> she’s against progress and threatens the continued thriving of our civilization. How exactly does she threaten the continued thriving of our civilization? I

> she’s against progress and threatens the continued thriving of our civilization. How exactly does she threaten the continued thriving of our civilization? It is fine for people to disagree with her worldviews, but labeling her a threat to civilization is an absurd claim. A civilization that can be threatened by a single person's acts of peaceful protest might be doing something, but it sure isn't thriving.