[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

There are two elements to this, let's call them "bottom-up" and "top-down". On the bottom-up side, of course you have the legacies of the civil and gay rights movements, which have all but eliminated any rhetorical foundation (within liberalism) for civil status hierarchies based on almost any identity marker. A clean-up operation was probably to be expected, and you know how it is when you find a stubborn stain on an otherwise gleaming surface -- you get in there and apply some elbow grease. That's why the activism looks as it does.

A lot of things occur on the grassroots level, however, but fail to achieve any institutional power -- just look at the anti-war movement. That's where the top-down comes in. If you visit the homepages of the great Anglo-American capital foundations -- Rockefeller, Ford, Wellcome -- you will find a focus on what we are calling "wokeness" (it calls itself "social justice", typically) that is near-equal to even some of the more strident student union pages.

Why might this be? And before you begin to surmise that the Monopoly Men have just "become good", remember that the game hasn't changed.

Maybe this is just what a massive revolutionary sea change feels like mid-stream? Revolutions don't necessarily always involve a crowd storming the Bastille or chopping off people's heads.