Sjmarf@sh.itjust.works to Memes@lemmy.ml · 10 months agoThey must have had great chemistry togethersh.itjust.worksimagemessage-square62fedilinkarrow-up11.26Karrow-down110
arrow-up11.25Karrow-down1imageThey must have had great chemistry togethersh.itjust.worksSjmarf@sh.itjust.works to Memes@lemmy.ml · 10 months agomessage-square62fedilink
minus-squareObilinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down2·10 months agoRarely see it spelled out that clearly, I think that’s a huge issue with modern “progressivism”.
minus-squareGabu@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up3·10 months agoProgressivism has no inherent need to be all-encompassing. In fact, keeping certain groups *cough conservatives cough* not included is an essential part of successful progressivism.
minus-squareObilinkfedilinkarrow-up2·10 months agoYou’re referring to the tolerance paradox, and I completely agree with that, but I don’t think that’s what happened here.
minus-squaredavel [he/him]@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down4·edit-210 months agoWho knew how many reactionaries would get flushed out of the bushes by a little off-hand comment about my personal life?
minus-squareeltimablo@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up2·10 months agoYou, for one. I imagine that’s why you posted it in the first place.
Rarely see it spelled out that clearly, I think that’s a huge issue with modern “progressivism”.
Progressivism has no inherent need to be all-encompassing. In fact, keeping certain groups *cough conservatives cough* not included is an essential part of successful progressivism.
You’re referring to the tolerance paradox, and I completely agree with that, but I don’t think that’s what happened here.
Who knew how many reactionaries would get flushed out of the bushes by a little off-hand comment about my personal life?
You, for one. I imagine that’s why you posted it in the first place.