The problem of the gradual, slippery conflation created by modern "liberalism" is between original openness and ideas that evoke good feelings are the only "cor

The problem of the gradual, slippery conflation created by modern "liberalism" is between original openness and ideas that evoke good feelings are the only "correct" ideas is no longer openness and instead becomes a totalitarian, if not conservative, viewpoint. In addition, the absence of mentioning issue A does not crowd out issue B or make someone against it. Nuance does exist and multiple issues can be important without being discussed at every moment. Furthermore, to not be in feverous celebration of position 1 for issue X does not make someone immediately for alternative positions. Finally, it is possible to discuss controversial subject, person, or work S without being for or against it. I believe these to be some of the ideological nuances the predominant cargo-culted version of ignorant American university liberalism has lost through mission creep for competitive hyper-virtue signaling while losing touch with what principles and beliefs were important to maintain. Also, the previous generations of professors and grad students forgot to lead and transmit what liberalism meant to subsequent classes of students through action like say Bernie Sanders or Noam Chomsky. I think it is wiser to reform the thought process by curious questioning rather than adopting or continuing to follow any corrosive ideological or political way. Instead of seeking to fight enemies and celebrate victims at every moment, perhaps looking to persuade those in reasonable disagreement would be a better use of effort than preaching to the proverbial choir or perpetual harmony.