I just find it ironic and somewhat sad and funny that your original response to this piece had…
Candy L. Daniels
2

Thanks for the good-faith response; it’s probably better than I deserve, given how I launched into this conversation.

But my point is this: that the continual subdivision of any cause into ever more specific subcategories, far from solving the problem, seems to cause infighting and power-mongering to ever more ridiculous (and self-defeating) degrees. That’s the theory — “a house divided against itself cannot stand” — but it is obviously true in practice as well, given what is said in the article we’re commenting on. Instead of bringing attention to all subcategories of the problem simultaneously, each subset of people facing the same general problem are now competing against each other for the same public attention. The snake is carving itself up.

What’s more, apart from being ineffective, it has the knock-on effect of creating the impression that there isn’t really a fundamental problem (in this case, police brutality) to address. If there’s truly a proverbial Axis out there, the reasoning seems to be going, surely the Western democracies and the Soviets can put aside their considerable differences for the time being? And so the infighting projects the message that this is all much ado about nothing.

Like what you read? Give Rüdiger Thiede a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.