Trying to understand the below stated passage. Looking for a 250 word quick critical response to the writing below.
“Purity is never possible in the world, and it is only unevenly possible in concept. And yet the focus on knowing more or better — the epistemic narrowly conceived — expresses a response to purity’s impossibility. This matters politically for those of us who want to change the world. In activist spaces over the last ten years, I have seen an upswing in what I would characterize as a commitment to staying at the level of epistemic as a response to the complexity and impurity of the world: conspiracy theories. One key difference between a conspiracy theorist and an activist, for lack of a better word, is that the conspiracy theorist holds that the best defense is more and better knowledge and the activist holds the best defense is creating another world. An anti oppression approach might start on the level of epistemic, but it always leads to toward action in the world, to speculative ontological commitments to different futures.”