Throughout history, a debate has raged about the origins of morality. Today the argument is less about its genesis and more about who has the right to claim the moral high ground as a pillar of their political persuasion. This lofty position, where virtue, righteousness, and truth merge, is heavily sought after by the American left today. They are, in fact, putting on a very public full-court-press to claim the mantle of morality. Ergo the question arises: Should those on the right cede this ground – or fight like hell to retain it?
Historically, moral law was grounded in religion. Augustine of Hippo called the Sermon on the Mount a flawless exposition of “the highest morals.” Theists believe moral values are found in the immutable nature of God. Thus, they posit that moral values exist because of who God is.
Myriad philosophers have long held a variety of dissimilar views. Aristotle, for instance, hypothesized morality as an intellectual understanding that has its roots in doing what is right because it begets personal benefit. Immanuel Kant postulated that reason is the foundation of morality. And then there is Bertrand Russell, who argued that opinion and feelings are the basis for all things moral.
This final hypothesis – one of feelings and opinion — is where the left has pitched its tent. And they are determined to haul the rest of us into their canvas shelter whether we like it or not.
Fraudulent Leftist Morality
The recent controversy over the canceling of Roseanne is an irrefutable illustration of this line of reasoning. As one reader from Port Jefferson, Long Island wrote to the Daily News, “The only reason ABC canceled “Roseanne” is because they are Trump haters. They are just a bunch of left-wing liberals taking the high moral ground of people with a lot of money who don’t give a crap about anybody but themselves.”
As crude as it sounds, the lady has a point. Susan Stamper Brown said virtually the same thing when she opined in Townhall, “Liberals constantly stake a claim to some religion-free moral high ground, which is laughable considering liberalism’s ideology is immoral at its core. Since November of last year, leftists have been too blinded by inane hatred for Trump to see the irony.”
This abject hatred has become the cornerstone for leftist morality. Thus, the president, who they perceive to be immoral, must be opposed on every front even though he has a moral obligation to those who elected him to do what is good and right and noble for the country.
This immoral lens in which so-called progressives view President Trump cannot and will not allow for realities like low unemployment and a possible end to the nuclear war threat from North Korea. It cannot and will not abide people like William Campudoni who reject the notion that Trump is a racist. To do so would mean they would have to relinquish their moral high ground which is looking more and more like quicksand – ready to gobble them up because they cannot abide the truth.
And so, their principles of what is right and wrong are perverted because of their feelings of animosity toward one man whom they view as evil. From the left’s perspective, what Roseanne said was abhorrent, but Samantha Bee not so much. Calling the president a Nazi is okay. Antifa violence is defensible. Rioting to prevent open campus discourse is justified because they believe their cause to be righteous and honorable.
In the American Spectator, Rabbi Aryeh Spero put his finger on this twisted morality of the left when he wrote, “…what we are seeing on the Left is an exhibition in self-righteousness, moral superiority, incessant virtue strutting… and revenge. Compassion, tolerance, and understanding are reserved for their clients and fellow travelers only, not others.”
This incessant virtue-signaling and scramble to take the high ground gives the left carte blanche to turn reality and reason on its head in order to maintain a sociopathic moral code based on hate. It is not rational. It is not warranted. And it must be rejected at all costs.