I'm also concerned about who determines that someone is "a bad person". In the recent Google memo, everyone condemned the author as a horrible person based on t

I'm also concerned about who determines that someone is "a bad person". In the recent Google memo, everyone condemned the author as a horrible person based on things he never said. People wanted him burned at the stake and were willing to believe absurdities to justify it. This sort of craziness happens all the time. Slate Star Codex has a post from 2014 where Scott points out that he was reprimanded for expressing relief at Bin Laden's death--a life lost is a terrible thing, even though he was a terrible person. Then a couple years later when Thatcher died, the same people who reprimanded him were celebrating in the streets and shrugged indifferently when challenged about their "a life lost is a terrible thing" philosophy. An angry mob triggered events that culminated in the forced resignation of two Yale educators who dared to (politely) suggest students could choose their own Halloween costumes. We use "Nazi" and "racist" and "misogynist" to describe people who dare point to inconsistencies in our social justice theories or rhetoric. There are definitely very real bad guys out there, but recent events tell us in no uncertain terms that the moment the standard of proof is lowered, it will be abused.