When Hate Overrides Reality: When Fake Feminism Defends Tyranny

On February 28, the US invaded Iran to free the Iranian people and women from the Iranian regime that has been in power since 1979 and has taken their freedom, their democracy, and their way of life.

Iranian women are dancing in the streets because the US was successful in killing the Ayatollah Khamenei. Iranians and their supporters in multiple countries are dancing in the streets thanking President Trump and the US for their attack, even Mark Carney supported the US action against the regime.

Meanwhile, you have comments on social media and protests in the street condemning these actions and supporting a dictator and terrorist.

Photo courtesy: Reuters.

Mostly because these protestors hate Trump more than anything. It has become their identity: anti Trump, many call it Trump Derangement syndrome, but there’s a lot more nuance than that.

How can someone can defend a terrorist while claiming to be a feminist, when that same regime tortures, kills, and oppresses women?

This is where we need to separate emotion from analysis.

If you believe a political figure is morally dangerous, you will interpret every action through that lens, even actions that objectively weaken an oppressive regime and free the people.

That reaction is not strategic or political, it is psychological.

When ideology becomes identity, facts no longer matter because loyalty is in the driver seat, not logic.

You are no longer evaluating outcomes.

You are defending belonging.

And belonging is powerful. It’s the foundation for tribalism.

If we cannot distinguish between personality and policy, between rhetoric and geopolitical outcome, we will continue reacting emotionally to issues that require strategic clarity, and we will empower terrorists. We will continue on this path of division and anti reality. We will continue on a path that ignores evidence and facts in the face of political identity and hate.

Imagine Churchill had listened to those who told him to surrender and sign a deal with Hitler?

This is not about liking or disliking a leader.

It is about whether weakening a regime that has oppressed women and civilians for decades aligns with the values people claim to defend. Do you support human rights? Then you cannot defend the Iranian regime.

If that contradiction makes people uncomfortable, good.

Because discomfort is where critical thinking begins.

In my next Substack, I will explain why this radical reaction is not primarily political, it is psychological, and how to have conversations with people who dismiss evidence and facts in the face of political identity and brand loyalty.

Can these people break free from the spell that has coerced them to support tyranny rather than liberating women and innocent civilians?

Photo courtesy: Jacqui Budden on X