Like I said, prestige.

When you're the richest man in the world, and your main companies are on track, what is it that motivates billionaires?

Prestige. Visibility. Legacy.

his sense of vanity?

You see both white nationalism and civil rights as political antipatterns? What do you consider a healthy political environment? Complete stagnation where people who got theirs are OK but no one else can ever rise to that level? Or do you mean something different by "woke" than its usual meaning of "aware of inequities and desiring to fix them"?

Edit: I see the free speech proponents are here to try to make my comment invisible. Come on guys, don't give in to cancel culture like this!

Woke is a disparaging term used to refer to people espousing broadly left wing “progressive” ideologies, who are obsessed with issues affecting minorities and “inclusion”, yet fail to recognize that their intolerance and refusal to respect differing views are utterly exclusionary.

So what you're saying here is that helping minorities and making them equal members of society is a political antipattern if opponents of civil rights don't like when you do it? I don't see how that's an antipattern. If that's what you mean, it's basically just saying "A healthy political landscape is one where civil rights are never granted to anyone," which doesn't sound healthy at all.

As a side note, I don't think there are very many people who are unaware that being intolerant of bigotry is exclusionary toward overt bigots. Can you give an example of someone you think has this attitude but doesn't realize that it excludes the people they would consider bigots?

In Québec, where I live, a university published a job posting that explicitly excluded white males for a research chair on marine biology[1]. Affirmative action like that job posting from ULaval is not what I consider "helping minorities and making them equal members of society".

I am sure that this was the kind of regressive left da39a3ee was taking about.

1) https://www.academica.ca/top-ten/qc-politicians-criticize-la...

OK, so you define someone who disagrees with identity politics as a "bigot"? I think that says all about you that we need to know.

First of all, your post is not invisible, just downvoted. Mine got flagged, meaning someone wanted it killed by an authority.

The way I see it, both MAGA and WOKE are ideologies that are more interested in attacking outgroups than really helping ingroups. Seems to me that Trump spent more time talkiing about immigration than helping the Americans that are negatively affected by immigration (while lowering taxes). I'm sure you agree with this part.

On the other side, I see WOKE as more interested in attacking white, conservative males (or some combination of the former), rather than helping whatever minority is their favourite. Case in point, BLM seems to only care about the black lives that are taken by cops. Black-on-black homicide seems completely uninteresting for them.

So how can this improve?`I'm old enough to remember the the Soviet Union, and when I was a kid, old people remembered Hitler.

In my country (northern Europe), everyone from moderate conservatives to social democrats realized that both Communism and Facism lead to terrible results. Facisim was completely off the table for everyone, possibly in part because we had been occupied by Nazi Germany for 5 years. There were some communists, but in fact it was primarily the social democrats who made sure they never achieved any real power. (who at the time were borderline socialist, especially in the 70s).

Actually, most social democratic parties understood that Communism is really an ideology of hate in the 1920s and 1930s, as far as I can tell, and it doesn't help much to use the same boilerplate and just replace the proletariat with some other, more modern victium group, the thought pattern is still based on hate and guaranteed to be toxic if it gains enough power.

This knowledge is still somewhere in the DNA of most social democratic parties in Europe, but it seems that countries who never had strong social democratic parties are not able to see the difference between the inclusive left (liberalism, social democracy) and the hateful left (hardline socialism, communism, and I would argue, hardline WOKE).

Part of the problem with ideologies like MAGA and WOKE are that they feed off each other, and make each other stronger. The more hateful each become, the stronger the other side will be. Trump pushes democrats towards WOKE and AOC pushes republicans towards MAGA.

In the end (EDIT: if the polarization doesn't end), the USA will have some Chavez or some Putin, or one of each in power, possibly a civil war. There are no good outcomes coming out of such polarization.