Beware those who argue in terms of “we”. Those who want to shame you into doing something often use mercy run amuck as their engine, and use the word “we” to immobilize you. If you are guilty as everyone else, then your argument has no force, you see. If you are also guilty, you have no business resisting. You’re just another bad child in a classroom of bad children, so shut up and do what the teacher tells you. That is the tactic and the tenor of the left.
Like everything of the left, this too is built upon a lie. You must resist it whenever it pops up. The objective of the speaker/writer is to sweep the resistance along with the evil people in his/her example all into the same dustpan, by trying to cast the tarp of guilt as wide as possible. The first counterattack is to immediately and forcibly declaim responsibility. “Without me there is no we. I did not do such-and-such, so there is no ‘we’.” Or, you can ask the speaker if “we” includes him or her. If it does, then he or she is in no position to lecture anyone else.
Of course, you must use discernment so that you don’t sound like a grammar policeman or a provocative douche, but the first step towards losing is to accept responsibility for something you did not do. The second step is feeling guilty for something you did not do and had no role in causing; once you feel guilty about that, you can feel guilty about other things you did not do as well, and that easily spiderwebs into every area of your life. Why I come down so hard on people placing liens of guilt upon us is that it is fundamentally a spiritual attack. It is a lie about our character and an attempt to persuade us to commit evil through agreement and inaction.