[ExI] Protest

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Jun 2, 2020, at 12:26 PM, MB via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, June 2, 2020 15:10, spike jones via extropy-chat wrote:
>> 
>> Perhaps if the author were to rewrite using only the words in the current
>> edition of Miriam Webster using the definitions found there, the meaning
>> would be clear.
>> 
>> 
> 
> Ah, but the author isn't writing for *us*... we're outsiders (because we
> don't already know and use those words).  He's writing for the elect,
> those who already know what he's saying. :(

In another post, I tried to translate some of the terms that I felt might be confusing. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the various online political movements and their interaction, but I think many of the terms he uses -- well, not POC and apparatchik, terms that have a longer history than chud -- are in currency online. I'm guessing the college aged "woke" person on Twitter, FB, etc. would know what they mean. This isn't jargon used by little academic circle at Ann Arbor or Berkeley. :)

If you want the gist of the piece, Gillis believes the Establishment wants to split off liberal people of colour from the wider Left and especially from folks who want a more radical change in policing -- whether that's strict accountability (in other words, treating the police as having no more legal rights than the people) or abolition. In other words, divide et impera -- or divide and conquer. This is typical of how any establishment has dealt with widespread dissent and protest: attempt to pull away some of the more moderate elements to weaken the overall movement. Sometimes this strategy -- or range of strategies -- works, sometimes it backfires.

Regards,

Dan