3 ms·

This statement is exactly true after removing "as extreme" too. These days anyone with a different opinion can be considered an enemy, extreme or not. Actually

This statement is exactly true after removing "as extreme" too. These days anyone with a different opinion can be considered an enemy, extreme or not. Actually, when was it not a problem? I vaguely remember christianity's historical splits were caused by lesser disagreements (at least what was stated to be the cause).

ixacto 5y ago
It’s the exact same in-group/out-group tactic that the neo-conservative republicans were using in the early 2000s with terrorism e.g. “if you’re not with us then you’re with the terrorists” == “if you’re not out protesting/twittering/tumblring then you’re with the white supremacy patriarchy.” Actually quite interesting how you can use the same tactics in a totally different population and get people all riled up. Most likely just political maneuvering by parties to engage voters. Looking at it objectively I also didn’t see the media covering the Tusla massacre (as abhorrent as it was) nearly as much as they have been in the last couple days, which does lead to the suspicion that the coverage is politically motivated.