>which has given you the mistaken belief that it makes up a large portion of activism.
but, the point made was that no causes are free of it, but neither are they made up entirely of it. (it being "intellectually malformed pseudo-activisism" in this case)
I don't think anyone said it makes up a large portion of activism, or even implied it.
I don't think anyone said it makes up a large portion of activism, or even implied it.
However, such pseudo-activism makes enough noise, that I have seen the following: There are young people out there that have labeled in their minds some pretty unsavory activities as being somehow noble or intellectually worthy. There are young people out there who believe such shallow notions, like that the use of certain phrases and/or the wearing of certain articles of clothing by complete strangers gives them free license to attribute certain attitudes and ideologies to those strangers, and that the emotional abuse of such strangers is then somehow a morally worthy activity. (And if you point out that they are stereotyping, they look at you strangely.)
Pseudo activism and hateivism comprise only a sad fringe. However, it does make an outsized amount of noise, especially on social media. In doing so, it produces a kind of corrosive misinformation that reduces society's awareness of the underlying causes of systemic injustice.
I very rarely agree wholesale with a cause nowadays. Most often, I can be sympathetic to certain elements of a cause. That said, here are some key examples: There are some parts of Feminism that I agree with, but I also find some feminists to be hateful and repellent. There are select points made by Men's Rights activists I also agree with, though I find some Men's Rights supporters to be hateful and repellent.
