No, I don't think you're catching my drift. — unenlightened

My bad in misinterpreting, then. As things go, I of course agree that your last post presents an accurate general overview. Most generalities do have their exceptions, though. I admire good willed people that persevere through hard times, rather than having their will broken – more specifically, rather than succumbing to unjustly imposed societal humiliation by becoming in fact humiliated at heart (they include some Jews that went through the Holocaust – from what I've gathered in my life, at least). I’d like to think that what I’ve just said is somehow intelligible to you. Was trying to speak up for those I find admiration for. (To be honest, this because I’d like to have a social context with more such people in it – and denying their presence, or even possibility, is antithetical to such want.)

I'm totally cool with that. Let's do our bit to give some status to principled non-conformism, especially when it results in crucifixion.

I'm totally cool with that. Let's do our bit to give some status to principled non-conformism, especially when it results in crucifixion. — unenlightened

If your sarcasm’s jab doesn’t contain hypocrisy, then you uphold that every social movement that has ever been was conducted by a bunch of cretins. Unless, that is, no risks in being humiliated by the powers that be were incurred in speaking truth to power—as though this were a realistic model of how the world is.

A contemporary example: Have those in charge call investigative journalists “the enemy of the people”, and only those who are deplorable cretins will continue investigating and reporting the same issues rather than becoming humiliated into proper shape. And yes, these unwanted journalists sometimes get assassinated (crucified, allegorically speaking)—in some countries a lot more than in others. Your rebuke: These journalists are imbeciles living in Lala land for not becoming properly humiliated in a timely manner; or even better, for not living life in manners that eliminate the risk of humiliation to begin with.

Or am I misunderstanding you yet once again? Maybe you’re totally cool with crucifying principled non-conformists, ya’ know, like those in the USA who claim that climate change is not a hoax. Imbeciles that they are, because a certain Trump so treats them.

If your sarcasm’s jab doesn’t contain hypocrisy, then you uphold that every social movement that has ever been was conducted by a bunch of cretins. Unless, that is, no risks in being humiliated by the powers that be were incurred in speaking truth to power—as though this were a realistic model of how the world is. — javra

Hmm. I was not being sarcastic, I don't think i was being hypocritical, and I don't for certain think that social movements are conducted by cretins. I'm pointing out that power generally does not like having truth spoken to it, and the archetype of the truth speaker was Jesus, a non-cretin who got crucified. I'm just reminding the world that the path of righteousness tends to be punished not rewarded. Social activists do not have a great time, they do not become wealthy, they tend to be arrested and imprisoned, they tend to be smeared and reviled, and many do not even become old. I don't wish it to be so, but so it is.