3 ms·
> What's next, arbitrarily arresting Salvadoran travelers to protest their government's arbitrary arrest of gang members? That comparison doesn't really make s
by tzs 2y ago
> What's next, arbitrarily arresting Salvadoran travelers to protest their government's arbitrary arrest of gang members?
That comparison doesn't really make sense.
What mschuster91 proposed is that in response to the US mistreating EU visitors the EU should mistreat US visitors. It's a straightforward symmetrical tit for tat. One party starts harming another, that other reciprocates with a similar harm directed to the first party.
In your comparison it would be others responding to El Salvador mistreating its own citizens by also mistreating El Salvador's citizens. It is missing the crucial symmetry of a tit for tat.
- the_other 2y agoCountry B starts doing shady stuff. Country A wants to differentiate itself from B, to retain its A-ness. If A imposes policies that match B's, A becomes more like B. B has exerted soft power over A, and is now in a stronger position to take control of A than it was before.
- latexr 2y ago> It's a straightforward symmetrical tit for tat. One party starts harming another, that other reciprocates with a similar harm directed to the first party. And then the cycle of hate and harm becomes infinite. Or, in other words: > An eye for an eye will leave everyone blind.¹ Random US citizens are not at fault for random US border agents harming random EU citizens. By all means, have the EU refuse entry to US citizens, but treating them like the US does—imprisoning them for weeks—is unacceptable even in retaliation. ¹ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/27/eye-for-eye-blind/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/27/eye-for-eye-blind/
- ryandrake 2y agoIndividuals aren't, but US citizens, collectively, are at fault for the behavior of the US government.