Defiant wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:21 pm
Zarathud did NOT give the Left a pass.
Yes, he fucking did. He dismissed Farrakhan because there weren't as many violent acts directly traceable to him.
You want a discussion on Farrakan? Have at it.
I tried to do that and got attacked for it with the absurd claim that I was engaging in whataboutism , so fuck that.
Whataboutism is "both sides are equally guilty". That's it. Any discussion of criticism is ended by saying the other side does it too.
I'M dismissing Farrakan too then, if that wasn't clear.
If you want to discuss Farrakan, then start a Farrakan thread. That's what new threads are for. If you want to discuss how Farrakan fits into the current climate of fear and hatred, start a thread about the current climate of fear and hatred.
It's like trying to have a discussion specifically about Nazis and having a Nazi bring up Stalin, and then suddenly the discussion isn't about Nazis any more.
What on earth does Farrakan have to do with anything the Right is doing now? The Right really seems to be super interested in Farrakhan right now, so Farrakan must have done something even more noteworthy than usual to warrant all that attention. What was it?
I don't even know who Farrakhan is, I can't even spell his name. I sure as hell know who Drumpf is. He's the subject of the conversation, because he's the president of the USA, and he's stoking the emotions that lead to the killing of people in Pittsburgh.
It's not about giving Farrakhan a pass, or the Left a pass, or even about an analysis of how you guys got to where you are. You want that discussion, then start that discussion. But then the discussion should be labeled as such and the scope of it much clearer.
For example, we have a thread about drumpf's appointments, but we don't immediately start talking about all the other questionable appointments that have ever happened, ever, because those aren't relevant to drumpf specific corruption. It's not called "systemic corruption regarding appointments" and then discussion of 100 years of problems. It's this. Here. Now.
Being derailed and distracted is exactly WHY they are bringing up Farrakhan. And you bit, hook, line and sinker, because he's a villain you are particularly vexed by. And that's fine, you should be. But that doesn't mean that in a discussion of the promotion of hate and fear in the current political climate Farrakhan deserves to even be mentioned in the same breath as drumpf and co, let alone given equal time. The very notion is ridiculous.
When specific criticisms are brought up, "They do it too" is not a valid response. For either side. About anything. Unless, somehow, it's sprouting from the same source, say for example, lobbying and lobbyists.
There are a LOT of hate filled people in the world. And way more homegrown than was suspected. We don't need to talk about all of them when talking about one of them. The Right doesn't want you talking about their particular one, so they bring up your particular one. Just tell them that you agree, but you'll deal with that topic later, right now we're talking about your guy in power and why what he's doing is bad. Not some random other dude on the other side of the aisle that engages in similar shitty behaviour.