Kampf has two great points: 1. Why, in the last five years or so, has context ceased to mattter? To reuse my Michael Richards example, he screamed something appauling like, “Get these niggers out of here!” in a club. By this logic, I myself am just as guilty, because I had the audacity to not censore myself when I was quoting someone. Sure, the word is hateful, but NO word is so powerful that it can’t ever be spoken. Particularly when the context is to discuss how terrible the word is. You don’t eliminate racism by turning words into bogey men. In a broader sense, there is an overarching theme that everything is as bad as everything else and context is irrelevant. Which is one of the things the IDW speaks out against, and draws heat for. It’s ridiculous. 2. If someone disagrees with you, they are not just incorrect or in oposition to your opinion. It’s because they’re clearly a [alt right, bigot, racist, etc]. Certainly, some people are. But speaking against any particular idea in our culture right now means you’re on “the other side,” and is stripping all discourse. If I agree with Sam Harris on a point, then clearly I think Islam is evil. Jesus, people even call JOE ROGAN alt right. It’s become a blanket term if someone speaks against a particular opinion. That’s what I do like about the IDW - even if I don’t agree with the individual members on most things. At least they have the balls to have nuanced discussions on difficult topics, and to tell the rabble rousers to fuck off. In particular Peterson and Shapiro. Watching Q&A with them from an opposing point is rarely anything other than a blood bath, because not enough people are carefully weighing their own opinions.