READ IT: Trump Confirms He Was Shot in First Statement Since Assassination Attempt
CBS News Reporter Said Doing This Is 'Unpatriotic' Following Trump's Assassination Attempt
If True, DHS Secretary Mayorkas Must Answer This Question After Trump's Assassination Atte...
Video Reportedly Shows Dead Shooter on Rooftop Following Assassination Attempt
Authorities Share Few Details at First Press Conference on Attempted Trump Assassination
Joe Biden’s Hospice Presidency
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 225: Psalm Summer - Part 2
Please, Please, Please, We Must All Tone Things Down
Are We Making Progress?
Climate Surcharges: Coming Soon to an Airport Near You?
The United States Has Become an Irresponsible, Debt-Addicted Nation
Drug Discount Program Big Pharma Hates Is Vital to Older, Rural Americans
Flashback: J6 Chairman Bennie Thomspon Proposed Revoking Donald Trump's Secret Service Pro...
Flashback: Tucker Carlson Said We Were 'Speeding Towards' an Attack on Trump's Life
Biden Days Before Trump Was Shot: 'It's Time to Put Trump in a...
OPINION

Corruption Is About Policy, Not Just Money

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Townhall Media

Back in 1998, iconic feminist Gloria Steinem wrote a now-infamous editorial defending then-President Bill Clinton, who multiple women had accused of sexual harassment, assault, and even rape. Steinem argued that Clinton's conduct wasn't really sexual harassment, much less criminal conduct and that in any case, the accusations against Clinton were in a different category than those made against Republican politicians (who had been forced to resign). But Steinem's bottom line was this: women -- even (especially!) feminists -- should overlook Clinton's behavior because, unlike Republicans, he was a reliable defender of abortion.

Advertisement

Steinem later backpedaled a bit, during the height of the #MeToo movement. But there is nevertheless an essential lesson in that story. To put it bluntly, an astonishing amount of corruption -- if by that we mean complete abandonment of principles -- will be overlooked, tolerated and even encouraged if it gets people what they want politically.

This is a bipartisan phenomenon, to be sure. Still, we are seeing it in full force on the Left at the moment, as the extent of the corruption within the Biden administration (and its puppet master holdovers from the Obama administration) is finally being revealed. Thus, they don't want endless wars -- unless the wars are taking place in countries funneling money to politicians they like and their families. They want to support the efforts of countries attempting to remain free of dictatorial overlords -- unless the dictatorial overlords are funneling money to politicians they like and their families. 

Bribes from foreign nations? Who cares? The weaponization of the federal government? No big deal. Selective enforcement of the law and dual standards of justice? Meh. Crafting a fictitious "collusion" narrative to take out a political opponent (and then a president), and spending tens of millions of taxpayers' dollars for a fraudulent investigation? Whatever. Lying to Congress? Yawn. Censoring scientists, experts and even journalists who have information that contradicts deceptive propaganda? Sure. Stuffing ballot boxes with votes that may or may not be legal? You'd better believe it.

Advertisement

Americans understandably feel betrayed by those who ignore the corruption when they should be calling it out -- like feminists who look the other way at serial abusers, free speech enthusiasts who now cheer for censorious authoritarians, or journalists who lose interest in telling the public the truth.

What's behind these abrupt changes of position is not so much money as it is policy.


Like Gloria Steinem in 1998, today's turncoats think ignoring the corruption of the Biden family and the lawlessness of his administration will aid those working behind the scenes to get the policies they want: the destruction of the fossil fuel industries, the elimination of cars, private property, and sprawling suburbs of single-family housing in favor of public transportation and multifamily high-rises in "15-minute cities"; criminalization of gun ownership; confiscatory taxation and wealth redistribution; defunding police departments; the imposition of critical race theory and gender indoctrination in the educational system; taxpayer-funded abortion on demand; "free" universal health care and higher education, just to name a few. 

So convinced are they that these policies will be the salvation of the nation, if not the planet, that any lengths taken to achieve those ends are worth it. Even if it means shredding principles they once held dear.

Advertisement

Indeed, the abandonment of core principles is what's behind the stunning political reversals of highly visible liberals like authors Michael Shellenberger, Dave Rubin, David Horowitz and Naomi Wolf, journalists Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, and Bari Weiss, actors Tim Robbins and Russell Brand, and academics Bret Weinstein and his wife Heather Heying.

To use academia as an example, it would be expected that a professor with left-wing political leanings would support policies that aid the environment. (I submit that concern for the environment is not limited to the political left, but that is an argument for another day.)

Historically, at least, one could expect such a person to be equally dedicated to the integrity of the process of scientific inquiry, including the pursuit of truth, rigorous research and quality scholarship.

But what happens when one's fellow travelers in the "environmental concern" space start attacking the research of other academics whose legitimate findings contradict the preferred narrative -- say, around fossil fuels, the reliability of "renewable" energy courses, or the benefits of electric vehicles? What happens when those attacks are not limited to challenging the findings but trying to prevent the work from being published altogether? Threatening the editorial staff of the peer-reviewed journals that print the work? Trying to get people attacked on social media, "canceled," or even fired? Does commitment to a clean environment justify the abandonment of standards of conduct in academic research?

Advertisement

Now consider that this same phenomenon is taking place in other areas where there were once agreed-upon values: Freedom of speech. Protection of the civil liberties of minorities and women. Safety of children. Election integrity. Accountability in government. Fair and equal justice. Truth in public health.

It's not that self-described liberals have become conservative. But they are finding common cause with conservatives and others who understand that principles must come before policy. When they do not, the corruption that follows corrodes everything in its path.

When the news is filled with headlines about bribes and kickbacks, it's easy to think that the dangers of corruption come primarily from the greedy or those with an insatiable lust for money. But they're just tools. 

The real threats come from the ideologues, the "true believers,"; those who rationalize the abandonment of principles and the aggregation of power because doing so is necessary to achieve what they believe is "the greater good."
History shows that that kind of corruption -- the heady combination of money and power plus self-righteous egotism -- is the most destructive, the most lethal, and the most difficult to eradicate.

To find out more about Laura Hollis and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Advertisement

Sponsored

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos