(-- removed HTML --) as Enemy Central to the rhetoric of (-- removed HTML --) is the demonization of (-- removed HTML --) . Condit and Lucaites note that for much of its history (-- removed HTML --) relied on notions of “separate but equal,” trying to meet demands of egalitarianism whine not upsetting the separatist urges latent within white supremacist discourses and institutions. However, the 1960’s saw a shift away from these separatist ideologies. Drawing from the civil rights movement’s demands for “equality in fact” these movements have pushed (-- removed HTML --) from that of opportunity to one of outcome. It is against this shift in (-- removed HTML --) that movements of conservative resistance emerged. Their emphasis on (-- removed HTML --) stemmed on the assumption that egalitarianism leveled the individual differences that drove capitalism. While MRAs version of (-- removed HTML --) does reject their caricature of the feminist notions of (-- removed HTML --) , they do not abandon the ideograph; to do so would put them at odds with fundamental principles of American culture. Rather, frame of victimhood fames men as on the losing side of (-- removed HTML …show more content…
For them (-- removed HTML --) has been so corrupted by leftists/feminists/Antifa that it is an entirely (-- removed HTML --) phenomena. For these groups “Race is not a social construct. Equality is.” For ARC (-- removed HTML --) leads to “hyper politicization and ideological thinking” that undermines “family, nature, emotions, beauty and folk culture.” This cluster clearly defines the range of things that are (-- removed HTML --) – most centrally family, and folk (read: racially segregated) culture. Once played in this opposition, equality is no-longer a salvageable part of the American tradition. It is (-- removed HTML --) and they argue it for its dismissal as a meaningful