But it seems to me to be even more than simple projection. They project what they deny in themselves rather than merely assuming that others see things the way they do and so must be thinking and behaving for similar reasons. But their reversal of motives, of common word meanings, and even of  accepted facts (Nazism as left-wing?) seems different. That, plus their seeming inability or reluctance to do original thinking.

So instead we see ONLY a constant reiteration of other people's ideologies as their own, of values belonging to existing institutions, even using other people's ideas for their own sense of existence! Isn't that the most important and fundemental question a person can have? One that defines conscious awareness itself...and in turn led mankind to be able to take nature itself apart, then reassemble it in all the different ways that now sees our physically weak species be able to survive.

No, instead RWAs simply accept substitute ideas from people who themselves got them from bad interpretations of old texts.  Despite being able to read for themselves the words of this ultimate final authority figure, they still knowingly allow local people to reinvent the WORD, somehow dismissing the fact as a neccesary consequence of their own need to conform to what other RWAs are doing, or what SDOs are saying!

No, something is really, really wrong here. Indeed, it's as though they have only their physical substance or appearance that they can truly call their own. And so, to be a whole person, they can only, and so must, reflect the intellectual part of a personality. That leaves the with no other choice but to follow orders, have faith in religious dogma, obey codified laws in place of a social "code" that reflects their own, personal satisfaction with the social and existential world they're in. How else to account for people who will go killing and even dying in wars that are clearly just "politics by other means"?  Wars in which the goal they know only from cheap banners and "patriotic"-sounding slogans?

No. These aren't the actions of whole, functional human beings. Either somethings amiss in comparison to our widely egalitarian, highly socialised neolithic ancestors, or they constitute a species variant, this in the true, biological sense of the word.

Perhaps they came into prominence after a tribe or group had adopted the sedentary, very reliant-on-others lifestyle that came alongside agriculture. Maybe the excess food that had originally seemed so promising for our future, was instead turned into the means by which a ruthless few could threaten the many with starvation? All that needed to happen was for those few to see how they could take advantage of all those fairly numerous others who failed to realise that the natural desire we all once had for associating with those who had the best techniques for finding food during our hunter-gatherer past was also an impulse whose utility no longer applied as it had always done. 

From this perspective, it's also clear which sort of person were most likely to fail to consider this or any other complex issue. It would have been the reactionary, emotionally driven sort who we today call conservatives. Their impulses told them to follow those with food (wealth) and so those who had somehow amassed a lot were then able to pose as real, "natural" providers with good hunting tips to impart to those closest to them. In game-theory, we would call these people "cheaters", but to those with unsophistiucared detection skills, that was enough to put them toward working for them, forever dangling enough wealth to keep their eye off of their own cheating ways. And thus began the class/caste trend that continues up to this very day.

* http://www.alba-valb.org/history

**http://cursor.org/stories/fascismi.php

This particular war brought together virtually every conceivable left and right wing faction, from anarchists, communists, socialists, social democrats on the left over to monarchists, fascists, theocrats (the Spanish Catholic Church was even more conservative than the Roman at that time...and that's saying something! <g>, wealthy industrialists (capitalists) and Spanish aristocrats, etc. on the right. And they all fell into alignment, with or in opposition to,  exactly who they should have if they had no other way of deciding than relative placement on the left-right scale.