4 ms·

This is a really dumb argument to make in today's day and age and lays out multiple false equivalencies. Due to the way social media and the web works today, it

This is a really dumb argument to make in today's day and age and lays out multiple false equivalencies. Due to the way social media and the web works today, it's now possible to have massive populations that live literally side-by-side with each other that live in entirely different realities from each other. Case in point - FEMA is having difficulty delivering aid in parts of the hurricane affected south because people are convinced they're going to take their houses or something. Do you actually think it has always been this bad? Yes, propaganda and misinformation have always been there. Yes, truth is often subjective. However, things like "will drinking a bottle of soy sauce kill me" or "should I use horse deworming meds to treat a very serious viral disease" have pretty clear answers, and that's not what we see today.

sofixa 2y ago
The most egregious false equivalency is the bad faith argument of Trump saying Haitian migrants are eating pets (blatant lie which is stoking hate against an ethnic group) is somehow comparable to a slightly disingenuous misinterpretation of Trump's words that 'there were very fine people on both sides' (he was talking about the civil war and slaveowners, not neo-Nazis, not thay different in terms of impact of his words).
- JohnMakin 2y ago
  Even the way the "there were fine people on both sides" is presented here is in complete bad faith. He was addressing the charlotsville protests and counterprotests, one side of which was heavily represented by people who would consider themselves white nationalists/nazis. Trump himself would probably admit this to you. So, while he didn't literally say it, it was heavily implied in that statement, and you also have the benefit of all the context around that event and the next several years to make your own judgment about what he meant there. Just complete bad faith bozo stuff, glad this got flagged.
danaris 2y ago
This has frustrated me a lot in recent times: people trying to claim that things have always been this way (the lying, the political polarization, the poor treatment of various marginalized groups, etc), and citing specific examples from the past... ...when the problem isn't that the whole idea of these is new, it's the scale. Without doing some kind of more comprehensive analysis on both the current and historical situations, you're not going to be able to prove it one way or another (so asking for proof that things are actually worse now is also just...totally impractical), but if you're paying attention, and paid attention in the past, it's painfully clear that things are worse now.
- Ukv 2y ago
  > [...] the poor treatment of various marginalized groups, etc. > [...] but if you're paying attention, and paid attention in the past, it's painfully clear that things are worse now. Treatment of marginalized groups is worse now than in the past? Could maybe be argued if you intend some time-span bound (e.g: "worse now than it has been within my lifetime"), but even still I think this thinking is falling into a couple of traps already pointed out in the article, like treating the truth as "there on the street in the sun waiting to be observed by anyone who glances in its general direction" and therefore that anyone who does not see it must be oblivious.
atmavatar 2y ago
Ten years ago, if your Uncle Dave posted a Facebook conspiracy theory that the government was controlling the weather so they could use FEMA to steal people's houses, most people would shake their heads and laugh, disregarding him as a nutjob. Today, people are taking up arms and obstructing hurricane relief efforts because they're totally convinced it's true.

sofixa 2y ago

The most egregious false equivalency is the bad faith argument of Trump saying Haitian migrants are eating pets (blatant lie which is stoking hate against an ethnic group) is somehow comparable to a slightly disingenuous misinterpretation of Trump's words that 'there were very fine people on both sides' (he was talking about the civil war and slaveowners, not neo-Nazis, not thay different in terms of impact of his words).

JohnMakin 2y ago
Even the way the "there were fine people on both sides" is presented here is in complete bad faith. He was addressing the charlotsville protests and counterprotests, one side of which was heavily represented by people who would consider themselves white nationalists/nazis. Trump himself would probably admit this to you. So, while he didn't literally say it, it was heavily implied in that statement, and you also have the benefit of all the context around that event and the next several years to make your own judgment about what he meant there. Just complete bad faith bozo stuff, glad this got flagged.

danaris 2y ago

This has frustrated me a lot in recent times: people trying to claim that things have always been this way (the lying, the political polarization, the poor treatment of various marginalized groups, etc), and citing specific examples from the past... ...when the problem isn't that the whole idea of these is new, it's the scale. Without doing some kind of more comprehensive analysis on both the current and historical situations, you're not going to be able to prove it one way or another (so asking for proof that things are actually worse now is also just...totally impractical), but if you're paying attention, and paid attention in the past, it's painfully clear that things are worse now.

Ukv 2y ago
> [...] the poor treatment of various marginalized groups, etc. > [...] but if you're paying attention, and paid attention in the past, it's painfully clear that things are worse now. Treatment of marginalized groups is worse now than in the past? Could maybe be argued if you intend some time-span bound (e.g: "worse now than it has been within my lifetime"), but even still I think this thinking is falling into a couple of traps already pointed out in the article, like treating the truth as "there on the street in the sun waiting to be observed by anyone who glances in its general direction" and therefore that anyone who does not see it must be oblivious.

atmavatar 2y ago

Ten years ago, if your Uncle Dave posted a Facebook conspiracy theory that the government was controlling the weather so they could use FEMA to steal people's houses, most people would shake their heads and laugh, disregarding him as a nutjob. Today, people are taking up arms and obstructing hurricane relief efforts because they're totally convinced it's true.