Pretty sure you’re engaging in selective blindness to the nature of politicization among humans.
At a fundamental level the political winds are that of retaliation for past grievances. Not just immediate grievances with lving victims, but all grievances across recorded history, with no definite end-game.
This creates a politically charged atmosphere that polarizes players to exist in two camps, primed for conflict intended to escalate beyond a stated goal of fairness.
Now you have bitter, uncompromising rivals who will not negotiate, striving to enforce inflexible terms and who benefits? Those external to the fight. Those not dragged down and injured by the grudge match.
Pay attention to the ones looking for a fight, trace that back to those who egg them on, and a picture develops about what’s really going on.
Where there’s an “us versus them” tone, the divide and conquer tactic can be found.
Years of setback may be true, if enemies are alert and opting not only to defend, but actively destroy dissent and redouble dominance.
The war being fought isn’t something camparable to the abolition of slavery. To call our current climate tantamount to one of slavery is hyperbolic without question.
I noticed this after learning Japanese and then listening to how Asians talk about other Asians and then checked what the other sides were saying and I was like... Oh man... this is vicious. Then I noticed the same thing in other countries that share borders, there are cases where they are sworn enemies or have bad blood because of beefs going back hundreds of thousands of years. It's amazing.
At a fundamental level the political winds are that of retaliation for past grievances. Not just immediate grievances with lving victims, but all grievances across recorded history, with no definite end-game.
This creates a politically charged atmosphere that polarizes players to exist in two camps, primed for conflict intended to escalate beyond a stated goal of fairness.
Now you have bitter, uncompromising rivals who will not negotiate, striving to enforce inflexible terms and who benefits? Those external to the fight. Those not dragged down and injured by the grudge match.
Pay attention to the ones looking for a fight, trace that back to those who egg them on, and a picture develops about what’s really going on.
Where there’s an “us versus them” tone, the divide and conquer tactic can be found.
Years of setback may be true, if enemies are alert and opting not only to defend, but actively destroy dissent and redouble dominance.
The war being fought isn’t something camparable to the abolition of slavery. To call our current climate tantamount to one of slavery is hyperbolic without question.