I most likely agree with the basic views of this writer, but that is a very long article to swim through just to confirm that. Some publishers will pay by the word, so perhaps he had to use this expanded format vs something more concise.
TL;DR - “There ain’t no arguing with Commies”
This author is excessively wordy. My graduate school editing professor would have a field day with this piece.
The bottom line: there’s no regressive endpoint to which these idiots can point where society was “better.” They dive back to 1619, but there’s no real substantial global reason for it. Why not 1492 when Columbus set sail to the Americas? Or the beginning of the Hundred Years War in 1337? Or the conquests of the Mongols in the 1200s marked by the fall of many historic dynasties? They glom on to what they perceive as historical hot spots with no intention of explaining why those eras were better for any body.
Challenge a Work adherent with explaining their ideal social worldview or historical pivot point, and they can’t. They can’t tell you why they’re oppressed, just that they are. They can’t tell you what is their end goal, just that “something” needs to change. There’s no reason or logic to their claims or their goals. It’s change for the sake of change. I call this the “do something” cabal. But then all of this thought I’ve committed is obviously racist because I’m privileged by my whiteness and my cisnormative upbringing means I can’t understand any of their plights, but don’t ask them about their plight. It just is.