4 ms·

Then do as 'sctb said and post a substantiative, thought-provoking article about it. I'd be happy to discuss the issue there, because it is an important one. Ba

Then do as 'sctb said and post a substantiative, thought-provoking article about it. I'd be happy to discuss the issue there, because it is an important one. Bad shit does happen today, and needs to be discussed. But the fallout of the bad shit from the past matters too and trying to diminish that here suggests that your motives are not as pure as your representation of them suggests. Which may not be your intention...buuuut...I'd bet that way, Monsieur "Virtue Signal", Señor "They're The Real Supremacists", Mister "Let's Talk About Anybody But Me". Willing to be wrong, though. Put up.

EGreg 8y ago
I would say the motives of those who talk about historical wrong X in the past while obstructing discssion of X happening today are also not pure. Everyone should evaluate themselves. That’s why I am not backing down and just agreeing. I find “calling whataboutism” to be disingenuous cover for double standards (speaking in general, not about anyone in particular). I am happy to talk about things if the intention is genuine. The people who care about historical wrong X seem to put up pedantic walls as soon as they are asked to care about X much closer and much more pressing to us. “Make another topic on HN and get it upvoted and maybe I will talk about slavery of Black people that has been happening in regions where it’s not as cool to critique at the moment.” Doesn’t seem to fit on a site where comments to “I invented a decentralized permissionless movie streaming platform” is “your site is green bleh” or some other thing. But talking about Black people being enslaved today is “diverting attention” from an article about Black people being enslaved by the country of which I am a citizen. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern-day-slavery-in-focus+world/middleeast https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern... It is a form of soft bigotry to me, if analyzed without the filter. A light form of collective insanity. And it doesn’t have to do with slavery in particular but pick any X issue.

EGreg 8y ago

I would say the motives of those who talk about historical wrong X in the past while obstructing discssion of X happening today are also not pure. Everyone should evaluate themselves. That’s why I am not backing down and just agreeing. I find “calling whataboutism” to be disingenuous cover for double standards (speaking in general, not about anyone in particular). I am happy to talk about things if the intention is genuine. The people who care about historical wrong X seem to put up pedantic walls as soon as they are asked to care about X much closer and much more pressing to us. “Make another topic on HN and get it upvoted and maybe I will talk about slavery of Black people that has been happening in regions where it’s not as cool to critique at the moment.” Doesn’t seem to fit on a site where comments to “I invented a decentralized permissionless movie streaming platform” is “your site is green bleh” or some other thing. But talking about Black people being enslaved today is “diverting attention” from an article about Black people being enslaved by the country of which I am a citizen. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern-day-slavery-in-focus+world/middleeast https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern... It is a form of soft bigotry to me, if analyzed without the filter. A light form of collective insanity. And it doesn’t have to do with slavery in particular but pick any X issue.