flock. This is satanic in its nature, a primitive mechanism that projects one’s own aggression onto others and perpetuates an eternal cycle of conflict and injustice in which morality becomes a weapon for collective hatred.
Their degeneration into an identity-political abyss, in which the dominant progressive left – the one that has taken over the public discourse in present-day Norway and the West – has become a culture of performative virtue-signalling that masks a deeper moral rot. This variant, which scarcely any longer has anything to do with genuine ideas of freedom, but instead is a mixture of collective moral policing, state intervention and selective empathy, prioritises narratives of “oppression” over actual morality. Their hypocrisy regarding Khamenei and Kirk is symptomatic: they are trapped in echo chambers that forbid genuine dialogue and promote a toxic form of group hatred. This is a destructive force that undermines the credibility of the progressive left and reduces it to a gang of superficial activists who poison the public sphere.
Their group blindness – a fatal lack of self-insight in which tribalism is disguised as progressivism, but in reality is a primitive, destructive force that divides nations and betrays universal justice. They protest against the assassination of Khamenei because it threatens their anti-Western narrative, while they rejoice over Kirk because he symbolises the “privileged” enemy. This is not solidarity; it is barbaric tribal behaviour that constitutes a threat to the foundations of society, and the left is responsible for this moral decay.
Their eternal melancholy as a left that has lost the utopia and now wallows in defeat and a mentality of victimhood – a sick nostalgia that replaces action with perpetual complaint and promotes a corrupted ethic in which trauma is cultivated as currency. They cultivate Khamenei as a melancholic icon, while Kirk becomes the symbol of their lost struggle, a dynamic that betrays the historical calling of the left to liberation and reduces it to a pathetic shadow of itself.
Their fanaticism as a destructive generation driven by self-deception and totalitarian tendencies. Their jubilation over the attempt on Kirk fits their Marxist delusions, while the protest against Khamenei maintains the illusion of their own goodness. They are naïve accomplices in oppression, having forgotten their own violent history – a moral corruption that is as dangerous as it is hypocritical.
They are a mass movement of true believers, driven by frustration into fanaticism – a malignant collective psychosis in which Khamenei becomes their sacred cause and Kirk their demon. Such movements are dangerous, filled with the dissatisfied who seek meaning through collective hatred, thereby undermining true morality with a toxic mixture of self-righteousness and aggression.
The left is no longer what it once claimed to be; it is completely woke – a perversion of genuine values, in which universalism has been abandoned for tribalism, justice for power games and progress for doom. Their hypocrisy reveals a reduction of morality to identity, in which victims are sacred only if they fit the agenda – an ethical catastrophe that is morally corrupt and demonic in its consequences.
They truly believe that they are the anointed – a self-satisfied, self-appointed elite that sees itself as the bearer of the only true moral insight, chosen to guide the ignorant masses. It is an arrogant conviction of their own superiority: “We know better, we see more clearly, we are the enlightened.” Facts become secondary when they collide with their “vision” – reality becomes something that can be twisted, ignored or rewritten to fit the narrative.
This anointing reveals itself in everything: they proclaim universal justice but select victims according to the agenda. They preach empathy but display cynicism towards those who do not fit the category of “good people”. They cry out about oppression but fall silent when their own allies commit the same or worse.
It is not merely hypocrisy – it is a moral corruption in which one’s own position as “the good” sanctifies all means. Arrogance disguised as virtue, power games disguised as enlightenment, and a deep contempt for those who dare to challenge the anointing.
They destroy society by making dialogue impossible: disagreement is not met with arguments, but with moral exclusion. Those who refuse to bow to their “truth” are not merely wrong – they become evil, racist, fascist, unworthy. It is a toxic dynamic in which self-congratulatory conviction of one’s own moral purity replaces genuine reflection and responsibility. The result is a divided, poisoned public sphere in which nothing is true any longer unless it fits their anointed narrative.
This development points towards a deeper crisis in modern political culture: universal principles are gradually replaced by identity, narratives and power games, a malignant process in which justice is reduced to who belongs to the right group and who may be sacrificed without moral cost. Instead of universalism a new tribal system emerges in which indignation and victim status become political currency, a demonic corruption that poisons the very soul of society. Morality loses its universal character and becomes a weapon in ideological conflicts – a brutal reprehensibility for which the left bears responsibility.