A very interesting take on the mind of 'leftists' from Ace of Spades. A few choice sentences are :
Now, the things the left wants you to believe are not easy to believe. It's hard to believe that, for example, taxing work and investment will not reduce work and investment (especially when one simultaneously believes that taxing the use of gasoline or other energy will reduce the use of gasoline or other energy).
Why is humor and irony so common on the right and so hard to find on the left? Humor and irony require emotional distance from a subject-- something I would contend the left is in of rather short supply.
The philosophy behind the article likens leftism to a fanatical religion. However the author slightly falls into the trap that 'leftists' set for him, by referring to them as 'progressives'. That term, along with 'elite' and 'liberal' are tools that the leftists in question use to automatically elevate themselves to some perceived level of moral and intellectual superiority over those who don't share their views. To cede these words to them is itself to grant them unearned credibility.
Another thing that is funny, that the author points out, is how 'leftists' are utterly convinced that those who disagree with them are stupid (and also evil). Yet, the 2004 Presidential Election Statistics show a rather straightforward corelation between income and a tendency to vote for Bush. Those earning over $200,000 a year voted 63% for Bush. The middle class slice earning between $50,000 and $75,000 voted 56% for Bush. Only those who earned under $30,000 voted strongly against Bush as a group (from cnn.com).
Income certainly does not corelate exactly to intelligence, work ethic, and determination, as someone in college may have all of these things but still not yet be earning a high income. But to believe the 'leftist' view that Bush supporters are stupid is to believe that intelligence is inversely corelated to an ability to earn a high income. This is vastly more difficult to logically accept.
A belief that disproportionate financial rewards are earned by people who are stupid enough to support Bush could lead to a dislike for the American system in general, and sympathy for socialism and communism, no matter how many countries those systems have failed in. It thus would appear that socialists are not interested in equality at all, but merely punishing the dumb people who would otherwise be earning more money than the anti-meritocracy socialists.