Kevin from FunMurphys inadvertantly pushes one of my buttons in a comment regarding Boycott France?:

If a woman has the right to choose, doesn't every American have the right to choose what country they want their merchandise from?

Although the original question concerned the attitudes of people in other countries, he raises a interesting issue. While its not true of all, it seems that in recent years "the left" has largely abandoned any consistent philosophical underpinning and reduced their dogmatic canon to a number of unconnected, conflicting "special cases" and fiats...

For example, as Kevin notes, a woman has a right to choose, a right to determine what happens with her body. Except in China, where her right to choose is less important than the "needs" of the state. Or in India, where a woman has a right to choose an abortion, but feminists lobbied to ensure she doesn't have the right to another private medical treatment, ultrasound, which will help her determine if the child is female and should thus be aborted. And, in New York and California, the doctor no longer has the right to choose; an intern can no longer use the conscience clause to opt out of abortion and must be trained to perform them. (This is true even when the doctor is a woman and must use her body to perform the abortion.)

And of course discriminating on the basis of race and gender is right if it appears, at least superficially, that that motive is to improve that minority's status, but is wrong if it doesn't (in that superficial analysis, deeper analysis are prohibited) or merely opposes some already canonized leftist dogma.

Freedom of speech is to be cherished, but we should bring the coercive powers of the state or other duly constituted authority (university, city) against you if you use those powers to oppose an ideal of the left. (Cite: David Horowitz on reparations.) Religious folks should not avail themselves of this right. Unless your religion is a "tolerant" one, like Buddhism. Except for Islam, which is to be accepted even though its intolerant.

Gun ownership is immoral, unless you have the money to hire your own security firm. Violence is bad and wrong, unless its in my last movie, or a movie with my favorite star in it. Then, viewing or speaking of violence is a matter of choice, opposing it is censorship. Except, in cases we disagree with, such as where the violence appears to be racially-motivated. Except in cases where that violence is directed against Jews by Muslims. Then its okay again.

Pornography is wrong: it degrades women. Or is it right, because conservatives are opposed to it and Woody Harrelsen seems so sympathetic when he portrays Larry Flynn? We're not sure yet about this one.

Civil disobedience is an important "right", and civil disobedience is patriotic. Those behaving thusly should be treated with respect and allowed to finish their protest. Unless you're protesting abortion or another cherished leftist dogma. Then you need to be prosecuted under RICO (designed for the mafia) and the ACLU need not be concerned violations of your civil liberties.

War is wrong, but "wars of liberation", such as the Palestinians against the Israelis, are right. Unless the "liberators" would institute a non-leftist government, such as the Contras or Polish Catholics. Military intervention from the outside is wrong. Except in Kosovo. And Serbia. The UN must be involved. Except when its clear that it's a corrupt institution. (We'll tell you when that is.)

Instead of war, or at least the wars I oppose, words and diplomacy be used to change the minds of these dictators. And no, no amount of words and diplomacy will change my mind on this matter. (Uh, wait, am I not saying I'm less reasonable than my own picture of, say, Saddam? Uh, next topic...)

Acceptable governments are those which believe in rule of law respect for human rights and dignity. Exceptions to the previous may be those which have a leftist leaning, like Cuba, China, North Korea, and Iraq. Exceptions to these exceptions include Islamic states, which, even though further "right" than U.S. Republicans, should be treated as a leftist because they're so darned "authentic" and "sincere": Muslims tend to be poor. Except that the Christians they kill in many wars of revolution are poorer, but owww! my head's starting to hurt now...

How is is possible to buy into this cognative dissonance?