4 ms·
I wonder if it'd be better to posit that the 'team' sued the KKK because almost everything I know about this guy would lead me to believe he wasn't even likely
by jollybean 4y ago
I wonder if it'd be better to posit that the 'team' sued the KKK because almost everything I know about this guy would lead me to believe he wasn't even likely to attack his aggressors, even if it was reasonable to do so.
FYI check out this 1969 congressional hearing [1], especially as compared to hearings today.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C5PMPIdG_Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C5PMPIdG_Y
- lupire 4y agoAsserting one's rights is not "attacking". Do you think that Fred Rogers, upon learning that a gang of monstrous people is saying horrific things while impersonating him, wouldn't force them to stop?
- jollybean 4y agoYes. First - this is the kind of thing that's typically handled and driven by 'the legal department'. They think differently, act differently, for non obvious reasons. Second - 'fighting' is a form of aggression no doubt and suggest most people avoid that and confrontation esp. people like Rogers. I can see him rationalizing it's just not worth the effort, I mean, it depends a lot on the proportionality of the situation. Was someone handing out leaflets in 'nowhere USA'? Or was there a National Convention? I cans see Rogers wanting to do something like wanting to call them and talk to them, and his lawyers saying 'no, that's not how it works, better to send them a firm letter from a reputable law firm, we'll take care of it' etc..