Ron Collins
Sep 1, 2018 · 3 min read

Addendum:

Just ran across this quote, from an article in The Federalist about a teenage girl trying to pass herself as a boy who just won big damages in a lawsuit against her school district for its not going along with her pretenses:

rule by bureaucrats fosters: not just state coercion, but a higher likelihood of that coercion consisting of harmful untruths

Which sums up my reply to your question about as well as a single phrase could. I mentioned as well the raw opportunism that inevitably attends the liberal mindset: it doesn’t take a lot of looking to find, associated with just about any liberal-sponsored political initiative, a whole array of gold-diggers looking to cash in on it.

The sources of the windfalls range from lucrative grants and contracts from the federal government (well-known as easy money with next to no oversight in how it is spent, just have a look at any public housing project for a case study, or the entire ignominious history of the Violence Against Women Act’s DOJ grants programs….), to overnight fame and the attendant financial inflows from “concerned” celebrities such as what David Hogg and his crowd enjoyed for a few tweets and public appearances parroting the standard-issue anti-gun message, to lavish judicial awards (see above link) from successful lawsuits gaveled affirmatively by judges too cowed by the de rigueur sentiments of their constituencies to bother themselves with rule of law….

I regard myself as conservative in large part because everything I have seen about the individual codes of conduct behind liberalism tells me the whole project runs on multiple forms of insincerity: be it the type of brazen hypocrisy that has the Clintons lining their pockets trumpeting liberal narratives while showing zero adherence to them in their own ethics, or the sort of self-hypnotic self-deception that has people suddenly “come out” as in support of some hip new fad which also offers the potential of a substantial payday associated with making the correct noises about it (as in “oh yeah: I just remembered I dated Billharvey Cosbyweinstein like thirty years ago and he was mean to me and I still didn’t get the part….”), to the laughable oxymoron of continually citing Hitler/Nazi parallels out one side of one’s mouth and indulging in brutish antisemitism out the other because being “pro-Palestinian” is more socially groovy to the left than being “pro-Israel”…

Et cetera.

I’ve got to where I don’t even bother paying much attention to the reputed contents of liberal ideograms. They come and they go, they tend to be highly improvised overnight reactions to current events while they still hold the fickle attention of social media users, and they can inevitably be found associated with some sort of fiscal inflow some force or faction is seeking to benefit from.

Liberalism is the ultimate expression of consumerism for its own sake: a thing need not make any sense nor have any real substance at all to have potential value in terms of money or attention or both; all it has to be is a facsimile of an idea that presses the right buttons of leftward political sentiment, and like a slot machine that hit the jackpot, the coins start to jingle. Look at the overnight sensation this Alexandra Occasional-Cortex person has become, for instance, and she has accomplished exactly what in exchange for it, again?

Why bother with such a triviality as, you know, meaning what you say? Try expressing a little genuine conviction in any gathering of liberals, and they’ll let you know that actually believing any of this crap is just bad form…..

Liberalism is a personal wealth-redistribution machine that runs on the standing potentiality of just saying what enough people want to hear, irrespective of its sincerity or veracity or viability, and the reliability of laughing all the way to the bank just for having said it.

    Ron Collins

    Written by

    Facts don’t care about your faction