I'm always the first person who expresses disdain for political analogy that's used in the place of political analysis so you'll have to excuse my hypocrisy here but, if you'll indulge me:

Y'know those infowarrior rides that progressives mock which are plastered with a pastiche of weird, niche political concerns that the owner doesn't actually know jack shit about - Stop 5G, Death Before Vaxx, Just Say No To Adrenochrome, Obama's Birth Certificate was Faked, Fluoridation Will Kill Our Nation... idk the rest but you get the picture, right?

How is that different in a qualitative way from those copy-pasted paragraphs that mostly the progressive libs regurgitate on social media that are like:

Free Hong Kong
Free East Turkistan
Free Tibet
Ban TikTok
etc. etc.?

Seems like either group is convinced that these things are the most pressing issues of today's world, at least right up until you ask them a few basic questions about these subjects and you get blank stares and some "Either you're with us or you're against us 😡😡" kinda defensive statements.

Like if you pressed them on it and said that East Turkestan only lasted about as long as the confederacy did (and only when you count up every month, despite the fact that the first half a year that it existed for occurred a decade before the next few years that it sprang back up for) and ask if they think that the ex-confederate states also deserve their independence they get really confused because that sounds wrong on an intuitive level but they don't know any better because they just assumed that it was always East Turkestan up until recently.

That evergreen bit from Kwame Ture about the man who hates snakes was wrong but only because he applied it In too narrow a way; at a conservative estimate this is how it is for a solid half of all political discourse in the west, as far as I can tell.