Adam Gurri

There's the Jewish communities, obviously, in there, to some extent, in terms of how liberals took it seriously.

So liberalism has always understood this.

I think liberalism in the late 20th century, as a theoretical idea, sort of lost touch with that.

And that's why it was vulnerable to a lot of these criticisms.

But just taking the civil rights movement, for example,

everyone who was a liberal very clearly understood that the African American community in this country was a distinct community with distinct needs and problems, um, that you needed to look at them as a whole and how they interacted with some of the other communities, um, that, that were excluding them or, or whatever.

Um, and you needed to, there, there needed to be some redress.

Um, but the ultimate goal is that any individual in those communities, um, can live equally with any individual in any of the other communities.

Um,

That's how you should measure success, in my view.

I don't know how else you would measure success, frankly.

And there's more, right?

So the first difference is ineradicable in the group sense.

So like I said, even if you have federalism or you have an independence movement, there's always an internal minority group.

But even if you have just one group you're looking at, just looking within that group, there's people that don't feel they fit in.

Yeah.

have to be coerced in some way in order to fit in with that group.

And I don't think the group has the right to do that as a liberal.

And I don't see why I should have to concede that to reactionaries and communitarians.

I think that the best situation is one