A foundation block for liberalism, progressivism, and the democratic party is moral relativism. In and of itself moral relativism is a judgment. The crux of this tenet is that you can't judge others for their actions because they have their own culture that condones or rejects the behavior in question. Based on those tenets, it would seem that there would little or no effort by liberals to control the behavior of others. Alas, that is not the case.
The very definitional conflict inherent in "moral equivalence" may not be realized or acknowledged by those who profess a faith to this cult of liberalism.

Example:
1. If you cannot judge that person 1 or group 1 has committed either a bad act (a judgment) or good act (a judgment) of violence such as shooting rockets randomly into the neighborhoods and cities of group 2 because group 1 professes a grievance against group 2, then there is no judgment to be issued or stated because group 1 has a grievance against group 2. For progressivism the grievance establishes the moral equivalence.
2. Therefore, if there is moral equivalence, then the action or reaction on the part of group 2 that is the result of a grievance against group 1 cannot be judged.

Moral equivalence in its abstract true form would be passivism not advocacy since there is no judgment of good and evil, right and wrong, or left and right. There is only equivalence. Otherwise noting is equal.

Added to Gab. December 5, 2022.
Added to GETTR. December 5, 2022.
Added to Locals. December 5, 2022.
Added to Truth Social. December 5, 2022.