3 ms·
This is what-about-ism, not a substantive objection. One need not point out every obstacle to open debate in order to identify one important obstacle to open de
by istjohn 6y ago
This is what-about-ism, not a substantive objection. One need not point out every obstacle to open debate in order to identify one important obstacle to open debate.
- jakelazaroff 6y agoIt's not what–about–ism because they're not neutral agents. I'm not saying "they say they want intellectual curiosity, but what about unpaid interns" — I'm saying "they say they want intellectual curiosity, but they are the ones actively preventing that from happening".
- mancerayder 6y ago> neutral agents Please explain?