Sorry, I have to keep going here. The root of the problem is that a segment of society has had *genuine* underdog status (to say the least) for centuries. Being an underdog allows moral coverage to use any means necessary to fight and win. But the goal of the fight all along was to achieve equality. As you get closer to achieving equalit…
Sorry, I have to keep going here. The root of the problem is that a segment of society has had *genuine* underdog status (to say the least) for centuries. Being an underdog allows moral coverage to use any means necessary to fight and win. But the goal of the fight all along was to achieve equality. As you get closer to achieving equality (and I’m not claiming the fight is done!), the moral justification for “anything goes” begins to diminish. That’s good! It’s a sign of progress!!! But if the end goal is equality, then at some point you have to be willing to play by the same rules you’re holding others to. We will ALWAYS live in a world where certain groups of our ancestors were screwed over. It makes me mad too!!!! But infuriatingly, we cannot change the past, and certainly not by creating more injustice today that our descendants will have to clean up or revenge tomorrow. Let’s make the buck stop here.
To your point, from the political perspective, there is segment of society, centered in the academic left, that continues to embrace various permutations of the Marxist idea that the only solution to social inequity is to destroy the current system. This progressive left discounts the real racial progress we’ve made in the past several decades. They stoke discord and division rather than working within the current system to make incremental progress. As Steve says, it’s no wonder that eventually ordinary people start to look at them as the enemy of social stability.
Sorry, I have to keep going here. The root of the problem is that a segment of society has had *genuine* underdog status (to say the least) for centuries. Being an underdog allows moral coverage to use any means necessary to fight and win. But the goal of the fight all along was to achieve equality. As you get closer to achieving equality (and I’m not claiming the fight is done!), the moral justification for “anything goes” begins to diminish. That’s good! It’s a sign of progress!!! But if the end goal is equality, then at some point you have to be willing to play by the same rules you’re holding others to. We will ALWAYS live in a world where certain groups of our ancestors were screwed over. It makes me mad too!!!! But infuriatingly, we cannot change the past, and certainly not by creating more injustice today that our descendants will have to clean up or revenge tomorrow. Let’s make the buck stop here.
To your point, from the political perspective, there is segment of society, centered in the academic left, that continues to embrace various permutations of the Marxist idea that the only solution to social inequity is to destroy the current system. This progressive left discounts the real racial progress we’ve made in the past several decades. They stoke discord and division rather than working within the current system to make incremental progress. As Steve says, it’s no wonder that eventually ordinary people start to look at them as the enemy of social stability.