I recently spoke to a mid-level executive at a major corporation who had been forced to sit through mandatory “inclusivity” training. The topic was transgender rights, and the trainer proceeded to spout far-left ideology as fact, going so far as to label all who disagreed with the notion that a man can become a woman “transphobic.” I asked if anyone objected to any part of the training, and the response was immediate. “Are you crazy? No one wants to deal with HR.”
French's article elucidates ordinary, decent Americans' loss of confidence in their own values -- which eventuates, in his words, in "the slow accumulation of individually defensible but collectively unjustifiable decisions not to resist."
But how can a decision be deemed "individually defensible" yet "collectively unjustifiable?" Quite simply: Smith is principally concerned with the defense of his own interests and the protection of those he loves. His decision to "not make a fuss" might prove ideal for those purposes. However, if the majority of Smiths choose to "not make a fuss," the field has been yielded to those that are willing to "make a fuss:" the noisy, demanding minorities that gain social and legal sway through persistence and volume, in a perfect demonstration of the Public Choice effect.
Please read it all, and keep it in mind for the next time you face the choice whether or not to resist.
UPDATE: For lagniappe:
Are we allowed to laugh at that today? Excuse me, Gentle Reader; my mascara's running.