Below is my column in The Hill on the recent New York Times podcast exploring the justifications for crimes ranging from theft to murder. The podcast with radical Hasan Piker, the New York Times Opinion Culture Editor Nadja Spiegelman, and New Yorker writer Jia Tolentino captured the moral relativism that has taken hold of the left in American society. Reading the manifesto of the accused White House Correspondents Association Dinner shooter Cole Tomas Allen shows the ultimate expression of a society where rage has replaced morality and decency.
Here is the column:
“It is so hard to live ethically in an unethical society.” That lament heard this week from New York Times opinion culture editor Nadja Spiegelman could well be the Democratic Party’s epitaph.
Spiegelman was interviewing two left-wing influencers about how everything from shoplifting to murder may be excusable today in light of the unfairness they see in society.
The podcast, a product of the nation’s newspaper of record, reveled in the moral relativism that has taken over the American left. It featured the ravings of the antisemitic Marxist streamer Hasan Piker, who calmly explained how the murder of United Healthcare executive Brian Thompson was perfectly understandable. His rationalization came from Marxist revolutionary Friedrich Engels, who had called capitalism “social murder.” If capitalists are “social murderers,” then why not kill them? The logic is liberating and lethal for some on the left looking for a license for violence.
Mind you, this same newspaper had once condemned and effectively banned a U.S. senator for writing an op-ed advocating the use of the military to quell violent protests during the summer of George Floyd’s death. The Times even forced out its own opinion editor for having the temerity to publish such an opinion.
But glorifying murder? The suggestion of open hunting season on corporate executives did not appear to shock or repel Spiegelman. After all, we are living in “an unethical society.” She explained that many felt that the murder of Thompson, the father of two, meant that “finally, someone can actually do something about health care.”
Even liberal comedians are practicing a literal version of slapstick. Margaret Cho this week declared that “we need a feral, bloodthirsty, violent Democrat.”
To be fair, Spiegelman did concede that it might seem a bit “scary” for some to start murdering our way to social justice.
She also explained that shoplifting can be justifiable because people are “stealing from Whole Foods — not just for the thrill of it, but out of a feeling of anger and moral justification.”
New Yorker writer Jia Tolentino also contributed to the podcast, titled “The Rich Don’t Play by the Rules. So Why Should I?” She immediately threw in her own experience with “microlooting” and explained why it is arguably moral: “I have, under very specific circumstances. I will say, I think that stealing from a big-box store [isn’t] significant as a moral wrong, nor is it significant in any way as protest.”
She detailed her own past thefts and added, “I didn’t feel bad about it at all, in part because the store was a corporation. And it certainly felt, in a utilitarian sense, I was like, this is not a big deal. Right, guys?”
Not in the confines of the New York Times, where apparently you are entitled to all goods that are fit to pilfer.
The bizarre exchange highlighted the moral chasm that is opening its maw on today’s political left. In my book “Rage and the Republic,” I write about how rage helps people excuse any offense or attack. It dismisses the humanity of others and provides a license to hate completely and without reservation.
It is not really murder or theft if there are no real humans on the other side, is it?
Other columnists have defended such property crimes. Washington Post writer Maura Judkis ran a column mocking shoplifting stories as the “moral panic” of a nation built on “stolen land.” It is reminiscent of those who excused rioting in past summers “as an expression of power” and demanded that the media refer to looters as “protesters.”
Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones went so far as to call on journalists not to cover shoplifting crimes.
At its core, it is a denial of transcendent values and rights. It is a decoupling of our society from a grounding in moral or universal truths. It is a trend that extends not only to attacks on individuals but also to attacks on our constitutional system. There is a growing denial of our founding based on Enlightenment principles of natural rights, which come not from government but from God.
Some people seem to have forgotten this. In 2024, a celebrated political journalist memorably asserted that belief in God-given rights is a form of “Christian nationalism” — an odd claim about a concept the nation’s founders literally wrote into our Declaration of Independence.
Last year, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — a man who represents Thomas Jefferson’s own state — attacked a witness in committee for espousing Jefferson’s immortal assertion that human beings’ natural rights are endowed by their Creator. Kaine disparaged this idea as something worthy of Iran’s mullahs.
The result is the type of moral free-fall and rejection of personal responsibility expressed on the New York Times podcast. Simply because they condemn our entire age as unethical, they feel justified in asserting a moral right to commit any offense, from microlooting to murder. This underpins the increasingly frequent justifications made for attacks against conservatives or law enforcement as a form of “defending democracy.”
Yet the feeling of “anger and moral justification” does not make an act moral. It is the morality of mayhem; a spreading decay within our society. History has shown us how democracies can become mobocracies.
During the French Revolution, journalist Jacques Mallet du Pan observed that “like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.” The sad fact is, it is not just the danger of fellow revolutionaries deciding that you are the next reactionary to be guillotined. It is the self-consumption of radicals who untether themselves from any higher order or purpose. It is the knowledge that all mortals carry the Saturn gene; all mortals share the capacity to become monsters.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
I didn’t always agree with how Ruth Bader Ginsburg bench pressed the conceptual building blocks on the Supreme Court’s plate. But l heard her when she said context matters. The Constitution is the devil we know. What is the devil from the left coming in bits and pieces as bright shiny objects to remedy specific grievances? James Carville says pack SCOTUS but do not campaign to voters that’s your platform. The subject podcast says shoplift what you want, flirts with shoot those who commit “social murder”. Where is the whole damn blueprint? Is it the Communist Manifesto? It calls for dictatorship of the Proletariat. It promises bread according to need. Except when GUM’s shelves are empty. You don’t need the right to speak nor keep and bear arms. The dictatorship does that for you. Is that the devil the left doesn’t want us to know? If not, what the hell is the blueprint? Get it bluelined and up on the table. If a company wants to sell an airplane to the national government it puts together a redteam to pick at the contract proposal. To rid it of glitches and make it better. Is this a redteam initiative? That comes back to RBG. Get the context down pat.
Democrats are clearly fascists set on destroying western society!
if you are forcing me to accept that a man can become a woman…you aren’t rational.
I want EVERY aspect of funding reaching democrats ENDED
Federal Aid to cities, states, non-profits and colleges
also Outlaw Public Unions the political army of the democrats funded by taxapayers
2 Civil Wars by Democrat democrats is 2 too many!
Anyone helping illegals invaders is committing treason…arrest EVERY leader involved…basically the ENTIRE Democrat Party1
If the store is big enough, the sin gets small enough? Kaboom! By that logic, Everest is a pebble if you squint from space. The sleight-of-hand isn’t in the pocketing—it’s in the shrinking. Call it “microlooting,” and suddenly the conscience fits in a thimble. But rename gravity “microfalling” and you still meet the turf.
Thanks for giving me lots to think about.
OT: Cole Allen’s manifesto explicitly excludes Patel from the list of targets. Any guess as to why?
I believe he indicated the reason in his Manifesto — ethnicity.
He mistakenly thinks that Patel, like him, is half-black (from Africa) and half-white.
Sam,
So, now we have unhinged would be, alleged assassins basing their target list on skin color?
Moral malaise? This is Manson Family-level sociopathy, and it’s very ironically the result of privilege – even the relative privilege mentioned in the piece. The concentration of wealth and prevalence of this mentality in the North East are not coincidental, neither is the disconnect from reality on display in the insularity of that milieu.
The inability to employ basic human compassion though – that is a different kind of conditioning, far more concerning. and has nothing to do with politics. It is straight up sickness, and its pervasiveness in the modern left can no longer be denied.
Come On Man! Let’s see what society has produced lately in the way of stupidity and lawlessness: 1) Sandwich Boy in DC acquitted after throwing food on Feds in a hissy fit; 2) Lovely Luigi The Murdering Abercrombie Model over societal healthcare costs; 3) Toilet Paper Warehouse Luigi Arsonist over minimum wage grievance; and, 4) Teacher of The Month Righteous Federal Assassin!!! The Dem Party Troika of Bernie, AOC, and Mamdani The Commie have to be Super Excited at the apparent Revolution in Young and Dumb Citizens! The future so dull you don’t need shades!!! Gen Z MORONS Rule!!!
This is what happens when a nation rejects God
The Left seems to embrace the third-world, poverty-centered mindset. Not a great setup for future peace and prosperity.
Turley cites the Times’ past handling of Senator Tom Cotton as evidence of hypocrisy, yet he ignores the difference between an op-ed calling for immediate military action against citizens and a podcast analyzing the psychological motivations of a fringe movement. One is a policy demand; the other is cultural reportage.
I doubt the simpletons and reading comprehension challenged folks would recognize the distinction.
Also, Turley conflates analytical inquiry with endorsement. Interviewing a radical figure to understand the “logic” behind social rage is a standard journalistic practice, not an institutional “license to kill.” To suggest that a podcast discussion is an “epitaph” for an entire political party ignores the overwhelming majority of Democratic leaders who explicitly condemned the murder of Brian Thompson and have consistently campaigned on public safety.
He’s playing the rage bait game by using inflammatory rhetoric like —”open hunting season on corporate executives”—to describe a nuanced conversation about social frustration. By framing the act of “understanding” an event as “glorifying” it, Turley deleted the distinction between sociopolitical analysis and criminal incitement. This no different than his own complaining of the “age of rage,” using alarmist language to provoke the very response he claims to despise. He’s such a hypocrite.
Since it appears you loathe the posts by Turley, you need to see a shrink. If it pushes your anger, why not read a book. . .maybe the Bible would be a good start.
No anger here. Just plain ol’ criticism of Turley’s hypocrisy.
There’s some kind of psychological issue here. You spend an inordinate amount of time on the blog and all you contribute is threadbare gainsaying.
And what will the left do when those to the right (including center, right leaning and solid right) decides to adopt the same or similar moral justifications for stopping those unhinged actions and take steps to address it using the “justified” methods of the left? The civil war they seem to strive for would occur and the results would not favor them.
What civil war? You don’t have any idea what you are talking about.
Democrats simply need to force Trump to reimburse Congress for his illegal spending, some of that money from Trump’s personal assets since he bypassed Congress. No violence needed, just make Trump start following laws;)
Do you mean follow the law like when Obama released frozen Iranian funds in cash and precious metals without authorization by Congress? You know, during a time of war to a listed sponsor of terror that was busy providing men and material for killing and maiming American soldiers? Or do you mean like when Obama killed four US citizens without any consideration of their due process, one a 14 year old.kid. Do you mean like that?
Congress authorized the release of those funds.
No they did not, Obama used an alternate method of funding to side step Congress. As I recall, it was $ 1.7 billion of Iranian assets that had been frozen to reimburse and pay the people that had been held captive by the Iranian government.
It’s time for a real “broken-windows” approach to law enforcement. Prosecute all and make the offenders inelgible for expungement, at least for those over a certain age, and 18 may be too high to start. Let everyone know they can’t get away with theft or other so-called petty crime.
So many of these writers, and their audience whom they seek to please, are located in or near New York City that it raises a question of whether their negative attitudes toward American values reflect a consciousness of the irreversible decline of NYC and the Northeast generally.
Great column.
Micro looters will be micro shot
I remember an old saying which summarizes the anti-capitalist view in today’s society. . . .”If all the rich people in the world, gave all of their money to the poorest people in the world, the rich would have it back in 5 years.”
Those who lambast the wealthy in our country are merely exhibiting the tantrums of a child when the parents didn’t give them another lollipop.
I’ve also heard someone say 95% would want what I have but only 5% would be willing to do what I did over many years to accomplish it.
Envy may be the worst sin. The reality is the standard of living for Americans has improved something like 600% over the past century. The lower middle class live better than Louie XVI or George III did in their day. We have refrigerators, microwaves, indoor plumbing, electricity, air conditioning, air travel, cars, telephones, vaccines, computers, etc. Stuff those kings could not even dream of.
But politicians know one of the more effective ways to manipulate the “masses” is to stoke envy. make them angry someone has more than they do.
Well said.
“Envy” captures the evil that drives these worthless residents of the USA! They are the victims among us who don’t just whine, but engage in unlawful and indecent actions.
I saw a link and read this on The Hill. I’m glad to see many others are similarly confounded.
I have some very basic guidelines for Nadja in her aspirations to live ethically. Don’t physically harm others, don’t steal. Should be easy enough.
Not for Democrats.
Let’s move beyond moral relativism and move directly to methods. Having studied power for decades, even written a few papers on the subject, a political rule of thumb on power is this: The methods used to achieve power are the same as those used when power is achieved. This new “Joy of Theft” is just another method to seize power, with the hope that “everyman” will join in. The theft of a candy bar is not good, but the theft of a million candy bars is a serious problem. It destabilizes. And theft is just what the left is attempting with these assorted millionaire’s taxes. This is, of course, the beginning of arbitrary seizure of property by the government.
Now, the latest “Joy of Murder” may be a bridge too far. I hope it doesn’t catch on.
“Now, the latest “Joy of Murder” may be a bridge too far. I hope it doesn’t catch on.”
I share that hope. However, if it should “catch on”, its proponents may find cause to regret their advocacy, as the concept can easily be turned against them. The overwhelming majority of the 500,000,000 or so firearms in the US are in hands of people who are opposed to their cause. I would advise them to be especially careful of what they wish for in this case, but cretins such as those are incapable of even considering good advice, much less accepting it…
NY Times, ‘all crimes are fine as long as they don’t affect me or my loved ones.
Yet the NY slime loved what Stalin was doing to his people.
Basically look
Abby Hoffman published a book called “Steal this Book” in the 1960s, sharing various ways to lie, cheat, steal, and game the system. And where did the activism of the 1960s end up? The “influencers” of the 60s and 70s, if not dead from drugs or disease by the 80s, became investment bankers or engineers. I lived through that and own a copy of the book. It’s a waste of everyone’s time, a phase young people (and societies) cycle through.
Investment bankers and engineers? LOL. More like PBS and NPR employees.
That too! The point was, not hippies .
Abby Hoffman died alone as a miserable man in the prime of his life after years of being on the run from the FBI. Another criminal 60’s antiwar Vietnam “activist “ like Bill Ayers and Patricia Dorn, the perfect Democrats.