Weinstein Is a Model of Liberal Values, by James Delingpole.
Hypocrisy is the very essence, arguably even the defining characteristic, of liberalism.
“Do as I say, not do as I do,” has long been the watchword of the liberal elite – in Hollywood, in publishing, in the mainstream media, in academe, in politics, in the corporate world – that polices our culture.
Which is why we should relish every moment of what John Nolte is calling “biggest scandal by far in Tinseltown history” and “the Great Unraveling“. It’s the payback we on the right have been yearning for for years – not least because these liberals spend so much time telling us that we conservatives are the bad guys and insisting that the moral high ground is all theirs.
I wrote about this when I first publicly outed myself as a conservative with a 2007 book called How To Be Right: The Essential Guide to Making Lefty-Liberals History.
Under the entry “Left Wing”, I wrote:
Left-wingers are: devil-may-care; good in bed; raffishly tousled; cool; sexy. They: sympathise with the underdog; hate injustice; respect the working class and people of all races and creeds, regardless of looks, physical ability or gender; nurture the environment ; have great taste in music; oppose violence; loathe inequality; are kind to children and small furry animals with lovely bright eyes and darling floppy ears and expressions on their sweet pink little mouths you could almost mistake for a smile.
All of which goes to prove how incredibly principled right-wing people are. If they wanted to they could chose the political affiliation which miraculously confers on them all these wondrous things. But they don’t because for right-wingers truth is more important than social convenience.
You could point out, correctly, that there are plenty of examples of prominent conservatives who have behaved badly too. But here’s the difference: conservatives are not in the business of trying to appease their consciences by creating a year zero and remaking the world according to a warped “progressive” philosophy which seeks to deny human nature.
Conservatives recognize that man has feet of clay and is prey to the sins of the flesh, which is why we have stuff like the Constitution, and property rights, and the rule of law, as well as more subtle social codes -– created by quintessentially conservative organisations like the church, the military, the golf club, etc –- in which our wilder instincts are modified by custom, tradition, stigma and the corresponding rewards for becoming a “pillar of society.” Our philosophy works with human nature, not against it.
Liberals, on the other hand, are on a mission to change not just the world but to improve the character of humanity itself. Or so they delude themselves.
This is the most truly disgusting thing about Weinstein and his liberal ilk. I’m not in any way wishing to play down the awfulness of the suffering experienced by those young women.
But what I am saying that their individual stories of hardship are a drop in the ocean when set against the damage that powerful figures like Weinstein and the “liberal” agenda they represent have done to our broader culture.
I’m thinking about the many thousands of young women who — courtesy of perhaps $300,000 provided by their hapless parents — will have their brains filled with feminist drivel on courses like that one at Rutgers: post-modernist, grievance-mongering tosh which will render them embittered, warped and almost entirely unfit to pursue a productive career or enjoy a happy family relationship.
I’m thinking of all the young men who, unlike Harvey Weinstein, aren’t powerful enough to get their sex by coercion but instead have to resort to more old fashioned methods like getting drunk and making a clumsy pass which, in the old days, might have got either a straightforward response or a rebuff, but which — thanks to Harvey’s liberal culture — now runs the risk of a UVA-style rape claim. …
Why hypocrisy is intrinsic to the liberal governing elite:
One of the most basic principles of a fair and just society is that everyone – and most especially those at the top of the food chain – has to be equal before the law. If they are not, then what constraint is there on the lawmakers? What is to stop politicians passing ever more iniquitous or damaging laws if they know that they won’t actually have to obey them themselves?
Liberals like Harvey Weinstein think it’s acceptable to create a world where they get to be allowed to behave as debauchedly as Goering at one of his country lodges, while the little people – that’s you and me – have to have every last detail of our lives overseen by the political correctness Gestapo.
They do the raping; you take the rap. That’s liberalism. I think it sucks. Don’t you?