This would be a convincing argument if it was extended with links to people who have written about "cancel culture", "wokeness" or whatever in a genuinely pleasant way, even and perhaps especially to criticize it. Maybe "Scott Alexander" of Slate Star Codex got closest, but even he reportedly regrets much of that writing - i.e. it does make him unhappy, which I think speaks volumes. I don't think it's realistic or fair to demand this feat from Paul Graham.

I'd look for someone writing from the perspective of "all humans are innately predisposed to prejudice and must work to overcome it", which avoids dividing up the world into "x-ist people / not-x-ist people".

I don't hold out hope that this perspective will ever become mainstream, but because it's an alternative to "us-vs-them", there's more opportunity for redemption, communion, and joy.

> all humans are innately predisposed to prejudice and must work to overcome it

Much of "Scott Alexander"'s following came from the readership of a blog named literally 'Overcoming Bias', that's devoted to descriptions of how all humans are often remarkably petty and prejudicial in obscure and counterintuitive ways. It's definitely not taking a mainstream perspective, and the 'redemption' in it is quite subdued, but it does seem to avoid that particular pitfall.

I agree; I am saying that this is a mode where Graham doesn't write well, not that it is impossible to write engaging badly-detached-from-facts propaganda.

Though Taibbi writes for a different audience that probably makes that easier.