Even the Grand Cyclops of the KKK loves the people who look and act like he does. Just because you’re willing to help the people you identify with most doesn’t make you moral, good, or right. In short, if you claim to feed the hungry, but hate the immigrant, you’re wrong. WRONG.
There’s a reason so many people involved in social justice talk about intersectionality. You have to meet people where their needs are, not where you’re willing to stand. If you can’t reach them because you’re incapable, that’s one thing, but if you can’t reach them because you won’t reach them, for whatever reason you’ve made for yourself, then you’re not moral, you’re not good, you’re just masturbating your ego.
That’s the kind of thing that makes people angry, because there are people who go out and feed the hungry, and that’s wonderful! I have to say though, what is the difference between feeding the hungry and rejecting the cause of that hunger in the first place?
Why are you so determined to ameliorate some of the issue, while letting the bulk of it go? I know people who will gladly feed kids who are hungry (which is good!) but will also blame black people, immigrants, and call for border walls, bombing foreign countries, and other acts that utterly destroy any good they’ve begun to build.
These people exist. I tend to find them in the Evangelical Christian community, where their hands pass out food for a handful of hungry people, while also talking about how the systems that oppress these people need to be reinforced.
It would be like Raytheon Technologies planting a tree every time one of their missiles murders a child in Syria.
It is a total disconnect of thought and reality, a denial of the material systems in which we live. You don’t have to defend people who do this, because they are not doing good in the world, they are running cover for the greater evils they help create and support.
.Red
