3 ms·

> You don't even know that I'm American. I don't and I've never implied this in any of my comments, although I definitely suspected it - some cultural things r

> You don't even know that I'm American. I don't and I've never implied this in any of my comments, although I definitely suspected it - some cultural things really stick out, no offense. > This is a website for discussing things and having opinions. That's kind of the point. Yes it is, and this is me challenging you point. Don't take it the wrong way. > You're the one who assumed the collective pronoun was nationally based. I certainly did not, definitely not national, but rather cultural. > I am under no obligation to turn a blind eye to anybody's bad behavior simply because they live in a different country. Nor have I said anywhere that anyone else ought to treat me differently. Nobody is under any obligation to do anything towards anybody, obviously. I just try do deconstruct you reasoning and understand why does your whole attitude screams that this whole deal is for you (plural) to manage. No other culture does that even when people completely shit over some other countries governments. Is this just purely a linguistic thing then? > I suspect there would be facts in need of clarifying if they think it's equivalent to Iran, but they're entitled to their opinion. You have completely missed my point regarding stepping in someones shoes, but unfortunately I don't have much examples of other nations meddling with some western countries internal affairs tangibly enough to be representative.

ivraatiems 4y ago
You might be right that this is a cultural difference, but to me it seems like our approaches are: Me: "Something bad is happening. We should try to stop bad things from happening and instead encourage good things to happen, even if " You: "Something bad is happening, but because it doesn't involve me or people culturally related to me, it's none of my business." I really don't mean this with any animus - I see why a reasonable person might take one approach or the other. And in different contexts, I might take a different approach. It's unlikely that either of us is in favor of the arbitrary detention and execution of protestors, for example, so it's a matter of what we are willing to ignore on the grounds that it's none of our business. The things that are happening in Iran are over that line for me. I think there is a moral imperative to speak out against, and preferably to act against, actions that are bad enough to cross that line. And while the line is certainly different for different people, I think a lot of people from a lot of different cultures, including the Iranian culture itself, agree with me on this. > No other culture does that even when people completely shit over some other countries governments. Is this just purely a linguistic thing then? I don't think this is true. I think I could go to RT or Xinhua or the Times of India and find lots of people criticizing other countries' governments AND cultures. One of the major points that Vladimir Putin loves to make is how degenerate the West is, in his view. India is constantly dunking on Pakistan, and vice versa. Everybody criticizes everybody else.

ivraatiems 4y ago

You might be right that this is a cultural difference, but to me it seems like our approaches are: Me: "Something bad is happening. We should try to stop bad things from happening and instead encourage good things to happen, even if " You: "Something bad is happening, but because it doesn't involve me or people culturally related to me, it's none of my business." I really don't mean this with any animus - I see why a reasonable person might take one approach or the other. And in different contexts, I might take a different approach. It's unlikely that either of us is in favor of the arbitrary detention and execution of protestors, for example, so it's a matter of what we are willing to ignore on the grounds that it's none of our business. The things that are happening in Iran are over that line for me. I think there is a moral imperative to speak out against, and preferably to act against, actions that are bad enough to cross that line. And while the line is certainly different for different people, I think a lot of people from a lot of different cultures, including the Iranian culture itself, agree with me on this. > No other culture does that even when people completely shit over some other countries governments. Is this just purely a linguistic thing then? I don't think this is true. I think I could go to RT or Xinhua or the Times of India and find lots of people criticizing other countries' governments AND cultures. One of the major points that Vladimir Putin loves to make is how degenerate the West is, in his view. India is constantly dunking on Pakistan, and vice versa. Everybody criticizes everybody else.