There are things in this world that you simply can’t explain. Black holes are an example of something you can’t explain, as they defy the laws of physics. Leftists are another example of something you can’t explain because they defy the laws of logic.
Soul Singer Erykah Badu is one such Leftist who defies the laws of logic. In an interview with Vulture, she was asked about a trip she took to Israel in 2008, in which she expressed support for Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam who’s been accused of anti-Semitism (which is as surprising as the Patriots making the Superbowl).
According to Breitbart: “Badu told Marchese (the interviewer for Vulture) that Farrakhan has ‘flaws,’ like any man, but that she will ‘follow anyone who has positive aspects.’”
And this is where logic ultimately dies. Literally everyone has at least one positive aspect about themselves. But given what she says about Hitler, that last quote doesn’t really surprise me.
She goes further to explain her way of thinking by saying: “I mean, I’m not Muslim, I’m not Christian (no kidding), I’m not anything; I’m an observer who can see good things and bad things. If you say something good about someone, people think it means that you’ve chosen a side. But I don’t choose sides. I see all sides simultaneously.”
At this point, logic is being further beaten much like a dead horse. People always will choose a side. No one can “not choose a side” about something. Not choosing, in itself, is choosing something. It’s choosing indifference or abstinence. She says that she’s “an observer who can see good things and bad things” and that she doesn’t choose sides. That’s the equivalent of a sports spectator watching a game and not caring about who wins or loses. The thing is that you can’t have that sort of outlook on life all the time.
Much in the same sense that you can’t believe in relativism all the time. I believe I’ve made this point before with this same analogy, but it’s a good one so I’ll use it here.
If you’re driving on the road and are crossing an intersection and see a semi-truck going at the same time and you’re in a collision course with it, you can’t say that it’s all relative. You can’t say that the truck is only there because you perceive it to be there. You have to do something about it otherwise you’ll crash and quite possibly die. That semi is, in absolute truth, going to hit you if you don’t do something quick to avoid it. You can’t avoid it by closing your eyes and therefore losing your perception of the truck. That truck isn’t there because you see it’s there. That truck is there because it is.
So even if you believe in relativism, you can’t perpetually live with that belief. Likewise, you can’t possibly observe all sides and perpetually abstain from making a choice. Like I said, not choosing is, in itself, choosing.
So she can’t say that she doesn’t choose sides. It’s logically impossible to do that. If you don’t choose sides, it’s either because you don’t exist or because your brain is incapable of making choices. You would have to be in a vegetative state to not be able to choose anything.
Regardless, we’ve spent a bit too long on this topic, so let’s move on.
Due to her expressed support for Farrakhan (which ironically means she chose him over Israel), she had been accused of being anti-Semitic. She went on to defend herself in perhaps one of the most confusing and worst ways to defend yourself from such accusations.
She said: “I don’t even know what anti-Semitic was before I was called it. I’m a humanist. I see good in everybody. I saw something good in Hitler.”
And people wonder why conservatives believe the Left is crazy, or at least full of crazy people.
That comment drew surprise from her interviewer, who asked her “come again?”
Possibly realizing her mistake, she had to explain just why she thought this way by mentioning his artwork. “Yeah, I did. Hitler was a wonderful painter.” Then she immediately backtracked by saying: “Okay, he was a terrible painter. Poor thing. He had a terrible childhood.”
Yeah, the time to backtrack was when you said you saw something good in Hitler, not when you said he was a good painter.
She goes on to say: “That means that when I’m looking at my daughter, Mars, I could imagine her being in someone else’s home and being treated so poorly, and what that could spawn. I see things like that. I guess it’s just the Pisces in me.”
Ignoring the ridiculous “Pisces” portion of her quote, this is precisely why I say the Left is crazy.
Plenty of people have or had terrible childhoods. But you have to be truly evil to do what Hitler did. Having a bad childhood doesn’t excuse anyone for doing the evils Hitler did. Not to mention that Hitler didn’t exactly have the absolute worst of childhoods anyway.
He lost his younger brother Edmund in 1900 due to Measles, but that’s where the tragedy ends. Otherwise, the only things that were tough for Hitler were his conflicts with his father and plenty of teens have that happen to them. Hitler wanted to go to art school, but his father forced him to attend a technical school in Linz. Hitler rebelled against his father and said in Mein Kampf that he intentionally performed poorly in school.
Aside from his brother’s death, this just sounds like the life of any regular teenager (of course, this is ignoring the fact that they were in Germany at the turn of the 1900s, so it’s difficult to compare that to today’s youth, not to mention he also fought in the First World War, but PLENTY of other kids who didn't turn into Hitler also fought in wars).
Speaking strictly about his relationship with his father, it sounds like plenty of people’s childhoods. Frankly, Obama had somewhat of a worse childhood since his father left him and his mother when he was only 3-years-old. And even basketball star Jimmy Butler had a worse childhood, with his father abandoning his family and him being kicked out of the house at the age of 13 by his mother. So Hitler “having a poor childhood” is an even worse excuse for what he did later in life.
And her philosophy of “following people who have good aspects” is not only ridiculous, but it could also be dangerous.
The Bible tells us that Lucifer was beautiful, charming and highly intelligent. But that’s not a good enough reason to follow him. Not to mention that “the good aspect” that Hitler has is anything but good. How is having a bad childhood a good aspect of someone? She already admitted that he was a terrible painter, so that’s also not a good aspect of him. Hitler was the embodiment of evil on this Earth. If he had good aspects to himself, they must’ve been with his missing testicle.
So what good aspect did Hitler have? Because she’s not even sure about it herself.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.”
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Freddie Marinelli and Danielle Cross will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...