That phrasing like that is a shibboleth. (It shows the person's beliefs/political attitudes).
From that statement, you can predict what the author's statements on various things will be. Or at least, it's unsurprising.
Listening to a variety of viewpoints in good faith is a good idea. Tribal, internecine discussion is usually much more predictable than that, though. I liked the term "internet of beefs" for that.
I do like the idea of recognizing that people are human, and not just political abstractions. But, I can also understand how natural the 'internet of beefs' stuff makes political abstractions the most convenient way of viewing people.
Because a significant portion of the article relates to using Twitter as a tool to help understand people who are different from yourself. An important aspect of that is being aware of how you differ from them.
Listening to a variety of viewpoints in good faith is a good idea. Tribal, internecine discussion is usually much more predictable than that, though. I liked the term "internet of beefs" for that.
I do like the idea of recognizing that people are human, and not just political abstractions. But, I can also understand how natural the 'internet of beefs' stuff makes political abstractions the most convenient way of viewing people.