civil discourse political discussion

Civil discussion a danger to 'unhinged outrage.'
A small but rapidly growing subset of Americans have been gathering in hordes to engage in dangerous acts of polite discourse. These impassioned radicals are embracing extreme positions of affability and toxic cordiality, abandoning the long-held progressive ideals of extreme partisanship and treating anyone who is not committed to your tribe like an insect to be crushed.

The Southern Poverty Law Center says that it is currently tracking more than 2,300 extremist civility groups in the country, citing an alarmingly high rate of instances of open interactions at unprecedented levels of respectfulness.

"It's like they're trying to set the clock back," said extremism advocate Duncan Whitehead. "We thought the troubling days of people like G.K. Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw - two men with wildly opposing viewpoints yet a disturbing amount of respect for each other - were far behind us."

Liberal activist Danica Hartley says the movement is driven by "privilege." "If you're treating your neighbor with respect, you're part of the problem," she said. "Our party didn't spend decades enraging and dividing people just to have groups like these reigniting the tired, dead philosophy of loving your neighbor."

One of the most disquieting features of this movement is that the cult-like membership includes people who come from diverse ethnicities, genders, ages, religions, and political parties. "Some people think that super far-alt-right neo-Nazi Jews like Ben Shapiro could never sit in the same room with a secular leftist like Sam Harris, but people need to wake up to the reality that this is happening. Friendships are forming between liberals and conservatives at a disgusting rate. This isn't just a couple guys meeting to banter across party lines in Dave Rubin's garage. This is a growing movement and it's getting bigger," warned civility awareness activist Marlena Parveneh.

Even with YouTube demonetizing videos and Twitter suspending the accounts of people who have engaged in seditious acts of reasoned debate and seeking common ground with ideological opponents, the movement continues to grow. The media has been warned not to provide the groups with undue publicity, but evidence shows the media has done everything in their power to ignore them. "We don't cover these groups at all," said CEO of NBC Brian Hammond who has been disturbed by the audacity of these groups to build large audiences without the approval of mainstream media sources.

"This movement could destroy everything we have worked for," said white nationalist Barry McGraw in a panel discussion with far-left journalists, KKK, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, MAGA hat guys, Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists, and other groups built on the principles of division and dehumanization. "If we don't get to work, we could wake up tomorrow and people who want to work together despite their differences could suddenly be running things. We have to stand up and protect unhinged outrage. This cancer of courtesy can only be neutralized by every one of us spreading the essential human values of discord, rage, and a refusal to engage with anyone who does not agree with us 1,000%."'