It’s no secret that the success of the liberal regime is founded on an illusory moral high ground: the successful framing of themselves as voice of the downtrodden, and the of Right as the party of “making the rich richer and the poor poorer.” It’s similarly obvious (to us, anyway) that liberal thought has done untold damage to all sectors of society, and that conservative positions will ultimately improve quality of life for everyone involved. This fiction persists in large part due to the Left’s disturbingly successful strategy of relying on appeals to emotion and compassion, protected by only the thinnest layer of pseudo-logic, to win support for misguided causes.

But the blame may not all lie on liberal shoulders. It’s telling that conservatives have not only failed to dispel this fiction, but don’t seem to be trying all that hard. Browsing the pages of Ricochet or The Federalist, one will find many sound analyses of social and political issues, but very little rhetoric aimed at providing hope, comfort, or understanding for those in the midst of life’s tribulations. There is little indication of empathy.

There could be various reasons for this. A surface explanation, exaggerated by the Left but still partially true, is the emphasis on personal responsibility. If you look at people’s problems as mostly their own fault, you’ll be less inclined to operate on their behalf or foster any emotion for their self-inflicted struggles. It also might have to do with a basic adverse reaction to popular liberalism. When overwhelmed by emotionally charged but empty discourse, the natural response is irritation followed by cold (but sound) rationality.