4 ms·

Indeed. Its the same trope as artists, songwriters, and other popular people engage in. Just because you're good at X, does not mean you are good at Y. Kaspaa

Indeed. Its the same trope as artists, songwriters, and other popular people engage in. Just because you're good at X, does not mean you are good at Y. Kaspaarov's good at chess. Cool. That doesn't mean anything about war, military, and the like. He's no more informed than the average layperson.

efdee 5y ago
Kasparov has been involved in politics since the 1990s. Even more so since he retired as chess player in 2005. That doesn't automatically make him right, but I don't think it's fair to say he's no more informed than the average layperson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Kasparov#Politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Kasparov#Politics
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
> Kaspaarov's good at chess. Cool. he's better know for Russian political commentary these days, for the last decade or two. If you didn't know that, why say anything? https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/384172818063056896 https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/384172818063056896 (2013) https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/garry-kasparov/winter-is-coming/9781610396219/ https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/garry-kasparov/win... (2015) He is described here as "Russian human rights activist Garry Kasparov" https://twitter.com/ANCALERTS/status/1499587940250308610 https://twitter.com/ANCALERTS/status/1499587940250308610
- yucky 5y ago
  Not OP, but I believe their point was there is a difference between being known for something and being good at it. He was known for being good at chess. Now that he is already known, he spends his time focusing on politics. That doesn't mean he is as good at that as he was at chess. At least that is how I read the comment. For instance, Curt Schilling was a great baseball player. That doesn't mean his understanding of politics is great, regardless of how vocal he is about it now that he is retired. Same concept.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    > That doesn't mean he is as good at that (politics) as he was at chess. No, that you have to judge on his track record. What do you think of it?
    - yucky 5y ago
      I think that was the point of the comment right? Kasparov is a bit of a hawk and very much against the current government in Russia on literally everything. Doesn't mean he's wrong, but it definitely speaks to a bias, which I believe was the point of the comment. Back to the Curt Schilling example, if he were to tweet 10 things he hates about Biden, whether or not they are legit criticism would be lost on the audience due to his known biases.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        > Doesn't mean he's wrong, but it definitely speaks to a bias, So to be clear, of Mr Kasparov's track record, his 2015 book "Winter Is Coming", was basically proven correct about Mr Putin by recent events, but ... never mind the track record, bias or something?
        yucky 5y ago
        The book published after the CIA-financed Ukrainian coup of 2014? Easy to predict a response from Russia after a pro-western coup has taken place right? Doesn't make him a prophet. It's like predicting a US response in Afghanistan after 9/11..
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        Calling the Maidan (1) "the CIA-financed coup" and a bloody invasion a "predictable response" really is showing your true colours. You should not be taken seriously. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
Although I don't disagree with the general meaning of your comment - that experts on one area might often are not experts in another one - but in this case it's false; also, last time I checked, he was the chairman of the Human Rights Foundation. Also, it turns out he was right when he wrote Winter is Coming. Moreover, let's be honest: you wrote your comment just because you believed the parent that Kasparov wanted to use nuclear weapons. What he proposes is completely different, and several of these points have already been implemented, at least to some degree.

efdee 5y ago

Kasparov has been involved in politics since the 1990s. Even more so since he retired as chess player in 2005. That doesn't automatically make him right, but I don't think it's fair to say he's no more informed than the average layperson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Kasparov#Politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garry_Kasparov#Politics

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago

> Kaspaarov's good at chess. Cool. he's better know for Russian political commentary these days, for the last decade or two. If you didn't know that, why say anything? https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/384172818063056896 https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/384172818063056896 (2013) https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/garry-kasparov/winter-is-coming/9781610396219/ https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/garry-kasparov/win... (2015) He is described here as "Russian human rights activist Garry Kasparov" https://twitter.com/ANCALERTS/status/1499587940250308610 https://twitter.com/ANCALERTS/status/1499587940250308610

yucky 5y ago
Not OP, but I believe their point was there is a difference between being known for something and being good at it. He was known for being good at chess. Now that he is already known, he spends his time focusing on politics. That doesn't mean he is as good at that as he was at chess. At least that is how I read the comment. For instance, Curt Schilling was a great baseball player. That doesn't mean his understanding of politics is great, regardless of how vocal he is about it now that he is retired. Same concept.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  > That doesn't mean he is as good at that (politics) as he was at chess. No, that you have to judge on his track record. What do you think of it?
  - yucky 5y ago
    I think that was the point of the comment right? Kasparov is a bit of a hawk and very much against the current government in Russia on literally everything. Doesn't mean he's wrong, but it definitely speaks to a bias, which I believe was the point of the comment. Back to the Curt Schilling example, if he were to tweet 10 things he hates about Biden, whether or not they are legit criticism would be lost on the audience due to his known biases.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      > Doesn't mean he's wrong, but it definitely speaks to a bias, So to be clear, of Mr Kasparov's track record, his 2015 book "Winter Is Coming", was basically proven correct about Mr Putin by recent events, but ... never mind the track record, bias or something?
      - yucky 5y ago
        The book published after the CIA-financed Ukrainian coup of 2014? Easy to predict a response from Russia after a pro-western coup has taken place right? Doesn't make him a prophet. It's like predicting a US response in Afghanistan after 9/11..
        SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        Calling the Maidan (1) "the CIA-financed coup" and a bloody invasion a "predictable response" really is showing your true colours. You should not be taken seriously. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

Although I don't disagree with the general meaning of your comment - that experts on one area might often are not experts in another one - but in this case it's false; also, last time I checked, he was the chairman of the Human Rights Foundation. Also, it turns out he was right when he wrote Winter is Coming. Moreover, let's be honest: you wrote your comment just because you believed the parent that Kasparov wanted to use nuclear weapons. What he proposes is completely different, and several of these points have already been implemented, at least to some degree.