Bottom line: we’re tilting toward a universe in which all discourse is subordinate to activism; everything is a narrative, and if you don’t stay on message then you’re contributing to the other team on any given issue.

— Zeeshan Aleem (@ZeeshanAleem) March 4, 2021

I first noticed this long before Twitter, on the old blog Pandagon. That was my initial encounter with those who got incandescently enraged at you if you did not agree with them heartily enough. It was not enough to just agree with them — no, you had to agree like you were a recently-inducted Wehrmacht officer attending the Nuremberg rally or you were very bad.

It was totally averse to my way of thinking and of being, and though I didn’t know it at the time this behavior was a harbinger of all that was to later occur in the general discourse. His entire thread is worth reading but I don’t think I will ever get used to the idea that if there is any disagreement, or even failing to agree spiritedly enough, that you are “committing violence” against someone. How the left fell down this trap I don’t know and I don’t care, but it’s a horrible place to be.