The word “apologist” has become something of a political fashion statement over the past few years, reminiscent of rhetorical trends that you see in just about any politically polarizing point in history - its nothing remotely innovative.
Its usage is not exclusive to any one political perspective. Its used in almost equal proportion by both left and right, in an attempt to not only to make a display of weakness or shame, but to frankly to paint a very reactionary back and forth between various factions.
Words like apologist beget, “sympathizer” and other terminology meant to completely polarize and isolate opposing perspective into a way that strips them of any nuance in thought. There can be no grey area. No one is partially right or wrong. Its just another dichotomous argumentative frame.
Apologizing is associated with moments of weakness, so its very convenient, clean and snappy to label any verbal or written aside on an issue as such. Additional footnotes, annotation, and parenthetical points are deemed unnecessary.
I have literally seen every political and social demographic use this frame within the past five days. Some qualifiers can weaken rhetoric, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with contributing to or humoring discussion if you feel that you have something of substance to share. People like to state their opinions and always will. Its perfectly rational to understand and note multiple perspectives whenever the facts are still fuzzy and emotions run high.
This post has 7 notes.
- moralesja likes this
- i-living-islam likes this
- haralambros likes this
- greeniskindofwhorish likes this
- warcaster likes this
- mehreenkasana likes this
- roxygen posted this