They used to see war in a neighbouring country, for example, and say, "Hmmm, if we don't do something about that, those bloodthirsty marauders may be over here next." People who thought that way—speculating about a potential ass-bite—actually disappeared a long time ago, if they ever existed at all.

Still, my point stands: if it doesn't directly affect them in the present moment, they don't care.

Sorry, I think that is weird.

And, of course, people seem very inconsistent about this. Some things they do care about, and usually those things are not as important as the things they should care about.

Take immigration control and enforcement, for example. Most people leaning to the left seem to care very much about the treatment ICE gives to people suspected (or legally determined) to be in the US illegally. They worry about their rights, their families, and the way they are arrested and deported. Yes, some of these worries are legitimate.

Everyone should be treated fairly and respectfully by law enforcement officials, and if they are not, it is right to complain about it through the proper channels. But none of these people seem the least bit concerned about how millions of illegal—and often criminal—people will degrade the way of life for everyone already living here.

I often ask, "So, do you want open borders then, and as a result, never have laws about enforcing the rules regarding immigration?" They will invariably say, "Oh no, I do believe we should control our borders!" Go figure.

The same story goes for free speech. People may seem to care about hate speech and speech that does not fit their worldview, such as Charlie Kirk's speaking about the negatives regarding transgenderism or abortion. But if you ask them, "So, you don't believe in free speech then? You think the First Amendment of the US Constitution is idealistic hooey?" They will invariably say, "No, of course I believe in free speech!" But they don't. Go figure.

They can't see far enough ahead to recognize the consequences of cherry-picking speech—eliminating what they think is offensive and keeping only the "important stuff." Unfortunately, you can't do that, and up until recently people knew that. There is a consequence for freedom, and sometimes it isn't pretty.

I think a lot of the time this "I don't care" attitude stems from the fact that people don't seem to care much about principles. Of course, that does depend on the "principle." Using the immigration example again to illustrate this point: those against deporting illegal aliens seem to care about the principle of "kindness" and "loving your neighbour" and "no one should be hurt, for pretty much any reason."

Yet they contradict this attitude in dozens of ways: expecting that people be put into prison for not calling someone by their chosen pronoun, or arresting someone giving a speech about the atrocities being committed in Gaza—they see these examples as hate speech. In these cases, it is fine to be arrested. But sneaking into the US illegally, or doing so and lying about your criminal record? That's all okay.

I feel the shrew-types are (see my Substack for a definition of "shrew") very aware of principles. The destruction of free speech and even the obliteration of privacy in the US is not necessarily affecting people directly (except during Covid, when it certainly did, with persecution toward the unvaccinated and the loss of jobs and livelihoods). It is a "principle thing" for a lot of us. It is the wanton destruction of the very fundamentals our country (the US) was founded on.