4 ms·

I don't think @banach did that. The point of the quote was to point out that laws aren't necessarily right. And this point you keep making about it only being

• Turing_Machine 9y ago
  > I don't think @banach did that. I think he clearly did do that. > And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing. I'm sorry you don't find arithmetic convincing, but there's not much I can do about that. > I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP. Now you're wandering off into non sequitur.
  • domevent 9y ago
    This is arguing dishonestly, as you presumably understand the difference between using examples to illustrate a principle, and a direct comparison. Why not just address the point, instead of being “outraged” by his presentation?
    • Turing_Machine 9y ago
      > This is arguing dishonestly No, it isn't. He is arguing that the government of Michigan's laws are bad because the Nazis had bad laws. There's dishonesty for you.
      • portofcall 9y ago
        He is arguing that the government of Michigan's laws are bad because the Nazis had bad laws. There's dishonesty for you. Yes, you’re being dishonest. If you use the state as a metric for ethics you'll end up disappointed. He spelled it out in the post you’re aggressively misinterpreting and it’s decidedly not the fiction you’re peddling. So are you really losing track of what’s been said, in which case it’s time to step back, or are you being dishonest? You don’t seem like you’re losing track, so...
        • Turing_Machine 9y ago
          I'm not "misinterpreting" anything, aggressively or otherwise. He is lumping all states together as "the state", giving an example of some unethical states, and arguing from that that no state is ethical, or pays any attention to ethical concerns. That argument is pure garbage.
          • portofcall 9y ago
            You said He is arguing that the government of Michigan's laws are bad because the Nazis had bad laws. Which simply isn’t true. He actually said outright: If you use the state as a metric for ethics you'll end up disappointed. Now, you may think that’s garbage, but you’re not free to pretend that he said completely different things he didn’t actually say. Remember how you hate inaccuracy? Do you think that what you were doing before was accurate? How about playing semantic games now with the word “state,” is that accurate? It isn’t, it’s evasive. So, what are you evading?
            • deleted 9y ago
              [deleted]
            • Turing_Machine 9y ago
              There is no "the state" to "use as a metric". That's what's dishonest. > Do you think that what you were doing before was accurate? Pointing out that the government of Nazi Germany and the government of Michigan aren't the same in any meaningful way? Yes. That's accurate.
      • deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
• sparrish 9y ago
  Embezzling is a poor comparison. This is Nestle getting legal permits to pull from a well. A better comparison would be if you invoiced Michigan for 1/2000th of their GDP and the state and local governments paid it. In that case, I'm fine with it.
• brandonmenc 9y ago
  > laws aren't necessarily right And neither is the public. We once needed a law and show of force against public demonstrators to let black children into schools.