4 ms·
It's not hard to define, it's an extreme version of "us vs them", divide the society into explicit in- and outgroups and kill the outgroup, repeat forever. Also
by tpm 3y ago
It's not hard to define, it's an extreme version of "us vs them", divide the society into explicit in- and outgroups and kill the outgroup, repeat forever. Also kill everyone who opposes this, even if a member of in-group.
So it's just a matter of time an "intellectual", or any individual really, says or does something that will be used as a pretext to accuse them of not being a good enough member of in-group (this will earn the accuser status as a guardian of purity). Soon enough the society is full of people accusing others and also of those that want to appease "the authorities" by proposing the most extreme ways of purifying and enhancing the in-group. It's easy to see this is not the best environment for seekers of truth.
- michaelt 3y agoIt's hard to get widespread agreement on a definition, because many political groups have a vested interest in expanding or reducing the definition.