4 ms·

Let's also not forget Julian Assange. Also a political prisoner.

mindslight 4y ago
Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing secrets of USG's military industrial complex. Bernstein is a political prisoner, for merely acknowledging Putin's invasion and genocide. Is there some comparison you wish to make, beyond the realpolitik of powerful entities going after individuals for political reasons? To me, the comparison of the two is that the conspiracy persecuting Assange is actually much more restrained than the one persecuting Bernstein. Assange had to directly poke the hornet nest to get attacked, while Bernstein seemingly just stated basic public truths.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
  > Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing secrets of USG's military industrial complex. > Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing a video depicting war crimes conducted by US military personnel. I mean, both are true, right? Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Why is it so certain that Assange's detainment is because of one and not the other? > Assange had to directly poke the hornet nest to get attacked, while Bernstein seemingly just stated basic public truths. It seems to me than when Assange published the collateral murder video it was congruent with stating "basic public truths". I don't see how his actions were necessarily more inflammatory than Bernstein's; certainly not to the point where the former's detainment is acceptable and the latter's is not.
  - d23 4y ago
    > I mean, both are true, right? Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Have we lost all ability to consider magnitude and context? Or did we never as a society have a good grasp of this most basic part of critical thinking?
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
      > Have we lost all ability to consider magnitude and context? It does not seem to me that I have. Now, would you mind answering this with your opinion: > Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Really, I don't get it.
  - mindslight 4y ago
    > Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? I didn't say that Assange's resulting predicament is less objectionable. I pointed out to end up in that position, Assange had to commit more offensive actions (to the relevant party). This implies the system he pissed off is more constrained, which would seem to indicate progress. You also can't point to collateral murder as a single action that led to Assange's persecution. Rather, he kept doing things that pissed off the entrenched power, and eventually they had enough. None of this is to condemn Assange's actions, or justify his persecution. Rather it's only possible to productively reason about these topics with a sense of magnitude - falling into binary thinking leads to contradictions or concluding that many things are equally bad, which is ultimately useless.

Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing secrets of USG's military industrial complex. Bernstein is a political prisoner, for merely acknowledging Putin's invasion and genocide. Is there some comparison you wish to make, beyond the realpolitik of powerful entities going after individuals for political reasons? To me, the comparison of the two is that the conspiracy persecuting Assange is actually much more restrained than the one persecuting Bernstein. Assange had to directly poke the hornet nest to get attacked, while Bernstein seemingly just stated basic public truths.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
> Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing secrets of USG's military industrial complex. > Assange is a political prisoner, for publishing a video depicting war crimes conducted by US military personnel. I mean, both are true, right? Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Why is it so certain that Assange's detainment is because of one and not the other? > Assange had to directly poke the hornet nest to get attacked, while Bernstein seemingly just stated basic public truths. It seems to me than when Assange published the collateral murder video it was congruent with stating "basic public truths". I don't see how his actions were necessarily more inflammatory than Bernstein's; certainly not to the point where the former's detainment is acceptable and the latter's is not.
- d23 4y ago
  > I mean, both are true, right? Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Have we lost all ability to consider magnitude and context? Or did we never as a society have a good grasp of this most basic part of critical thinking?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y ago
    > Have we lost all ability to consider magnitude and context? It does not seem to me that I have. Now, would you mind answering this with your opinion: > Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? Really, I don't get it.
- mindslight 4y ago
  > Why is Assange's predicament so much less objectionable? I didn't say that Assange's resulting predicament is less objectionable. I pointed out to end up in that position, Assange had to commit more offensive actions (to the relevant party). This implies the system he pissed off is more constrained, which would seem to indicate progress. You also can't point to collateral murder as a single action that led to Assange's persecution. Rather, he kept doing things that pissed off the entrenched power, and eventually they had enough. None of this is to condemn Assange's actions, or justify his persecution. Rather it's only possible to productively reason about these topics with a sense of magnitude - falling into binary thinking leads to contradictions or concluding that many things are equally bad, which is ultimately useless.