Social Movements Need to Display More Honesty in Their Approach

When I hear of different social movements going on around me I often get a little taken aback by what I perceive as an inherently dishonest approach taken by those promoting them.  This manifests in four different areas: retroactive political correctness, restricting public debate only to areas that serve the movement's goals, treating the movement as something that had better be accepted or else, and removing personal responsibility from those whose interests are being furthered.  If those in the movement are pursuing something worthwhile,  that means that if they are successful then today's world and people's accompanying attitudes toward the issue in question will be better than they were yesterday, so consequently in such a positive scenario the past...along with what people believed and did back then...will naturally seem less enlightened and more subject to criticism.   Some celebrity or politician may have said something in 2005 about an issue that has since moved on and now somebody else wants to call them to task for it, or this movie or that book uses language that since has been adjudged to be insensitive or hurtful to one group or another...and the temptation is to retroactively condemn the person and censor expression, right?  But shouldn't we instead, in an enlightened, supposedly educated society, have enough sophistication to place the past in its proper context and appreciate the change for the better?   Movements may insist on "necessary conversations", but what they really mean is that you can only say what they want you to say and any attempt at broadening the message of their narrative or mitigating its generalizations is impermissible...they'll say it's their debate right now and you're just being tone-deaf, insensitive, or worse if you disagree with or even just modify one or more of their cherished positions.  If they want to essentially take over sections in different cities with protests, even vandalizing businesses and homes while harassing residents, pedestrians and customers in the area, well, this is such an important issue in their minds that they feel justified that everything else must completely shut down until they get what they want.  And with these movements, usually a group is labeled as the "victim" of another group...in their narratives, the incidents of victimization almost always portray the victim as passive and blameless or severely downplay his or her behavior in the incident being spotlighted.  But an honest discussion of anything should involve the actions of all parties involved...

I know there's a lot of injustice going on around me on different fronts and believe that if you want to draw the whole population into honestly recognizing it and working to make our society a more equitable and fair place to live instead of dividing them along political battle lines, then you're going to have to learn to listen respectfully to others with a differing point of view from you if you want them to be willing in turn to respectfully hear out your own agenda.  You may discern that in this article I'm thinking primarily of one particular social movement, and I'm largely in sympathy with its message and aims, albeit incompletely expressed...so let's allow for a more open, honest and civilly-responsible discussion which I believe in the end will contribute to a more unified, constructive outcome...