Why Are the Left Pro-Crime?  

I didn’t really understand what the Left’s lax attitude towards crime meant until I was in Berkeley in California last summer. In a branch of Target, anything which cost more than about 20 dollars could not simply be taken off the rack. It was locked onto it in order to prevent theft. You had to ask the shop assistant to remove it for you. This is because petty theft is effectively legal in California. The police are unlikely to investigate any theft of less than about 950 dollars.

I’d never been to California before, and once I realised this, it became clear why prices, such as in restaurants, were sky high compared to other parts of the US: the prices were an insurance policy against theft. Berkeley is a wealthy town, yet the moment I stepped outside my hotel, the stench of human urine and excrement was obvious. Vagrants lined the streets and played loud music in the public library, with nobody attempting to stop them. A fair few lived in tents on the campus of the University of California. Obviously high or drunk and almost certainly schizophrenic, they shouted at or otherwise intimidated passing students. In the Finnish town where I live, theft is practically unheard of and will be prosecuted, vagrancy in non-existent and people who are high in public will be arrested.

Why do the Woke permit criminality to flourish? Do they, somehow, enjoy intimidation on campus, the stench of human excreta and ludicrous prices in restaurants?

As I have discussed before, as pack animals, we have five Moral Foundations.  Conservatives are more group-oriented than liberals. They are more concerned with the moral foundations of in-group loyalty, obedience to authority and sanctity, in contrast to disgust. The latter causes people to react with disgust to that which impacts the group or themselves in a negative manner, including an invasion of outsiders, but also to disease.

People who are left-wing are concerned with the individually-oriented moral foundations of harm avoidance and equality. These allow you, as an individual, to ascend the hierarchy of the group, which was once necessary in order to pass on your genes. By being concerned about harm, you can avoid harm to yourself. By being concerned about equality, you ensure that you get proportionately more of the resources in a species that is highly cooperative.

It is useful to be particularly concerned about these issues if you are at the bottom of the hierarchy and, also, if you are physically weak. They are a means of covertly playing for status. Signalling your concern with them allows you to seem kind and morally good and is, thus, a means, in a pro-social species, of covertly ascending the hierarchy. Overall, conservatives are also concerned with these individually-oriented foundations but liberals are not concerned with the group-oriented foundations. Unsurprisingly, virtue-signalling and signalling your victimhood are associated with being a selfish individualist, with being high in Narcissism and Machiavellianism, for example.

Once you are in a context where individualist foundations are the key Moral Foundations, then power-hungry types—leftists—will competitively signal their interest in these foundations. Runaway concern with harm avoidance means that we have to be concerned about the feelings of the criminal. His criminality is not his fault; it is surely the fault of harm done to him by an unfair and uncaring society (or the fault of his genes), so why should he be punished? In the case of property crime, this is, surely, at least partly the fault of “systemic inequality” against which the looter’s “crime” is a noble form of protest.

According to transwoman American author Vicky, formerly Willie, Osterweil “rioting and looting are our most powerful tools for dismantling white supremacy.” He argues in his book In Defense of Looting: A Riotous History of Uncivil Action that the actions of looters are morally right, presumably until they threaten Osterweil’s property or safety, as it is mostly those of low socioeconomic status who are the victims of such crimes. Thus, for the power hungry leftist, the problems I discussed earlier are a small price to pay for the high social status which such competitive Woke signalling may achieve.

And, for most of them, it is only a small price. Being pro-crime is what Rob Henderson has called a “luxury belief.” It is a belief via which you can signal your Woke credentials while not having to deal with the consequences of your belief. It is also a means of signalling your confidence and wealth: you will experience no difficulties as there is no crime in your area. As Henderson wrote in the New York Post: “In other words, upper-class whites gain status by talking about their high status. When laws are enacted to combat white privilege, it won’t be the privileged whites who are harmed. Poor whites will bear the brunt.”

Even littering and vandalising public property, such as with graffiti—made respectable in among elites by Leftist writer Norman Mailer in the 1970s—are means via which a criminal has been able to express his legitimate grievances. Accordingly, society should not be protected from “traditional criminals” and they should receive only the lightest of sentences, if they must be prosecuted at all. By contrast, people stating that “you cannot become a woman” are challenging “equality” and harming people’s feelings. These people are attacking the dogmas that hold society together and, thus, they must be severely punished.

It is possible that there is a vicarious dimension to why leftists support such criminality. The pleasure of breaking the law is, for some people, a matter of feeling “empowered,” of experiencing a “power rush.” However, the bourgeoisie leftists aren’t really interested in a new television or in daubing graffiti. They are, however, interested in power rushes and fantasies of revolution, specifically “anti-hierarchical aggression,” as research on them has demonstrated. They will identify with criminals and enjoy their criminality vicariously, despite not being criminal in nature themselves, because they want power, they want to overthrow the current power. However, being high in anxiety, as Leftists tend to be, few of them can bring themselves to actually personally break the law.

As I have explored in depth in my book Breeding the Human Herd: Eugenics, Dysgenics and the Future of the Species, anxiety is part of a broader personality trait known as Neuroticism. Being high on this trait means you have strong negative feelings. This means they are resentful, jealous and power-hungry, because they wish to control a world which induces anxiety in them. They hate that which has power; the current “unequal” hierarchy. They deal with their negative feelings via Narcissism; by telling themselves that they are morally superior due to their leftism. But being high in anxiety, they fear a fair fight, so they play for status covertly — in the way that females do — by virtue-signalling about equality and harm avoidance.

The eventual result takes you beyond anything you might experience in Berkeley. It takes you down the road, to Hyde Street in San Francisco, where drugged-up zombies rock back and forth and dance, where people openly take and deal drugs in broad daylight, where people live in the street in tents, and where the street must be hosed down every morning. This runaway individualism will continue until it actually seriously impacts wealthy Woke people and so ceases to be a “luxury belief.”


19 replies
    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      On the contrary, they are consciously evil people who know precisely what they are doing.

      Dutton is correct for once: the Jews and well-off white traitors who allow this filth and lawlessness free rein will maintain the status quo till their own quality of life is endangered. Unfortunately, there is little likelihood that any such endangerment is on the horizon.

      Recall what happened on Martha’s Vineyard in September 2022. The (((media))) told the world that the virtuous Vineyarders and the planeload of illegal scum—who were dumped unceremoniously back on the mainland in a matter of hours—were both the victims of Ron De Santis!

  1. GirlinTexas
    GirlinTexas says:

    Localized crime, such as shoplifting, looting, loitering, carjacking, etc., is prevalent amongst blacks/browns, so naturally as those groups have been suffering under the jackboots of White Supremacy, they can no longer be held accountable, as current prevailing social mores is geared to the elevation of the Untermensch, as current social mores indicate that the only reason for hordes of “untermensch” in the world is due to those European Jackboots.

    That places such as Haiti tossed off the yoke of White Supremacy hundreds of years ago, it matters not, as Whiteness leaves an insurmountable footprint everywhere we set those Boots. And, there may be some truth in that, as we established societies that others can’t sustain, without outside assistance, so they are attempting to live in, or sustain, an environment for which they are not suited, i.e., Africans, Aborigines, American Indios, South Asians, etc., are not capable of Western-type civilization without the Boots, yet they are too far removed from their indigenous culture to regress fully, but regression is exactly what is occurring in Rhodesia, South Africa, Caracas, Alice Springs, Baltimore, Detroit, London (new acid-attack Capital?) and in those gang-rapey no-go zones in Scandinavia, France, Germany, and so on.

    Finland is a lovely country, and Finnish people are wonderful. I pray you maintain the ideals of your forebears, who thwarted the Russians/Bolsheviks, and keep Finland Finnish/Scandinavian, or Northern European, and get those lovely, silly, bleeding-heart women OUT of your government. Do not Americanize Finland.

  2. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    Alexander Solzhenitzyn, a Nobel Prize winner for his book, “The Gulag Archipelago,” (I prefer to spell it as, Goolag.) discussed the “socially friendly element.” In the Gulag, the Siberian prison system, the guards treated criminals differently than they did political prisoners. Prosecutors gave the author 20 years for some critical remarks against Stalin in a letter. However, those who committed real crimes, like theft or assault, often received only 5 years. The commies regarded criminals as “socially friendly elements.” They helped to destabilize society and promote an environment for anarchy, revolution and dictatorship. The parallel with the behavior of the Democrats in charge in the US should be obvious. They allow looting and arson. They allow criminals to go free for serious crimes, and the defund the police. They prosecute normal citizens who try to defend lives and property including the police.

    • GirlinTexas
      GirlinTexas says:

      That’s an excellent perspective. In fact, Stalin was a criminal before he was recruited by Lenin/Trotsky. And, he got to them before they got to him.

      I think the string-pullers are working the “society destabilizing program” by convincing UsefulIdiots that the criminals were victims first/always.

  3. Paschn
    Paschn says:

    In order for our owners to successfully destroy Russia in creating the first Marxist/Judaic/Communist nation, they had to take the lawless, (we call them “woke”, “Lefties”, “LGBT”, “Antifa” “BLM” etc.) and bring them together, galvanize them, point at normalcy and call it “the enemy”. An enormous aid in that is control/ownership of media. We saw it in Russia, Germany, Italy, Spain, U.S. On the plus side, (again, just like they did in Russia), once these criminal class have fulfilled their usefulness, they are “disappeared” en mass. So if it’s any consolation, after they’ve destroyed nations’ people, families, (Ignatiev pushed for a white genocide), these Ashkenazi will cull their ranks of these animals. Of course we’ll be beaten, bloody and will have buried our dead, but then, we can’t have it all our way. Then mosque’s/churches will go, there’ll be an explosion of Synagogues on every corner. Then finally the truth of John 8: 44 will be obvious to all those still standing. Sorry to bring religion into this, but religion is quite literally the core of all this. So wily the enemy, in spite of being at opposite ends of the religious spectrum, they’ve duped their primary target into not only worshipping them, but financing their own destruction. “… and then the end will come”.

  4. Quidnam
    Quidnam says:

    While I strongly suspect you are correct in your conclusions, the “individually-oriented” vs. “group-oriented” lens is a challenging one, insofar as it scrambles so many pre-existing assumptions (held or at least professed by most everyone) regarding economic collectivism, identity politics, etc.

    It certainly seems to have a lot of explanatory power regarding the behaviors of different social classes during our current slide into anarcho-tyranny.

  5. canadian goy
    canadian goy says:

    Isn’t it obvious to everyone here that it was actually Jews that subverted the justice system as part of their multi-prong war against our civilization? Why make it more complicated than it really is?

    • Bernard Fisk Wellington IV
      Bernard Fisk Wellington IV says:

      Isn’t it obvious to everyone here that it was actually Jews that subverted the justice system as part of their multi-prong war against our civilization? Why make it more complicated than it really is?

      Great comment. 100% true.
      The fuel for crime is jeiwish influence and their determination to wreck every white nation on earth.
      Non-whites are free to rape, rob, andmurder, while whites cannot even defend themselves.
      All of this was engineered by organized jewry.

  6. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    The title of this essay is an easy question, and I am surprised no one else (as I write this) has responded. The Left (usual suspects) promotes evil and opposes good.

    You may also view it as ‘promoting sickness and defying health’.

    Or ‘Protecting pedophiles and making children vulnerable’.

    It is a historical fact that between 250 AD and 1948 AD the Portugueses were expelled from various nations and provinces.

    Oh, I am sorry. It wasn’t the Portuguese? Who else could it have been? What a mystery – at least for idiots and Christian Bible thumpers.

    I write this as a Christian. Sorry, but I realize the 2% of us Christians make the other Christians look bad.

  7. RockaBoatus
    RockaBoatus says:

    Having worked for many years in the Criminal Justice system as a law enforcement officer, I can personally attest to what Mr. Dutton describes among those who have a more “individually-oriented moral foundation.”

    It didn’t used to be this way – at least not as much – but it seems every aspect of ‘woke’ insanity has permeated the entire system. I saw it among the soft-hearted liberal judges, and even the DA prosecutors were not as zealous in seeking stiff penalties for hardened offenders. Plea deals were given out like they were candy which reinforced an attitude among criminals that the system was weak. It served to embolden them in their crimes because they knew that any possible punishment would always be tempered by bleeding heart do-gooders.

    Though it was not openly conceded, it was apparent that there was little trust in the system to bring about justice, especially for the victims who were treated more or less as insignificant. Rarely, did a judge require any form of compensation on behalf of the victim. I can’t speak for other states, but at least in California restitution for victims of crime is not particularly high on the list of importance. Most crime victims are left high and dry.

    For years I was outraged by it all, but eventually realized that as a cop I had little real influence or power in reforming the system. This was because the people who actually had the power to change things were deeply infected with a cancerous worldview that made them view almost everything contrary to reality. They were incredibly self-righteous and not particularly teachable either – a major characteristic of the ‘woke’ Left.

    These Leftist mutants of insanity that have infected almost the entirety of our country do not believe that humans could act evil, that all of us are basically good and pure in heart. I think in some ways that this is where the problem starts – namely, a deficient view of human nature.

    Mr. Dutton is right when he says that the Left’s lunacy won’t end until it directly and seriously impacts all the wealthy limousine liberals who for years stood by and watched and even encouraged this national freak parade.

    And even when it finally ends – because even liberals can’t live under the very conditions they impose upon the rest of us – as usual no one will be held accountable for it.

  8. kolokol
    kolokol says:

    Anarcho-tyranny is a fact. It’s a fact that the Left is pro-crime and anti-police. That has been proven many times. This article by Edward Dutton explains why. His description of Berkeley and San Francisco (with excrement on the streets, drugs everywhere and most crime legalized) is very nauseating. Naturally, the left-wingers are proud of it – they think it’s great.

    For example, on May 25, 2020 in Minneapolis, career-criminal George Floyd died of a drug overdose while violently resisting arrest. The instant reaction of the State authorities, all left-wing loonies, was to arrest the four police officers involved in the arrest and to charge them all with murder. And they made a hero out of the criminal Floyd. This has resulted in a nationwide epidemic of violent crime, which continues to this day, just as these left-wing “authorities” intended. They like it when America “transitions” into a pile of shit. That’s how anarcho-tyranny operates.

    • Tim Folke
      Tim Folke says:

      Good points! Still, you have to admit St. George Floyd has been drug and crime free for almost four years now.

  9. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    I must add, the Democrat/commie/Jewish alliance grooms Black people (and others) for criminal behavior. When normal people complain about the behavior, the Dems defame them as “racists” and whatever else is fashionable. Clever, huh?

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      … whereas the Republicans you shill for, George, are outspoken in their opposition to black and Jewish crime—am I right? As they and you are fond of saying, Democrats are the real racists!*

  10. RegretLeft
    RegretLeft says:

    I will read this closely but I scrolled quickly to the end: “runaway individualism” ?! – Really?! – I think, rather, we have a runaway, criminal ruling class who want to kill a lot of us and degrade most of the rest of us.
    In any case we have an interesting test case of “… until it actually seriously impacts wealthy ” in progress. Did you hear that the 19 year old son of the former Head of U-Tube, Susan Wojcicki, was found dead in his dorm room at Berkeley; a family member revealed that drug overdose was likely (crickets since then) – call it Fentanyl. And the Fentanyl epidemic is likely a ruling class op (i.e. “kill a lot of us”)
    And what the ruling class wants us to do is to blame ourselves or some amorphous entity such as “individualism” – think again, please, about that sentence.

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      I actually like the usage of “individualism” there. Groups will say, “no drugs for the group,” and liberals will say, “drugs are fine if they harm no one else.”

      So, it fits. But maybe a person has to be familiar with how this used to be presented to understand how it fits. I’m old enough to understand.

  11. Hello!
    Hello! says:

    Dutton is not a scientist, nor does he have any mathematical or visuo-spatial abilities, nor does he even have a science degree, but rather a PhD in Theology. Yet, people still look to him for scientific information and publish his articles. His intelligence is extremely verbally tilted, yet we can’t even trust his information on history, since he completely hides the Ashkenazi variable in societal outcomes, choosing instead to replace the word “Ashkenazi” with “White Spiteful Mutants.” In other words, he is 100% unreliable and untrustworthy. However, he seems to be relatively business savvy – he now gets enough yearly donations to constantly vacation all over the world, claiming to “take you on my adventures around the world,” and occasionally making videos filled with anecdotal comments. Basic point here – stick with the actual scientists, such as Emil Kirkegaard, MIchael Woodley of Menie, and David Piffer.

    My thoughts on Unz.c*m/runz/judith-miller-david-cole-and-the-holocaust/

    I am curious about David Cole’s behavioral genetics and evolutionary psychology. Was he really universally altruistic and wanted all sentient beings to have the truth about history so that all beings could empower themselves with truth? Or, was Cole a universal sociopath with no altruistic sentiments toward both Jewish people and Gentiles? Or, was he an undercover Jewish activist right from the start? Let’s say that Cole was a universal altruistic, then if he was threatened by the JDL and others, then if he was truly paralyzed with fear, he would have just stopped publicly talking all together and just quietly lived out his life without getting involved in politics and pro-Jewish activism. He may have even decided that he did not want to contribute to a world based on sociopathology/misanthropy and that he would thus join the Amish/Mennonites/Hutterites, or just end his life. But instead, he did the complete opposite – he chose to become a radical misanthropic sociopathic attack dog for Jewish interests, without any feelings of guilt/sympathy/empathy for his gentile victims. This leads me to conclude that David Cole is either a universal sociopath who enjoys making money by antagonizing everyone, or he was an undercover Jewish activist right from the start, assigned to infiltrate European Nationalism and “anti-semitic” entities.

    Cole could have just changed his name and remain in hiding. Why did he choose to become a pro-Jewish radical with his new name?

Comments are closed.