To The Principleless Big Tent Crowd Who Accuse Others Of Gatekeeping

I'm a neurodivergent and I get accused of taking things too literal at times but the number of people who are willing to excuse and defend people who cross/crossed moral red lines and principles due to their class is insane.

Yes, we want to take out the elites, but there's a division among us. There are more wage-slaves than masters but not every wage-slave is for their own class. See, some oppose more than just the elite, and some are cool with non-elites who are pedos, sexual predators, those guilty of DV, theft, assault, animal abuse, and pretty much anything else under the sun, as long as they're not elite. For them, it's not left or right. It's up vs. down, and if you're down, you can commit any crime in the world you want. You're safe, you're good, they will align themselves right next to you, they will give you hugs. Hell, you could be Jeffrey Epstein, as long as you're a poor, broke son of a bitch, and they won't care. But the second you show you've got money, that's when they'll care. So you can be the next Hitler, and they can know it, and they will be your compadre, as long as you're broke.

If you're one of those people who's constantly saying it's up versus down, that you don't care about left versus right, but you don't care about the mentality of people, that you don't care about the sick, disgusting individualism they push, saying that it's not left versus right, not like light triad versus dark triad, but strictly up versus down, and you disagree with that statement, then you're being hypocritical. Because either you're saying it's impossible for the poor to commit crimes and be morally bankrupt, or you're saying that you do care about left versus right.

I get taking out the elite, but we are what we tolerate. We are guilty by association, and if you're willing to tolerate the 152 million-plus who thought that genocide was okay as long as it was done by their party, then you're no different than them when it comes to crossing moral red lines, because you're literally admitting you don't have a problem with genocide supporters, and the only thing you actually care about is power.

Which is funny because that's all the elite care about. Are you one of those embarrassment millionaires Steinbeck talked about?

You know who else had an open door to their big tent and didn't care who entered? The Democrats, who welcomed war criminal Dick Cheney with open arms because numbers mattered more than principle and they supposedly didn't want to alienate potential allies. If you want a big tent of shared grievance, join the Democrats, that's what they run on, not Trump/GOP. If you want a big tent of like-minded people, you have to actually vet and keep people out because if you'll accept anybody now, who will you accept in the future‽

How many times do you sit there and tell workers they "have more in common with a homeless person than with the elites," while those same workers are siding with the elite on one or two issues? You warn them they're going to get oppressed. But those same people would sooner see you in chains than as equals and you're just as foolish as they are for trying to align with the morally bankrupt. When did moral clarity become a liability rather than an asset? Consistency matters and history shows, so does willful negligence or deliberate compromise of principle.