4 ms·
>So I see no need to look far back. It‘s a bit like the diabetic regretting that nobody told them how harmful all the donuts were, all while they still don‘t di
by jjulius 3y ago
>So I see no need to look far back. It‘s a bit like the diabetic regretting that nobody told them how harmful all the donuts were, all while they still don‘t diet because „now it‘s too late anyway“.
Except that, in this case, the diabetic's immediate family learned early on that the donuts might be bad and told the diabetic, but the diabetic kept eating them. And when the evidence further grew that the donuts were bad, the diabetic kept making them and eating them, while evangelizing about the wonders of donuts to others. Then there came a time where people called the diabetic on their crap, and folk came to their defense saying, "Don't be mad at them, how could they have known!?".
- cf100clunk 3y agoThe diabetic was a major stockholder in Acme Donuts and saw internal Acme documents in 1954 directly linking consumption of the donuts with diabetes and other health problems. Subsequently, the diabetic denied and disavowed any knowledge of such links and actively worked to thwart any acknowledgement of such as being threats to share prices and a way of life. That'd be my comparison.