We have power to change the ways we encourage shunning and instead do the work to facilitate communication.
but what to make of the media attention and centering of the Trump voter/supporter that believes generally made-up or inaccurate things as opposed to those actually harmed? for example, the article from the history professor whose student wrote an essay about voting for Trump insisting that Reconstruction failed and was devastating for the South despite that not being in any way shape or form accurate--at what point does communication stop serving a positive purpose and start re-creating/perpetuating harm? or is that an overstatement of harm? I guess maybe a question to return to in the chapter on the state
