Between being half asleep, and the whole issue containing many layers to unpack, I don't' think I was clear enough previously.

If we are going to be technically precise, I would say that it is the SJW-like tendency of the MSM and coastal elites, including the Hillary campaign, to agglomerate, objectify, and dehumanize others, so as to pontificate on the perceived moral deficiencies of said "other" in favor of their own hollow self-righteousness, and projection of assigned blame for things over which said people have little, or no, control over, is the issue.

Not the presence of the annoying twits that infest social media, university campuses, and gaming blogs. Though I do think the institutional shift in regards to SJWs in media and education has not gone unnoticed by the larger public, and also has an effect.

Think Hillary, and her calling half the country a "basket of deplorables" as one example.

In the brave new SJW world, people don't have disagreements, differing views, cultures, or competing ideas - or at least not that ones that include typical Euro-centric culture derivatives as legitimate. Nor that Euro-centric people have legit grievances. And I do guarantee you, that the scions of northern Europe have in fact noticed this. It's not that other people have different ideas, or different opinions - it is that their whole culture and existence is seen as being delegitimized entirely.

Another example would be the fight over Obamacare, and the govt shut downs, or threatened shut downs. Instead of framing the issue as:

GOP: Being willing to threaten to shut down govt to defund Obamacare, or other issue

Dems: Being willing to threaten to, or shut down govt to keep ACA, and other issues

Almost the entire media apparatus simply framed the issue as the GOP/Tea Party/righties being willing to shut down the govt or do any reckless action to get their way. Nevermind that the Dems were also willing to commit precisely the same actions for the sake of implementing their agenda, and never mind that a majority of public opinion was actually against ACA at the time, the pro-ACA narrative was ubiquitous.

That wasn't a discussion, or an argument, or an instance of competing ideas - at least not in the MSM narrative. it was a total delgitimization of those who went against the prejudices of the Establishment. Why? Because the people who didn't like ACA, or Obamas agenda were mostly all non-coastal whites.

People started noticing this. People really aren't too dumb to discern that both sides had exactly equal, if opposite, stances. Nor too dumb to see that there is a pattern (of which this is one example) to delegitimizing their concerns or desires for govt.

The same can be said of trade, and immigration. Just how were the MSM, and Establishment, treating opponents in this arena? Not to mention bailouts for banks. Not just with disagreement, but with delegitimization and scorn.

Bernie got this, I think. Especially in regards to trade and Wall St. Which forced the issues to become "legit" again, as Hillary put on a public face of pivoting that, as Michigan results show, was not wholly believed.

But I digress from the initial point, somewhat. Other than the fact that Bernie legitimized some of those issues again, which is partly why I think he would have easily trounced Trump.

Last edited by Derid; 11/09/16 08:19 PM.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)