5 ms·

Kind of rare to see someone respond to something so dismissively and non-constructively on hn

IshKebab 4y ago
Well you said something that is obviously ridiculous and you said you won't listen to anything anyone says so I didn't think there was much point trying to be constructive.
- hellfish 4y ago
  > you said you won't listen to anything anyone says wasn't the intended meaning
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  FWIW, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder. Parent did indicate the inflation of the word 'fascism' and uneven application of the term to same type of event ( "lockdown" ) under two different systems with one of the overlapping values being media portrayal. In other words, it may be worthwhile to prove poster wrong with facts.
  - IshKebab 4y ago
    > FWIW, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder Only sometimes. Implying that the American lockdown is the same as the Chinese one is obviously untrue. If I call you ridiculous for thinking that Sweden is just as oppressive as North Korea you wouldn't say "well that's a matter of opinion" would you?(assuming you're not an idiot)
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      I don't disagree in an abstract, but the issue I have is with an argument that relies on 'obvious' as a flag. Not everything is obvious ( and most things could be argued ). In fact, some things may appear obvious only to be lost in the sea of nuance. This is the reason I object to arguing along the lines of obviousness. North Korea and Sweden are very different countries in just about every way I can think of. It would take a tremendous stretch of language ( and rather ignorant audience ) to convincingly argue that Sweden is just as oppressive. With America and China it is not as straightforward a comparison, because those countries do share some interesting characteristics so less of a stretch is needed. The issue gets muddled, however because the word lockdown is discussed without any nuance attached to it. In US, it was challenged in courts and people ( clearly ) mostly did what they wanted to do ( that said, some businesses got fined heavily ) despite heavy media shaming, whereas in China lockdowns included stories ( among others ) of sealing off entire buildings without allowing their denizens for any way out. Despite the same word, those two approaches are very different in application ( edit: and results ).
      - IshKebab 4y ago
        Ok maybe I should have said "obvious if you have read anything at all about China's covid lockdowns". I think it was fair to assume that he had read at least something about them given his strong opinions on the matter.
    - hellfish 4y ago
      > Implying that the American lockdown is the same as the Chinese one Wasn't what was said in my comment. It was about protests of the lockdowns and the govt/media response to said protests Did you only skim read my comment before posting a one sentence reply?
      - IshKebab 4y ago
        Your comment relied on the premise that the lockdowns are equivalent. If they are not, why on earth would you expect the same reaction to protests about them??!

Well you said something that is obviously ridiculous and you said you won't listen to anything anyone says so I didn't think there was much point trying to be constructive.

hellfish 4y ago
> you said you won't listen to anything anyone says wasn't the intended meaning
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
FWIW, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder. Parent did indicate the inflation of the word 'fascism' and uneven application of the term to same type of event ( "lockdown" ) under two different systems with one of the overlapping values being media portrayal. In other words, it may be worthwhile to prove poster wrong with facts.
- IshKebab 4y ago
  > FWIW, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder Only sometimes. Implying that the American lockdown is the same as the Chinese one is obviously untrue. If I call you ridiculous for thinking that Sweden is just as oppressive as North Korea you wouldn't say "well that's a matter of opinion" would you?(assuming you're not an idiot)
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    I don't disagree in an abstract, but the issue I have is with an argument that relies on 'obvious' as a flag. Not everything is obvious ( and most things could be argued ). In fact, some things may appear obvious only to be lost in the sea of nuance. This is the reason I object to arguing along the lines of obviousness. North Korea and Sweden are very different countries in just about every way I can think of. It would take a tremendous stretch of language ( and rather ignorant audience ) to convincingly argue that Sweden is just as oppressive. With America and China it is not as straightforward a comparison, because those countries do share some interesting characteristics so less of a stretch is needed. The issue gets muddled, however because the word lockdown is discussed without any nuance attached to it. In US, it was challenged in courts and people ( clearly ) mostly did what they wanted to do ( that said, some businesses got fined heavily ) despite heavy media shaming, whereas in China lockdowns included stories ( among others ) of sealing off entire buildings without allowing their denizens for any way out. Despite the same word, those two approaches are very different in application ( edit: and results ).
    - IshKebab 4y ago
      Ok maybe I should have said "obvious if you have read anything at all about China's covid lockdowns". I think it was fair to assume that he had read at least something about them given his strong opinions on the matter.
  - hellfish 4y ago
    > Implying that the American lockdown is the same as the Chinese one Wasn't what was said in my comment. It was about protests of the lockdowns and the govt/media response to said protests Did you only skim read my comment before posting a one sentence reply?
    - IshKebab 4y ago
      Your comment relied on the premise that the lockdowns are equivalent. If they are not, why on earth would you expect the same reaction to protests about them??!