“I don’t think punk ever really dies, because punk rock attitude can never die.”
– Billy Idol
Liberty doesn’t mean ‘do what thou wilt.’ Liberty without the expectation of consequence is not liberty. It’s degeneracy.
Liberty is not a passport to hedonism. Although the biggest detractors of liberty, the hard Left, claim liberty is an excuse to be strictly self-serving, here’s the irony: The Left unabashedly perpetuates the self-serving, unsustainable behaviors it claims to detest.
Here’s just one, highly contentious, example…
It befuddles the staunch “pro-choicer” that many liberty-minded individuals claim to be pro-choice and pro-life. Meaning, they disapprove of outsourcing social responsibility onto a public (or private, for that matter) institution, while also understanding they cannot reasonably force individuals to live by their own moral prerogatives.
“My body, my choice,” therefore, is a very libertarian ideal. It is a tenet of self-ownership.
Libertarians merely wish this principle — this sound logic — would extend itself beyond the confines of such widespread “progressive” selective morality.
For example, when the government takes it upon itself to socialize consequences of degenerative (life-destroying) behavior, there are far-reaching consequences. From the big bank bailouts to the backroom deals to the Main Street shutters to the criminalization of poverty, when the going degenerates, the degenerate lead the way.
Such is the rise and rise of the monster calledmoral relativism.
Life becomes expendable, not miraculous.
The term “liberal,” in my estimation, has been hijacked to quietly mean the liberation from “antiquated” barbarous relics like reason, morals, character, longevity and personal responsibility.
In the “progressive” postmodern mind there’s no way to rationally discern right from wrong with certainty. Morality is seen as entirely subjective, thus intrinsically meaningless and mostly inconsequential.
(Students can thank their $100,000 unforgivable student loans for such gleaming pearls of wisdom.)
Tyranny is excused as a necessary evil when individuals “can’t help” but act with no moral agency. (There’s no motivation to do the right thing when there’s no right thing to do.)
Life — that miraculous thing in which we’ve all mysteriously been endowed — is not inherently important to the morally in-absolute. Life only has importance when it fits the narrative.
Death and destruction are the only certainties. Creativity, building something from nothing, is difficult. But destruction, creating a mess by flailing objects around like a dejected four year-old, is quite easy.
To the morally acrobatic troglodyte, life is only important when it can help destroy. Destroying that which triggers thee is the only sacred thing. Prevention of destruction is never an issue.
It’s a sad fact, for another contentious example, that the massive amounts of young black men (even children) who die at the hands of other black men are not seen nearly as important by the leftist intelligentsia as any taken by a white cop — no matter the context. The former has no political juice to squeeze.
Human life, therefore, is relative to the goal. That is what is meant by moral relativism — or selective outrage.
Morality based on principle would argue every senseless murder a tragedy — and would denounce them all voraciously. But when compassion becomes weaponized, the degenerate doesn’t treat lives equally. Because morality is a perception, not a principle. And people are pawns, not living, breathing miracles.
No rest for the wicked.
Politicians and bureaucrats can ignore basic human rights when it fits the agency of the mob of morally relative. Governments can monopolize and nationalize entire industries with only a whimper of opposition so long as it doesn’t offend the narrative. There’s always a way to justify war when morality is no longer an annoying hindrance. There’s always a means of destroying culture when culture is seen as archaic.
People who ask for decency, reason, peace, goodness, debate, light, evidence, truth and even a modicum of traditionalism are treated as intolerant, hateful, backward, narrow-minded, divisive, [fill in the blank]-phobic, [fill in the blank]-ist and every insult that can be shoved down the public throat.
And, frankly, it’s exhausting.
To abstain from all forms of unsustainable, life-destroying degeneracy these days is to be a revolutionary. Moderation, dear LFT reader, is the new counterculture.
Prudence is the new punk rock.
Managing editor, Laissez Faire Today
P.S. Have something to say? Say it! Chris@lfb.org.