3 ms·
When someone asks for examples of particularly bad actors, replying "everybody is a bad actor" is a pat non-answer that communicates nothing except the answerer
by chucksmash 2y ago
When someone asks for examples of particularly bad actors, replying "everybody is a bad actor" is a pat non-answer that communicates nothing except the answerer's disillusionment.
- zemvpferreira 2y agoTrue, but it’s useful disillusionement that conveys useful knowledge: companies must be monitored. Every industry, left to itself, will commit horrible acts for profit. There’s no such thing as an ethical business in the dark.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- chucksmash 2y agoI disagree. Think of the places where corruption is endemic. Having an outlook of "well, everybody is corrupt" normalizes the behavior and makes it easier to justify sliding into corruption oneself. If the outlook were useful, it would help to fix the problem instead of doing the opposite. The disillusionment doesn't offer any benefit that can't also be gained with a touch of common sense alone. But going from "some people are terrible, sometimes" to "everybody is terrible" forecloses any possibility of improvement.
- ethbr1 2y agoAgree with your disagreement. To ignore gradations of disappointment is to excuse everything via apathy. One thing can be bad, while another is worse.
- red-iron-pine 2y agohow does a company like Costco unleash a global propaganda campaign to shift blame for things like global warming to individuals? how many governments did they overthrow? tell me about how netflix dumped millions upon millions of gallons of oil in the ocean and wiped out entire ecologies. There are definitely egregiously-bad actors compared to those that aren't.