4 ms·
Other positions aside, I’ve found most rational people have a natural distaste for hypocrisy/double standards, especially when it’s institutionalized. I read T
by nugget 6y ago
Other positions aside, I’ve found most rational people have a natural distaste for hypocrisy/double standards, especially when it’s institutionalized.
I read Tom Cotton’s op ed about civil unrest in the US and then Regina Ip’s op ed about similar issues in Hong Kong. I’m struggling to understand why anyone would think Cotton’s piece needs the post-publication disclaimer and the other does not. A clear double standard seems to be present.
- tshaddox 6y agoCan you explain why you think that illustrates a double standard? What principle do you think the NYT is purporting to hold but is applying inconsistently in these two cases? I haven't read either article (because I'm not a subscriber), but I gather that the former is advocating using the US military to put down civil unrest in the US, and the other is defending the actions of Hong Kong police to put down civil unrest in Hong Kong. If you suppose the principle being applied is very broad, something like "no support of any state action against civil unrest should ever be published," then that principle does seem to be applied inconsistently. But that seems very unlikely to be the principle NYT is purporting to have.