i guess we’re arguing definitions. i don’t think “once stable” can be a criterion, the reaction is to revealed instability. wanting to repeal something is in a way trying to go back to a past, but i don’t think that captures it. 1/

when we talk about “right-wing reactionaries” we bring to mind people upset by the overturning of old hierarchies, wanting to reoverturn hierarchies back. 2/

but i guess what motivates my little provocation (obviously that thread was a provocation) was a conjecture that this is in fact the motivation of a lot of self-styled centrists. 3/

that is, they are not so much animated by a project of justice or equality, the arc of history they so went on about. they were at the top of a social hierarchy, and what they’re after is just getting that back. 4/

some people of their broad class (think prominent tech people) work to retain social position by joining the new winning team. others for whatever reason won’t do that, so want their team to win again. 5/

some evidence for this is the very same people were all-in on identitarian approaches to social justice when that was the tactic Hillary Clinton adopted to simultaneously ward off challenges from Bernie and Trump. now they dismiss those approaches as “the groups”. 6/

one wonders whether the justice part ever had anything really to do with it. /fin