The colonialist mentality oppresses minds and crowns itself landlord of the spirit’s territories

When Denial Puts on a Clever Face

(By Hella Ahmed) When you spot premeditated gaps in a speech that claims to be reasoned, you’re witnessing the work of feigned denial—a glaring symptom, to me, of pseudo-intellectualism. But how can you be sure these flaws are intentional? How do you know if you’re being fed an illusion of good faith just to sell you emptiness and leave you defenseless?

The Naive Dressed Up as Profound

Well, you don’t tackle serious topics with a kind of childish innocence. If someone who’s previously shown they can follow an argument through—with sharp, rigorous essays—suddenly starts stumbling in their judgment, why the shift? Why this abrupt inability to dig deep with honesty? It’s just worldly hypocrisy, plain and simple.

To me, the pseudo-intellectual fully exposes themselves when they choose to sidestep what can’t be avoided if you’re going to philosophize sincerely. Thinking out loud with an audience means rising up without letting yourself sanctify a convenient obscurity to shield personal interests or opinions better left for close-knit dinner chats. And honestly, you can philosophize with integrity without constantly name-dropping past figures, this or that thinker, as if innovation were a lost privilege and a thinker had to endlessly justify their existence.

The Relentless Push for Darkness

What a childish game it is to tear apart a fresh work by dragging in big-name writers or famous philosophers whose texts faintly echo what’s being dissected from on high, just to dissolve it into nothing. And there goes the pseudo-intellectual, short on creativity and humility, resorting to belittling others to feel secure. They wave around their essay, built on the rubble of what they’ve demolished, hoping to fill the unbearable void in their own mind.

But hold on—they don’t go after just any creation like that. It takes a specific target: a bold talent that dared to speak with strength. Those who obsessively dismantle a work to snuff out an emerging reputation—a voice that dares to shake up the cozy, often inherited or networked circles—reveal a primal urge. It’s a grab for dominance, not just racial, but animal.

Natural Selection

It plays out like a show in intellectual circles, among cliques of thinkers who either endorse or turn a blind eye to sneaky violence. Pseudo-intellectuals loaded with degrees and their unofficial sidekicks, promoted and devoted to a “stagnant evolution,” form strongholds obsessed with defending a territory they think they own. They turn legitimacy into a tool for social inequality—the very inequalities that, if erased, would free minds for real change.

Stagnant, yes, because this so-called scholarly world stays oppressive, hostile to genuine free expression and the recognition it ought to offer. The digital world amplifies these alliances: virtual and shaky as they are, they’re still solid, fueled by viral reach and economic interests that drown out everything else. Perfect platforms for the vanity of pseudo-intellectuals who pick their friends or lovers as partners, patting each other’s backs to keep their status safe. Classism, professional jealousy, discrimination, stigma, racism—these are all cards played under the guise of legitimacy, flipped endlessly.

Legitimacy in Question

You’d need a fancy degree to dare speak up, but education is rationed—tough, even out of reach if you’re broke or poor. Meanwhile, corrupt types, comfy in their doctoral lives, preach one thing and do the opposite. You’ve got to master the language just enough, without shining too bright, or you’ll spark envy, hatred, or exile—especially if you weren’t born into the elite. You can rise from horror, get back on track, but can you really? The doors stay shut unless you agree to play the glorified outcast, handpicked to embody a society’s optimism where success hinges on reputation and reserved privileges. That guy spinning your struggle into his own profit will snag the promotion, while you’re left as little more than a pawn.

And heaven help you if you know more than you’re allowed to! They’ll almost accuse you of stealing a role you never held or claimed—out of respect for the rules, no less. To cut through the endless hints, you’ll have no choice but to climb back down the ladder. But why stifle an honest mind that knows? How do you demand a genius play dumb? And how dare they pass off the pseudo-intellectual as the real deal they’re just mimicking? Why sabotage skill?

The Wide World of Letters

Oddly, those who flaunt their shaky prose, with murky morals, claim to save us from decay despite ourselves—all because we don’t worship Freud, that careerist who crafted an ethic only to dodge it in private. Brilliant, sure: he probed the unconscious and conscious to understand souls and pull them from psychological misery born of buried dramas and mythic tragedies. But instead of calling out the violence of a patriarchal system or the misogyny of abusers who torment women, shatter their peace and quality of life, he labeled the oppressed as hysterics.

And if you dare challenge those claims, they’ll brand you a fascist. Let’s not judge by history alone: trial and error come with any researcher, especially those who misuse drugs and dose their patients into toxic psychosis and wretched death. Narcotics and overmedication share this: they lead to collapse.

Cynical, me? More like clear-eyed. I didn’t invent these grim historical truths; they’re there, well-documented by thinkers who dared to push their questions to the end, braving the petiteness, abuse, and harassment of those who see themselves on a punitive crusade, armed with gloomy pseudoscience.

The Freedom to Think

What nerve to pose as the sole judge of what reading will save us from ignorance! Me, I prefer sociology, neuropsychology, cognitive and behavioral psychology, and a fearless Anglo-Saxon literature that revived me when a mob of invaders, pursuing success at my expense frayed my nerves. That’s my right, and I don’t force it on anyone, so don’t come trashing my writing just to feel alive by twisting a fertile, sensible originality into something it’s not.

Those who want to “free” you from your freedom of thought, hounding you under the pretense of saving you, contradict their pretty words the moment they meddle in your business to choose for you—like colonialists always have, with their smug mission to civilize people who were free and thriving. Colonization never stopped: economically, it’s only grown stronger; psychologically, it runs through snobbish media and this war of pseudo-intellectuals against bright oppressed minds that don’t need permission to shine.

Hella Ahmed © All rights reserved – Find my books on Amazon