Not to paraphrase the article, but rather to prime the reader, I ask: Must everyone with an identity answer for the excesses of the few? What if that few work for what they see as the best interest of the identity?
Eh. They don't have to answer for those excesses, really, so long as they're actually
just of the few. For all the extremes have been an issue the bigger issue has always been the rest of the folks that support and enable them. Y'ain't really gotta' speak up but maybe don't give them money and vote for 'em. Be leery about what they're supporting, that sort of thing. Don't have to run around shouting denouements, but keep that shit out yo' house as much as it's safe to do so.
As for the best interest thing, fuck that noise. Best interest isn't zero sum in regards to the stuff being talked about and never bloody has been. If those few see the situation as being so they're no longer working in your best interests even if they've deluded themselves into
thinking they are. They've gone from someone sharing your identity to someone actively attacking it, at that point, and should be reacted to accordingly.
... thaaat said. Again, it's worth noting that turnout wise, the increase in dog whistling and outright whistling didn't really help much, exactly. Maybe helped depress things, but it didn't increase the voting share to particularly notable degrees. It's going to be an issue, particularly if the left-wing media keeps sucking the alt-right and co. off, too, but it's questionable if there's actually been much of a
rise in it. So far as that front goes m'personally not really sure if there needs to be much change in direction. What we've been doing over the years seems to be workin', maybe not as quickly as'd be nice, but working. Reacting to this shit like some kind of jump scare instead of somethin' we've known was there the whole time might not be particularly wise.
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1421973 times)