I have a long distance ex-friend (ex as of this weekend - his choice, not mine) who supports the Palestinians and sees anything they do as legitimate because they are "oppressed" by "the Jews".
He was more of an acquaintance than a friend, but once we were able to have face to face debates over culture and politics, now most of our communication over the past decade has been online, due to the distance that separates us. He has always been of the left, having grown up under the soft socialism of the UK, but since Obama was elected, he has grown more radically left with every passing year.
Needless to say, he is also a BLM and ANIFA sympathizer, a supporter of "trans rights", he is for every civilization-ending movement from a deal with Iran to totally ending hydrocarbon production, and is on the opposite side from me on literally every single domestic and foreign issue.
Big Obama supporter, he sees Biden as the fulfillment of Obama's legacy. He believes America should end in its current form and he is not shy about admitting that was the purpose of the processes begun by Obama.
Before he decided we could no longer communicate, I did get some insight into his thinking.
When we were still talking, he schooled me on why he allies with movements, some of which would kill him as casually as swatting a fly. First of all, he denies that radical Islamists exist and that their penchant to throw homosexuals from roofs is just an exaggeration.
Next he explained the leftist concept of "intersectionality", a term coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, a one of the founders of Critical Race Theory. He said intersectionality is the concept of "interlocking" systems of oppression that was commonly referenced by the Combahee River Collective, a Black lesbian social justice collective formed in Boston in 1974, a precursor to today's radical Fourth Wave feminism movements.
According to him, intersectionality means that every oppressed group, regardless of their structural, philosophical and ideological differences, are united by one common aspect - that they are oppressed by the current socioeconomic and sociopolitical systems, most of which are run by white people.
I asked him about my proposition that communism is the actual tie that binds radical Muslims and Islamists to the LGBTQ communities and he replied that it is just a coincidence that communism is the system by which all oppression will be ended, it is a tool to that end.
This was sort of the beginning of the end of our conversation because I laughed out loud at this suggestion. He simply denies the failures and atrocities of socialist and communist systems of the past and completely denies that Fascism and Nazism have the same root as communism - even though Hitler and Mussolini both explicitly expressed that fact (the Nazi party had socialism in their party name - they were the National Socialist German Workers' Party).
He even denies Hamas and Iran slaughtered Israeli civilians, including women and children, even though Hamas terrorists slaughtered babies, live-streamed their crimes against humanity and both have admitted Iran was involved. Biden and Kirby say there is no "direct evidence", so that is good enough for him.
The conversation (and the friendship) ended with the discussion of intersectionality.
I told him that in my opinion, intersectionality was just a contemporary expression of the old Arabic saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and that it is just a way for radically different groups to build volume and power - at least until they begin their own power struggle because their goals are so different, there can be no unity.
I asked were were the "intersectionality" movements in the third world, places where racism is national policy and persecution of LGBTQ people is the law. Why are there no marches in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Saudi Arabia? Why no concern trolling about Myanmar? How about on the African continent? I asked why these predominately non-white countries and governments were exempted from his attention and didn't that absence constitute hypocrisy and cowardice?
I asked why "intersectionality" seems to only exist in Western societies and countries where the protesters face no consequences for demonstrating of their beliefs or speaking out about them. I suggested that very fact meant that they were not actually oppressed, they were just throwing childish tantrums.
I said based on my observations, "intersectionality" was just way for radical groups to invent reasons to destroy the very Western systems that protect their freedom to exist. That it allows them to justify the very actions of which they accuse others, as evidenced by his defense of the Palestinian terrorists because they are “oppressed” and his attacks on Israel defending itself because they were the “oppressors” - even though the Gazans attacked Israeli civilians.
It is an excuse to invent, import, and export grievances - but only to countries that will allow it.
His answer was to say that we shouldn't speak again.
Fine by me.
You & I have both independently concluded that though we share the same physical universe with our (former) friends on the left, we abide by different rules of logic.
My erstwhile colleagues in big tech are otherwise brilliant, yet insist on a political agenda that defies reality, is ruled by feelings, & is mediated by good intentions, not objective truth.
Though Sam Harris has lost his way on some issues, these words ring true, “We have a choice. We have two options as human beings. We have a choice between conversation and war. That's it. Conversation and violence.”. When words fail, the alternative is inevitable.
When there is no argument against your view, that is the common response - "I'm gonna take my ball and go home!" So childish!