> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://goodoil.news/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Left - URL: https://goodoil.news/hypocrisy-thy-name-is-left/ - Published: 2026-10-21T00:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-20T23:59:59.000Z - Description: You can’t cheerlead ‘necessary’ violence, then thunder against violence when it comes for one of your own. - Author: Lushington Brady - Tags: AUS Politics, Media Bias As I’ve already written about the attempted murder of independent MP **Helen Haines**, it’s a universal truth of politics that no foul deed goes unexploited. And few are as quick to exploit foul deeds than the left. No sooner had the news broken than the left political establishment (which, of course, includes the coalition these days), than the legacy media and left-wing social media went into full-throated meltdown mode. The immediate bellowing was that this was all **Pauline Hanson**’s fault, all social media’s fault, blah blah blah. That many of these same people had openly cheered **Charlie Kirk**’s murder did not go unnoticed: a number of X users replied to thundering lefties with screenshots of their own gleeful celebration’s of Kirk’s assassination. It’s not just social media nobodies, though: some of the biggest names in the leftosphere were straight out of the gates, screeching that violence is intolerable (which it is), while ignoring their own past support for violence. People like wannabe politician, **Hannah Ferguson**. You have to hand it to the modern progressive influencer: consistency is merely a bourgeois construct designed to shackle the revolutionary spirit. When Ms Ferguson, the darling of digital didacticism, recently graced our morning television screens to lament the dark arts of political discord following the deplorable assault on independent member Helen Haines, one could almost hear the collective groaning of synapses nationwide. Here was the quintessential progressive oracle, fresh from her triumphant pilgrimage to the National Press Club, where boomer hacks genuflected before her altar with all the religious fervour of medieval peasants before a weeping Madonna, lecturing the populace on the sacred virtues of civility. > [Yes, there is](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/hannah-fergusons-calls-for-cool-heads-reveal-contradiction-on-political-violence/news-story/9361997cd22665fe243b86503abe761d?ref=goodoil.news) unhealthy discourse on social media, but when we see a woman like Helen Haines targeted, I think it speaks to a broader issue of male violence against women in Australia as well. How utterly predictable. No crisis is complete until neatly filed away under the grand intersectional heading of systemic misogyny, preferably before the breakfast toast has cooled. Yet one doesn’t have to delve terribly far into the digital archives to unearth a rather striking dissonance. It was only yesteryear, following the fatal dispatch of American conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, that our budding stateswoman took to her Substack and Instagram to ponder the finer ethical points of lethal retribution. > Am I glad Charlie Kirk will no longer spread his extremist messaging? Yes. Am I happy that someone shot him in the neck in broad daylight? No. Do I believe he empowered the violence that ended his life? Yes. Do I believe he caused more harm than good? Yes. Is violence sometimes necessary? Yes. There you have it: murder is deeply regrettable, you see, provided the victim’s ideological alignment isn’t sufficiently distasteful to warrant a philosophical shrug. Ms Ferguson’s enthusiastic endorsement of conditional bloodshed applies strictly conditionally. “Necessary” violence is strictly reserved for those whose newsletters fail to pass the inner-city purity test. Naturally, this supreme self-regard translates seamlessly into electoral ambition. Ms Ferguson is currently girding her loins to challenge the prime minister himself in the seat of Grayndler, campaigning on her self-described “three Gs”: gas, gambling and Gaza. You almost have to feel sorry for the bewildered constituents of Marrickville, being buttonholed between flat whites by a Forbes 30-Under-30 alumnus explaining why traditional journalism is a “stale, pale and male” conspiracy orchestrated entirely by **Rupert Murdoch**, while completely ignoring thriving alternative mastheads run by formidable women who dare to deviate from the hive-mind. Appearing at the National Press Club to her adoring audience of ageing Boomer insiders, Ferguson lamented the suffocating grip of institutional consensus while simultaneously demanding absolute ideological conformity from anyone daring to draw breath to her right. In her utopian vision, dissent is treated as a form of spiritual pollution, and anyone insufficiently outraged by the current year’s mandated *cause célèbre* is cast outer-darknessward into the bin of bigotry. Yet beneath the polished Instagram reels and the carefully curated ‘girlboss’ aesthetic lies a fragile edifice. This is, after all, a woman who confessed that she and her coterie wept bitter tears upon discovering that **Donald Trump** had successfully reclaimed the American presidency. One shudders to think how the fragile psyche of our self-appointed media disruptor would cope with a stiff breeze of genuine, unfiltered adversity that couldn’t be blocked, muted, or monetised. Probably with the very violence she conditionally approves or disapproves of. Lest anyone think she *isn’t* just parroting whatever she thinks the left-wing peanut gallery will approve of, take her own words for it: > [At one point](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/progressive-girlboss-preaches-diversity-but-champions-conformity/news-story/e702ac11dbb63ab7f0f81eb97bf258c8?ref=goodoil.news), she let slip an interesting anecdote: that when she started out in her career she was desperate to be accepted by progressive circles, terrified of being cast out for not using the correct lingua franca. Nothing is quite so satisfying as when the left openly admit that they’re nothing but cowardly group-thinkers. --- 💡 ****If you enjoyed this article please share it using the share buttons at the top or bottom of the article.**