The Hypocrisy Was the Worst Part

I thought it was the rape

The Epstein Scandal, reignited after the Department of Justice published over 3.5 million partially redacted pages, has dominated the headlines for weeks. While others may wish to pore over the documents and attempt to piece together a coherent narrative, we can learn an essential feature of the progressive elite through examining mainstream coverage of the scandal.

New York Magazine recently published an article initially titled “Pizza Gate Was Not Real. Right?”, where Dan Brooks ostensibly discusses the recent tranche of files. However, while the piece is concerned with the details of the theory and viral supporting evidence, the author himself is primarily focused on defending the liberal order against the “well-documented conspiracy of morons.”

In both this article and others concerning similarly inconvenient sex scandals, we see progressive authors act more upset that the ruling class has been discredited—and the so-called ‘far-right’ proven correct—than they are with the scandal itself. This trend reveals a flaw in progressive self-conception and undermines the moral legitimacy of the regime.

The columnist begins with a summary of recently published documents and a characterization of Pizzagate. While the purpose of this article is not to delve into John Podesta’s art collection or Hillary Clinton’s dining habits, it must be emphasized that Brooks is unconcerned with the veracity of these claims.

In any case, the writer accurately describes this theory, which is “[based] on the belief that references to pizza were code for children who were used for sex,” before pointing to excerpts from the file which lend credence to this narrative. After listing out the evidence, Brooks expresses his primary concern: the DOJ files will vindicate and empower conspiracy theorists and racists.

The author contends that this force is a far greater threat to the nation than a cabal of billionaire pimps, racketeers, and traitors.

“...Fear of such people is fundamental to the experience of being an educated liberal in Trump’s United States, more frightening than a syndicate of pedophiliac celebrities, [and] financiers, ...because it operates in greater numbers.

According to the author, the real scandal is the empowerment of a “well-documented conspiracy of morons,” and not that a powerful financier trafficked women and state secrets for decades. He is entirely correct when he admits that the ‘educated liberal’ is terrified of losing narrative control. In moments of narrative crisis, the archetypal progressive becomes aware of the precarious nature of his position.

Nor is the New York Magazine article the only instance of this selective outrage. Infamous progressive activist Nick Lowles, who works as the chief executive at perfidious left-wing NGO Hope Not Hate, argued that the worst effect of the Grooming Gang scandal, which involved the sexual exploitation of thousands of ethnically British girls, was the empowerment of the far right.

In the November 2012 edition of Hope Not Hate’s magazine, the progressive activist wrote an article titled ‘Grooming- an issue we cannot ignore.’ Much like the Brooks article on Epstein, the author begins with the expected moral pieties before pivoting to his main concern: the far right.

Written just after the arrest of nine Pakistani Muslims for the systemic abuse of white British girls in Rochdale, Lowels laments how, “The British far right must be rubbing their hands in delight,” at the news of these horrible crimes. Later in the same piece, he adds:

“But if we are to prevent the likes of the British National Party, English Defence League and National Front benefiting from this then we need to prove to the public that we are concerned about these stories of grooming by both gangs and individuals...”

Seemingly, the British activist is more worried about losing political standing due to the poor behavior of left-wing client groups and the subsequent cover-up than the mass exploitation of native English girls.

Closing out the essay, the writer reiterates his claim. “If we continue to be too afraid to speak out then we are complicit in the on-going abuse of vulnerable young girls and we will only have ourselves to blame when racist groups benefit.”

Speaking years later, Lowles stated, “Child sexual abuse has long been a trope used by the likes of [far right activist] Tommy Robinson and the far right in their Islamophobic narratives about the Muslim community.” According to the progressive activist, the primary issue is the ascendancy of the supposed ‘Far-Right,’ and not the sickening abuse of minors.

Clearly, when these left-wing activists speak derisively of the ‘Far-Right,’ ‘racists’ or ‘conspiracy theorists,’ they are referring to the normal citizens rightfully outraged by both the relevant scandals and the excesses of liberal rule. Insults such as these are simply slurs used to punish political enemies.

This darkly ironic situation reminds me of a classic Norm Macdonald joke in which the now deceased comedian discussed the allegations against Bill Cosby with Jerry Seinfeld. As the pair drives along in Seinfeld’s vintage Porsche, Norm quips, “I mean, there’s a comedian, Patton Oswalt, he told me, ‘I think the worst part of the Cosby thing was the hypocrisy.’ And I disagreed. ... Yeah, I thought it was the raping.” While Macdonald delivered his line as a joke, we see the same issue at play: selective outrage over narrative embarrassment instead of the clearly monstrous abuse.

Assuming I am correct, the question arises, why do progressives react in this way? Progressives love to cast themselves as brave rebels against an indelible racist and “misogynist” system, but their self-conceptualization could not be more wrong. In other words, the two authors examined in this essay share the same politics as Chase Bank, General Electric, and the MI5. The progressive self-conception is a fabrication.

Brooks has written for some of the most prestigious media outlets in America, including the New York Times and the Atlantic. Nick Lowles and Hope Not Hate rake in millions of dollars in grants while policing British politics, in a role similar to that of the ADL. Neither one of these men is a renegade or genuine anti-establishment figure; they are slaves to power.

Therefore, an attack on institutions such as the DOJ or the British Constabulary is an attack on these men. However imperfect, the “well-documented conspiracy of morons” represents a genuine challenge to the regime. Not only is the ‘Far-Right’ critiquing the same system these men depend on, but the supposed racists are true enemies of the regime, highlighting a painful and obvious contradiction within the progressive mind.

Ultimately, both Lowels and Brooks are correct; both the Grooming-Gang and Epstein scandals have discredited the regime and lent credence to the right-wing critics of the ruling class. As their political enemies, we cannot allow the ruling class to escape their complicity in these horrific crimes.

J. Burden is a Gen Z podcaster and writer, best known for his eponymous interview show. The Virginia-based commentator has published over 430 discussions with a wide range of conservative, traditionalist, and dissident thinkers. His writing can be found on Substack, either on his personal page or at the Old Glory Club.