I'm in agreement with that but you also address the idea that I expressed. In the new order of the 21st Century it is hard to cling to the group identities of the old order. They have become so fractured that people increasingly either reject them outright or clarify their subgroup.
You for an example, a long-time proud liberal, do not fi…
I'm in agreement with that but you also address the idea that I expressed. In the new order of the 21st Century it is hard to cling to the group identities of the old order. They have become so fractured that people increasingly either reject them outright or clarify their subgroup.
You for an example, a long-time proud liberal, do not fit under the Orwellian new definitions the radicals impose. I am seeing an increasing number of people seceding from groups they were previously comfortable in.
I think it is the result of subgroups trying to claim membership where they don't fit. A glaring example is LGBTQ[whatever else is being added]. The L & G people have an attraction to their own sex (something in common). Sex is fun. The B people are happy to have it with whomever will participate with them. If they have a preference, they seem to be able to get past it. The T people are split between the dysphoric and non-dysphoric. The Q people are outrage junkies. I don't see it as a unified group/tribe and think that some actually despise or hold one or mor of the others in contempt.
Perhaps it time to dust off our copies of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals." in a strange new world where it is radical to be rational. While I dislike the "enemies" world, sometimes we do have genuine enemies. Hopefully without thinking we must kill them, rather than their ideas.
I'm in agreement with that but you also address the idea that I expressed. In the new order of the 21st Century it is hard to cling to the group identities of the old order. They have become so fractured that people increasingly either reject them outright or clarify their subgroup.
You for an example, a long-time proud liberal, do not fit under the Orwellian new definitions the radicals impose. I am seeing an increasing number of people seceding from groups they were previously comfortable in.
I think it is the result of subgroups trying to claim membership where they don't fit. A glaring example is LGBTQ[whatever else is being added]. The L & G people have an attraction to their own sex (something in common). Sex is fun. The B people are happy to have it with whomever will participate with them. If they have a preference, they seem to be able to get past it. The T people are split between the dysphoric and non-dysphoric. The Q people are outrage junkies. I don't see it as a unified group/tribe and think that some actually despise or hold one or mor of the others in contempt.
Perhaps it time to dust off our copies of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals." in a strange new world where it is radical to be rational. While I dislike the "enemies" world, sometimes we do have genuine enemies. Hopefully without thinking we must kill them, rather than their ideas.