[fmxsh]

> ... but it's still probably an understatement if you look at what has been happening.

That's exactly what I would question. Does the author look just as hard in the other direction and, with intellectual honesty, defend those cases? (should he? why? why not?...) My general sense is the "other side" may have experienced similar treatment that is now being complained about. No, I don't mean it is therefore necessarily justified. I really mean that—I do not think it is therefore necessarily justified.

If I side with any of them, either side may decide I'm no longer in the in-group. Rather than either side being right, both have the same potential for corruption, and that's the real enemy.

This is not a specific answer to the effort you offered in explaining the situation. I would have to look deeper into it.

[AlecSchueler]

I'm not sure what you mean by sides or directions in this case.