@hankteford @jeffjarvis I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, in that a moral panic is a misnomer. I think it could, more accurately, be ascribed to being fearful of change.
I don't believe the majority of the people who set out to maintain the status quo do so with ill intent.
However, their resistance clashes with those who desire growth, thus forcing the resistant to become entrenched with a "This is bad. Everything is bad," attitude.
They're still oppressive dicks, though. 🤷
@mike @jeffjarvis I am dubious of the idea that people who resist change are "forced" to become entrenched in their views.
I think that some people, faced with a change that makes them uncomfortable, and unable to point to a concrete pattern of harm, will attempt to frame that change as a symbol of a moral failure.
Because many moral codes are not based on an internally consistent ethical framework, it's an easy argument to make, and hard to refute.
@hankteford @jeffjarvis Forced was a poor word choice, I agree with you.
Making the resistant take on a defensive stance by willfully choosing to ignore reason, logic, or facts in favor of their "moral" codes would have been a better way to put it.
It still all comes down to being fearful of change, a lack of understanding, and usually a lack of empathy with a side of dehumanization/depersonalization.
@mike @jeffjarvis I think we mostly agree on this topic, but your use of "making" seems to me like it is shifting responsibility away from people who are resisting change.
No one is compelled to ignore evidence and reason. They might make that choice from a place where they're emotionally compromised or ignorant or using motivated reasoning. But it is a choice and they are responsible for that choice.
I may be splitting hairs, though - I suspect that we're 99% in agreement overall.
Jeff Jarvis
hank
Mike | Raymond Tec