I think you'll enjoy this article from 1940: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/germany/1940-04-01/p... ("resonance")
1) Forced conformity
2) Stifling of dissent
3) Grassroots support of censorship
4) A cheap way for corporations/politicians to market their expression of "the right message"
5) A cheap way to undermine competitors who don't express "the right message"
6) Redirection of criticism of capitalism/the system/the elite towards other groups in the same economic class
7) Promoting division of the same, lowering their chances of organisation
8) A neverending outrage factory for the media to generate views
What's not to love from the establishment's point of view?
The red political establishment loves things that make people recoil at the complexity of the real world. Even twenty years ago it was the prospect of artificial wombs and men having babies. Today it's humans with penises using the same bathroom as your daughter, amongst many other tempests in teapots.
Similarly, the blue political establishment loves vibrant examples of injustice, doubly so when that addressing that injustice doesn't rock the corporate order. So someone having what is essentially a rare medical/social condition, getting singled out and dumped on by the red team for political purposes, resonates strongly.
And thus is our hyper partisan world. It's not enough to ignore the topic because you don't actually know anyone who is transitioning, have it be fine to make some faux pas like when any cultures mingle, and rely on the general good faith of shared humanity to come to an understanding.
Rather, you've got to proactively stake your stance as some obtuse pro/anti, reject or "accept" an entire abstract group, and then conspicuously demonstrate your stance to the rest of your tribe.
The 'our enemy is soooo weak, but also too strong' dillusion is very much on display
I didn't read that comment as saying that they "secretly control the world," but rather that the combination of changes in communication technology and those mental disorders leads those people to have a wildly disproportionate voice and impact.
I mean: elections are often won or lost based on which candidate can run the most ads. It's not too hard to believe that a disorders associated with excessive internet use would have an undue impact on society right now, due to something like having disproportionate share of social media posts.
POST
>"It is impossible (yes, really, there have been studies) for healthy, normal people to understand the motivations of the mentally ill, including mild and severe Cluster B."
THE
>"so, studies suggest that the confusion of the state of affairs and the inability to form a mentalizing theory of mind for the mild or severely mentally ill portion of leaders in social movements is actually a sign of health and intelligence :)"
STUDIES.
Considering you refer to no less than three amorphous groups of "studies", please post them. Otherwise it really only points towards you using the term because you think it gives you intellectual credibility.
The vast majority of people would agree!
However, in this environment, Cluster B have power advantages in the realm of social movements. Most social movements nowadays are disproportionally led by psychopaths (primary or secondary), people with Borderline Personality Disorder or narcissism (in short, people with Cluster B personality disorders), studies show.
It is impossible (yes, really, there have been studies) for healthy, normal people to understand the motivations of the mentally ill, including mild and severe Cluster B.
So, studies suggest that the confusion of the state of affairs and the inability to form a mentalizing theory of mind for the mild or severely mentally ill portion of leaders in social movements is actually a sign of health and intelligence :)
In short, expect even more confusion going forward into the future.