Either one means it's pointless to discuss it with him, but I can explain it to others.

"Proxy compassion" is third-party compassion. Forcing others to give, others to support your guilt. Supporting massive wealth redistribution for other people doesn't cost the average progressive any real effort, never mind money.

Jesus did not show up on people's doorsteps with an armed Roman soldier on each side of him, and tell the occupants to render unto Caesar so that Caesar could care for the poor, and if they didn't, the soldiers would haul them out of their homes to prison.

Jesus did confront a rich man who asked Jesus how to get into the Kingdom. Jesus said "give YOUR money to the poor." I can't think of any major religious figure or historical moral leader who has ever subscribed to the "second-hand holiness" of modern socialist thinking.

The modern liberal is all about making others be generous and compassionate, then claiming all the moral virtue by proxy. "Proxy compassion."

It's the guy who pays a couple thousand in taxes for the social programs that occupy the vast majority of our government, and then spits on the shadow of the guy who pays millions into that process.

It's the guy who picks someone's pocket and drops the wallet into the monk's bowl, and walks away convinced the merit is all his.

At the bottom is the guy who wears the colored ribbon, or carries the sign, and feels as virtuous as if he had actually done something useful for somebody.

I could go into details, like the differences between liberals and conservatives as far as personal charity--real charity--is concerned. What I referred to as the "rubber meeting the road." Giving of your own time and money.

Something Bowser, from what he's written, actually does, and still doesn't understand the concept of "proxy compassion."

I have explained this very simple concept in great detail, with these examples and others. Many times.

You can see how it's worked.

To be a committed progressive apparently requires the destruction of one's own brain. A leftist who seriously thinks about his positions stops being one. It's not common, but I've seen it.

Most choose the self-destruction of their mind rather than go back on their beliefs. They may be brilliant technologists, or physicists, or mathematicians, but in this particular context they just stop thinking altogether and become seething balls of preprogrammed responses and uncoordinated concepts, most absorbed randomly from their environment like a sponge absorbing nutrients passively from the ocean.

It's kind of a hoot to be lectured on reason, logic, evidence, and rational debate from people who have never been able to deal with any of those things.