I have often pointed out that progressives ruin everything. It seems that whenever there is something that has even a modicum of a chance of being positive, they find a way to make it a problem.

Ever since 1933, Radio City Music Hall has put on a Christmas Spectacular that features the Rockettes in several amazing performances. Some of the routines have been performed since the show’s inception and it remains a staple in New York City.

This year, however, Alec Baldwin and the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have decided that the show is a problem and have gone full Karen to express their disapproval. Why?

Because they use live animals in their performances.

The actor and organization sent a letter to those in charge of the production demanding that they stop using live animals in their performances. The letter began:

Nothing is more magical than visiting New York City during the holidays, when people from all around the world come to see the Radio City Christmas Spectacular. But as someone who cares deeply about animals, I was disappointed to learn that the show doesn’t just feature dazzling human performers like the Rockettes but also camels, sheep, and donkeys, who are forced to participate in the Nativity scene.

Baldwin also claimed that these productions “are anything but merry for animals who are often deprived of everything that’s natural and important to them” and claimed that they “feel fear, pain, and stress, just like us.”

The actor then pointed out that the Dawn Animal Agency, the organization the show has worked with, “has frequently been cited by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for violating federal law for denying animals even basic necessities, such as clean and safe enclosures, adequate space, and veterinary care programs” and insisted that “[n]o production should want to be associated with such cruelty.”

This is rich coming from Baldwin, who narrowly escaped being prosecuted for killing an actual human. But it is even more absurd considering PETA’s troubling history with the animals it claims to be helping.

Since 1998, PETA has slaughtered tens of thousands of dogs, cats, and other pets. The total number is 47,049. But these are just the numbers we know about. The organization purports to advocate for the safety of animals, but it has likely killed untold numbers while pretending to be their saviors.

Indeed, killing animals is part of the ideology that drives PETA.

Why does PETA kill cats and dogs by the thousands instead of finding them homes? Simply, PETA does not believe in pet ownership. Ingrid Newkirk has called pet ownership “an abysmal situation.” She further elaborated on her goal for destroying the human-pet bond: “If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind.”

“In the end, I think it would be lovely if we stopped this whole notion of pets altogether,” she has said.

Ridiculously, PETA has argued that outdoor cats should be summarily killed instead of allowed to live. In a 2014 interview with the Washington Post, Newkirk argued that outdoor cats would be better off dead because they might contract a future illness or be hit by a car in the future. In PETA’s twisted mind, it’s more humane to just euthanize the animals than for a hypothetical harm to befall them in the future. Similarly, PETA has also argued in court that elephants are better off being killed than living in American zoos where they are well cared for.

As far as I know, nobody is killing the animals involved in the Christmas production. I’m not an animal rights advocate, but if it were up to me, I’d keep those animals as far from PETA as possible given their penchant for destroying nonhuman beings.

But this is part and parcel of the hypocrisy shown by authoritarian elites who believe firmly in the principles of “rules for thee, but not for me.” Perhaps this is why so few people take them seriously.