Critically Thinking about Feelings: There is a Pandemic of Fake Empathy

If you think about it, almost all of the major positions held by Democrats are based on feelings. Further, their supposedly most popular feeling is empathy. So, whether the issue is immigration, abortion, men in women’s sports, or anti-Trump Syndrome, their root argument comes back to feelings.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, the Left is adamantly opposed to having citizens be Critical Thinkers. One of the main reasons why they have taken over the K-12 system is to minimize that from happening. Thomas Sowell brilliantly observed the consequences of their effort:

“The problem isn’t that Johnny can’t read. The problem isn’t even that Johnny can’t think. The problem is that Johnny doesn’t know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling!”

Rationale for an Emphasis on Feelings

Why have they taken this path? Here are some random reasons…

1 – Feelings are actually synonymous with emotions. An obvious conclusion from that realization is that (unlike FACTS), dealing with feelings is like squeezing a wet balloon: it’s hard to get a clear explanation of them. An intended consequence of this is that they are hard to disprove, which means that they are difficult to dispel, which makes them harder to argue against.

2 – The proponents of feelings have carefully set the stage here, as (starting in K-12), they are big advocates of relativism. This belief system is in direct opposition to Judeo-Christianity as it claims that there are no truths but our own. In other words, our feelings trump all facts that may exist.

This gives them the opportunity to justify policies that are simply based on political correctness — e.g., wind energy. The scientific facts are irrelevant as all that counts are the beliefs and good intentions of the proponents.

3 – Another benefit of being pro-feeling is that this helps them to come across as the “good guy” since they claim to be sympathetic with an underdog. (However, if we look closely, only some underdogs qualify for their empathy — e.g., trans men but not victimized women.)

4 – Consensus views — collective opinions (feelings) of some other parties — is another fallback for those on the Left. Note that if Facts were available to support their position, no one would rely on consensus!

5 – Deference to authority is another favorite, i.e., we feel comfortable relying on a supposed expert — e.g., Dr. Fauci re COVID-19. If Dr. Fauci actually had the scientific facts (e.g., about the optimum COVID-19 early treatment) then all he would have to do would be to present them, and they would speak for themselves.

Adherence to computer projections (which is widely used) is another variation of relying on experts.

6 – An emphasis on feelings is attractive to some 50% of the population: women, which is a large voting bloc Dems would like to capture.

7 – Woke is really about so-called “social justice.” But for social justice to have any value, there must be the appearance of some social injustice that needs to be “fixed.” Dems to the rescue, as they want to come across as feeling badly about people who are victimized by some “social injustice.”

8 – Equity is another variation of this. Dems feel bad that everyone can’t be a winner, so everyone gets a prize. Grade inflation is a good example of this, where basically all you need to get an “A” is to periodically show up.

9 – Attacking religion (esp. Judeo-Christianity) is one of their primary objectives, as their teachings are the opposite of “equity.” For example, the Bible makes clear that not everyone will go to Heaven. Instead, we are advised to follow the prescription spelled out in the New Testament.

10- The emphasis on feelings is consistent with the constant portrayals of victimhood, oppression, white privilege, etc. This public document is an astounding declaration as to how broadly these simple-minded ideas can go. Note that they also specifically attack the Scientific Method! To show how far this absurdity had gone, the effective national Science Standards of K-12 (NGSS) have removed the Scientific Method…

A Superior Book —

A spot-on book is: Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion,” by Allie Beth Stuckey. The author explores the five most heated issues through which “toxic empathy” is deployed: abortion, gender, sexuality, immigration, and social justice. A synopsis:

Progressives use catchy mantras to present their perspective as empathetic, ‘like abortion is health care,’ ‘love is love,’ or ‘no human being is illegal,’ but in each case, they ignore the other side of the moral equation.

For example, supporting trans men in women’s sports is presented as compassionate for the trans person, but what about the empathy for the women who are victimized?

The Opposite Position

The most obvious thing to note is that none of the above views is rooted in Critical Thinking. That realization should make it clear as to why the Left is hell-driven to make sure that Critical Thinking is not only erased from any K-12 curriculum, but that the opposite is aggressively taught.

In recounting her college experience, Ayaan Ali is spot on:

“At the University of Leiden, students were taught how to think, not what to think. We were asked to leave our dogmas, convictions, and certainties at the classroom door. The learning process emphasized that if you’re in the classroom, you have to participate in learning to think critically. Our feelings were never entertained. You would be laughed out of the class if you started expressing your feelings, whether you’re hurt or not. If the university is not hurting you, they’re not doing a good job.”

Critical thinking arguments rely on facts, logic, and evidence—not on feelings, political correctness, authority, or consensus. Students should learn to distinguish between claims supported by evidence and those based on opinion, tradition, or social pressure.

The Bottom Line

Critical Thinking is needed to distinguish fake, politically driven empathy from real feelings. Don’t be fooled!

©2026 John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO (although it’s not perfect) the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2026 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time!)