Liberals; the Definitive Creators of Unintended Consequences.

Jordon Peterson brings to light that most ideas for change are bad. The main reason is we forgotten why we do things they way we do. Liberal Progressive believe not only that change is good but needs to be done continuously, without any thought of why what they want to change is being done the way it is being done; the end result is almost always a disaster of unintended consequences for which they take no responsibility. Further they are intellectually lazy, or simply don't care because they are agenda rather than result driven. A typical example is the constant false rationalization that correlation equals causation. In it's absurd form, they would say that carrots cause heart attacks, because the vast majority of people having heart attacks eat carrots shortly before their heart attack; this of course ignores that carrots are a staple in most diets, and nothing at all to do with heart attacks. In a more subtle way the same can be said for sending people to jail for so called minor crimes. Data correlation tells us that those sent to jail for theft crimes generally emerge more antisocial than when they went in. The Liberal Progressive would say we should than not send thieves to jail. The problem is that theft is antisocial by definition, so without punishment, the same person will continue to steal and become still become more antisocial; at least when the thief is in jail they are not continually re-offending, until their crimes become serious enough to warrant incarceration. Further, the lack of punishment for theft encourages others to commit theft as well.  In other words the unintended consequences of not addressing theft crimes, is the criminals will continue to offend with impunity, meaning whether incarcerated or not, they will still become more antisocial, with the addition of creating many more victims and it will result in massive increase in others taking up thievery. Of course the left now measures success only in the term of equity and since criminal behavior tends to be overrepresented by minorities, the view fewer incarcerations as a success unto itself, regardless of the harm and wholesale destruction it does to society. 

There are those that claim that theft is a form of reparations, again from a world view based on equity. Even if this were true, the unintended consequences of that is entirely regressive, as the end result will be lawlessness in the poorest of communities and a massive increase in retail costs. This of course goes along with defund the police, which is another regressive policy that is only popular with those that live in otherwise protected communities and do not face crime on a daily basis; in other words, the poorest among us. While decades of indoctrination has convinced urban blacks that the are the constant victim of police violence and anti-black racism, they also know that the police are the only barrier between them and violent crime committed almost entirely by other blacks. Murder is so prevalent in Black communities, it is one of the primary causes of deaths of young black men. liberal Black activists often rationalize away black on black crime, saying white criminals generally victimize whites also; what they conveniently ignore is blacks are victimized by blacks at ten times the rate of whites by white criminals). Yet it is so ignored by Democrats and the mainstream press, that the moment the suspect of a mass shootings and/or killing or violent act is identified as black, all reporting is immediately stopped, just as all black on black crimes are never reported on, no matter the body count or the viciousness of the crime. To the black communities, regardless of how much they hate the police, they still want their presence in as large numbers as possible, as without them they are without any protection from the violent black gangs that otherwise control the segregated ghettos controlled solely by Democrats, they are forced to live in.