The Joe Rogan controversy revealed something important about the American left [Archive.org URL]

Within the field of moral philosophy, the main rival to deontology [the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action] is a school of thought known as “consequentialism.” In this view, the morality of actions must be judged by their consequences: The more grievous the consequences (be it in terms of human happiness, or suffering, or human freedom, etc.), the more heinous the action.

[…]

But the main objection philosophers have raised against deontological restrictions is that they’re overly rigid. Immanuel Kant, the originator of this school of moral philosophy, famously argued that it was immoral to lie in all circumstances, even to a murderer who’s asking for your friend’s whereabouts so he can kill her. Few people today think a rule that rigid is viable. But if we as a society accept more and more forms of discrimination and animus as absolutely unacceptable — adding poverty to the list, say — we are left with an ever-more-restrictive moral code that forces us into ever-thornier moral dilemmas.

[…]

There is a reason most philosophers are not down-the-line consequentialists: Most people think there are some rules too fundamental to be subject to means-ends reasoning.