Hopeless liberal contradictions
Liberalism is so riddled with contradictions that it has to embrace blind hypocrisy to stand – only no culture can be sustained on contradictions and hypocrisy. This does not concern the liberal intellectual class in the least since they are not driven by practical realism or Judeo-Christian tradition, but only by faith in a cause they believe is the only basis for life’s higher meaning. The self-vaunted intellect of this chattering class is really only about words and sentiment, not real intellectual rigor or on-the-ground facts. We have already seen how this played out in the BBC’s attempt to re-write the Ten Commandments. A broader expose of liberalism’s mindless confusion should make the point writ large and point us to the now pervasive presence of Orwell’s doublethink (1984, ibid). Take feminism and multiculturalism for example. The former embraces some questionable rights that go well beyond gender equality, but multiculturalism requires liberals to embrace cultures entrenched in chauvinism, intolerance and violence; the very things feminism is supposed to reject. This masochistic double standard has reached the height of absurdity in the most feminised western culture – Sweden, where 50% of its parliamentarians are women. Blind hypocrisy like this means a committed feminist like Hillary Clinton can take money for the Clinton’s trust fund from wealthy Saudis, steeped in misogynist Islam. She and her consorts in Europe can also press for Muslim immigration from Syria, knowing they will inevitably bring in ISIS jihadists, who will kill and maim and yet oppose the death penalty in case one innocent person is executed. Swedish feminists deny the horrible immigrant rape statistics in their country and its link to the deep disrespect for women in the culture from which these immigrants come. They have been at the forefront of laws protecting immigrant rapists. The perpetrators of the savage and now common gang rape of a young girl escaped conviction because a high court in Sweden ruled the girl was partly responsible by allowing herself to enter an unsafe environment (Ibid: Neilsen, 2017)!
uccessive liberal western governments from both sides of the political divide have lauded multiculturalism and pluralism, while allowing highly chauvinist Muslims to establish cultural no-go-zone mono-cultural ghettos across the western world. Liberal hypocrisy is manifest in its claims that all cultures are equal, despite the fact many of those cultures despise liberalism’s values. So, liberals have to ignore this inconvenient truth to hold to its own dogma. If you are going to claim Christianity and western culture are divisible you have to also maintain Islam and criminal inhumanity are not connected! As I write Muslim men are sexually molesting and raping women across Europe while the liberal media and politicians flagrantly try to deny it has anything to do with Islam. Similar hypocrisy is to be found in liberalism’s moral relativism. It holds that moral values have no basis in natural law, but only in personal choice and positive (legislative) law. When values are reduced to pragmatic preferences human behaviour must be closely managed. Vast swaths of law are required to keep everything under tight control. Relativism is thus hoisted up by the petard of rigid controls, processes and regulation that must become increasingly tyrannous. Liberalism’s claimed adherence to human rights is thus exposed as a mirage hiding a much more sinister reality.
Take capital punishment. Here lies another hopeless contradiction for the liberal. A life for a life has been replaced by a life for a term in prison. Murder rates climbed, with women and children featuring in the statistics, and yet the liberal is quite happy to see millions of children killed in the womb. Protect murderers, even when the evidence is compelling (the Judeo-Christian standard of proof is two eye witnesses – rare), in case one innocent person dies, while committing untold millions of innocent babies to death, without trial and without reference to their rights.
Liberals bask in the glory of their tax-taking welfare-ism and yet all the statistics confirm it does nothing to alleviate poverty. Their solution – more tax dollars and expanded government programmes. Then there is the liberal claim to tolerance when in fact they will only tolerate those who agree with them. Given the hypocrisy in their pluralism and their moral relativism they must exercise the controls of their fascist thought and speech control techniques (political correctness) to ensure that tolerance only extends to those who embrace their creed. Anything else is intolerable. The jackboots and brown shirt brigades are quick to respond. Cross the red line of what is acceptable to them and find yourself vilified with nasty labels, blacklisted and fired from your job, even if that means your spouse and children suffer too. Our universities are hotbeds of this kind of intolerance. Try to get a professor-ship, or publicly express conservative views at a university and the brown shirts will swarm immediately to shut you down. It is on the altar of tolerance that fascist liberals are most likely to sacrifice men, women and children to their intolerance. This is a cognitive illness. It is a form of madness; a pathology that is monstrous in its debasement of human values and rationality. Any of history’s tyrants would have felt comfortable in this environment.
The liberal defence of homosexuality, putting aside any moral issues, harbours another contradiction. It conflicts with their dogmas concerning evolution and biological science. If you believe in the advance of species through genetic adaptation, as any atheist does, homosexuality would not be possible because it is a non-reproducing lifestyle. It cannot therefore be a natural consequence of evolutionary processes. If liberals really believe in science and evolution they would at least acknowledge that homosexuality must therefore be a product of environment and influence, not genetics. But, to fit the homosexual meme, they have chosen instead to deconstruct marriage and family – the most natural of institutions by any scientific or logical measure.
While we are talking about science we should also note that liberals buy into the notion that we humans are just another animal. How can that be so when we humans are self-aware beings capable of understanding the world in which we live and manipulating the laws of physics. No animal can do these things. We comprehend the universe when animals do not even understand the stars they see in the night sky. It is these sort of issues that decouple liberals from their claim to reason, science and rationality. How can they then be trusted with governing nations, especially when they have put the rule of law outside the reach of ordinary people and supported the unprecedented rise of stark inequalities?
The rights of women and children and the liberal creedal commitment to sexual licence also conflict. I have dealt with this subject already, but what about prostitution, child sex-trafficking, pornography and violence. These activities have all gone through a massive period of growth in the liberal era. Liberals have been the champions of legalised prostitution despite the fact that it promotes female exploitation. Multiculturalism has permitted the easy spread of sex-trafficking, rape and social volatility. Permissive attitudes to sex and violence (in entertainment media) has led to massive growth in violence and the porn industry’s exploitation of women and children. Liberalism is the enemy of life itself. It claims to value human life but takes, or ruins it, on a scale Mao and Stalin would be proud to endorse.
When it comes to the West’s demographic winter liberals claim to be all about benevolence and social resilience, when they promote practices that are actually reducing the West’s population and destroying cultural resilience. They celebrate state welfare-ism as the pinnacle of compassion, but their policies on family, abortion and feminism are destroying the population and prosperity base needed to support tax-funded programmes. They claim to love life and respect human rights but they take life, rob so many of its real meaning and threaten the very culture that upholds human rights. They claim to hate social inequality, but in aligning themselves with corporate neo-liberalism they have conspired to create historically unprecedented levels of inequality and exploitation. The Marxist roots of liberalism contrast hopelessly with the liberal political elites embrace of rogue neo-liberal anti-capitalism. Liberalism’s manic obsessions leave liberals blinded to all the harm they have caused and all the hypocrisy they embrace. At rock bottom they value their sectarian creed over people, reason and truth. Liberals are either oblivious to these contradictions, or happily live with them to maintain their crazy dogmas. Traditional, or classical, liberals like me see through it all and writhe with indignation in the face of this madness.
 I speak here of the ruling class liberals, not common or garden liberals, many of who oppose corporatism. Regrettably their solution is the usual unsustainable socialism.