3 ms·

thanks for linking the transcript. if true, that certainly changes the narrative, but I don't think it weakens my main point: dumping the tea in the harbor made

thanks for linking the transcript. if true, that certainly changes the narrative, but I don't think it weakens my main point: dumping the tea in the harbor made sense given their objective, both symbolically and practically. and to the extent that it weakens the narrative of noble freedom fighters, it makes the comparison even weirder.

iso947 6y ago
Ok, same people same city. Smuggler John Hancock has his boat confiscated, starts a riot
- leetcrew 6y ago
  yeah, that would be a fair comparison. or if you really want to stick with the boston tea party, you might liken it to the police station that got burned down in minneapolis (a symbolically and practically meaningful target). in general I don't think this is a good rhetorical pattern though. comparing controversial current event A to mythologized account of historical event B seems like an attempt to avoid having to defend A on its own merit. as we've seen here in this thread, it may also rely on an incorrect/embellished understanding of B that introduces some weird implications.