5 ms·
> so that article OP cites is outrage bait, it's not an informed source. How does this follow? One faction burns a bible and another faction puts it out. How
by rukittenme 6y ago
> so that article OP cites is outrage bait, it's not an informed source.
How does this follow? One faction burns a bible and another faction puts it out. How do you choose which narrative to privilege?
- a_bonobo 6y agoThe book being burned doesn't look like a bible to me - the breitbart article tries to spin that one book being burned into a NSDAP-like mass book burning event, with bibles being burned - we don't know which faction burned that single book, but breitbart wants the reader very hard to believe that it was BLM people/leftwing people.
- rukittenme 6y ago> wants the reader [...] to believe You can play this game for the rest of your life. It won't make you more informed. It won't make you happier.
- staycoolboy 6y ago> How do you choose which narrative to privilege? Do you REALLY find it that hard to figure out? I can't tell if you're being sincere, or just being a troll who is trying to shrug and say nihilistic-sounding things to advance the alt-right agenda, which is to "flood the channels with shit" as Bannon said. If some right-wing rando at a protest start burning a bible, and then two large established groups of protestors try to stop him because it is not what they are protesting and is sending a misleading optics, it really isn't that hard to see what is going on. Like the white supremacist biker that was recently arrested for smashing windows during a BLM protest in an attempt to create deceptive optics for the right wing media machine.