I don’t think that’s it.
I think there are many aspects to the modern western liberal-leftist’s mind, and one of the most important is that while we see things as matters of right and wrong, justice and injustice, good policy and bad policy, they tend to see things as part of a battle between the strong and the weak.
They are just fixated on backing the perceived weaker party in a conflict. It’s one of their metaprograms. They see a conflict between rich and poor, and they back the poor (facts be damned). They see the abortion issue as a conflict between men and women, and back the women. They see Israel and The PA, and back the weaker PA.
They don’t see people, they see races and other minority groups, and are compelled to show their liberal superiority and bona fides by backing them, no matter what.
Since they tend to be outcome based, they get confused when two of their preferred weak groups are in a conflict. Then it is either back the weaker party, or succumb to tribal biases and just back that party.
We know that the strong may be right. They seldom enters into the liberal’s analysis.
That's what they're all about. Zero moral direction; insistance upon committing evil just because that's who and what they are.