I’ve seen so many people this last week who see themselves as such “right on” virtuous people posting the most horrible things on social media.
One replied to a post about Charlie Kirk, it was basically a “sorry not sorry” post because he’s so hateful. When asked by someone if she’s actually seen any of his debates she said she didn’t need to, the facts are there that he was basically a fascist who incites violence. FWIW I’ve watched several of his videos since seeing her post today and seen nothing that suggests this, even though I don’t agree with his opinion on many things (but apparently he’s doing it in code, whatever that means)
Another friend was ranting about the protest in London and using really horrible terms to describe people that went. I hate what the flags have come to represent, and I don’t doubt that there were many thugs there just wanting to stir up hate. Surely though, describing all who went to the protest as the same (basically they’re all thick as shit racist hooligans) is no better than someone describing all immigrants as benefit chasing potential rapists (or insert any other racist stereotype)
Am I missing something? Or is it considered acceptable to make sweeping generalisations as long as you’re on the left side of the political spectrum?