It should not be surprising that so many revolutionary activist movements claiming to be inclusive of diversity are actually exclusive to the point pf being supremacist. Nor should anyone be surprised that all of these revolutionary activist movements claim to be democratic at the same time that they oppose the majority.

They cannot possibly be democratic and revolutionary at the same time. That's an irresolvable dichotomy. The whole purpose of any revolution is to overthrow the current majority; the whole purpose of democracy is to allow the majority to rule.
<...>
If they can't out-vote us because we outnumber them, they'll illegally change the whole racial balance in America by importing millions and millions of "people of color", and either way, they will either win by revolution, or by "democracy", corrupted as it will then be.

Cultural Marxism hit a near home-run with their DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) revolutionary activist movement, because it incorporated into itself an almost endless number of almost mutually exclusive individual revolutionary activist movements. The possible permutations and combinations of imaginary transsexual pronouns alone defy human counting without the use of a super-computer.

Try to imagine a transvestite, an Islamist, an ardent Communist, an open sodomite, a real live anarchist, a Palestinian, a real live Nazi, a biologically male women's athlete, a bearded drag queen, a material atheist libertarian and a bomb-toting dedicated Jihadist all getting together for a beer in one big happy DEI love-fest.
<...>
If none of that sounds particularly democratic to you, welcome to the club. As long as it's anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-Western, anti-male, anti-white, anti-hetero, anti-majority and anti-normalcy, the Marxocrat Party will support it, and the Republicrat Party will seek common ground and compromise with it.

Do you begin to understand Trump's majority popularity everywhere?