Metaphor and I align on opposite sides of many political issues. And I am guilty of a poor choice of words — "trivia" — to describe the concerns of both wokeists and anti-wokeists. My objection to the extreme wokeists — who are, I think, a tiny minority — is not their motive (usually compassion) nor their authoritarian bent (unlikely to be implemented in a country that still prides itself on freedom) but on the
backlash they cause. Egged on by propaganda sites (Fox or Toilet Paper USA), centrists are likely to reject liberalism due to the divisive views of wokeists.
One can see such divisive views right here on this message board. And one can see liberals sometimes do the very thing they accuse right-wing liars of doing:
taking words out of context.
His religious beliefs about the 'original sin' of whiteness are vulgar, racist, and wrong.
You imputed to him the claim that
whiteness is an original sin. Now you admit that he never said this. Stop digging.
Metaphor used "original sin" as his own, well, metaphor
. He could have made clear he wasn't quoting the Professor, but he has since explained that.
And the "original sin" metaphor seems quite apt to me as a means to describe the imputations of many wokeists on the topic of historic racism.
Metaphor erred by placing the phrase in quotation marks, but I can sympathize because I have often made the very same mistake myself. (I don't mean on this topic, but rather the use of quotation marks to imply my own phrase is used figuratively rather than to quote an antecedent.)