Uh, that wasn't posted until well after the comment where he was making the accusation. And honestly, it's still not clear context, since you have to go read a twitter thread that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else here. I'm perfectly happy to admit I'm just totally missing something obvious, but seriously... what does that link, posted long after the fact, have anything to do with the rest of this thread?
specific context.
Ok, here's the specific context of this conversation, BeriaInocenceProject was claiming that either what I was saying in my comment, or what RNAi was saying originally, (I don't know which is the case, this whole conversation is a little surreal imo) was aiding US imperialism. I counter that as being ridiculous, which it is, and it sounds like you agree. But then it seems like you come in with a "well ackshually" response for me.
I agree, it would not be productive to walk into a room full of liberals and start ranting about Putin. But that highly specific context is nowhere to be seen. That is not what was happening anywhere. If instead, someone is glorifying Putin as "based" I think in any following context, it would not be a negative thing to say "No. Putin is bad." I think this is all the more the case if the Putin-praising was being done in a leftist space. And that is what was happening in the original image.
In the context of what's actually happening and being discussed here, to me it seems pretty weird to come in with "they have a point" in defense of someone arguing that it's wrong to call Putin a reactionary. But I dunno. Whatever. I realize we're pretty much in agreement. This whole thing just strikes me as... odd.
Uh, that wasn’t posted until well after the comment where he was making the accusation. And honestly, it’s still not clear context, since you have to go read a twitter thread that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else here. I’m perfectly happy to admit I’m just totally missing something obvious, but seriously… what does that link, posted long after the fact, have anything to do with the rest of this thread?
My bad, when you added your edit to your comment, it replaced the first time stamp, so I didn't realize the order of comments.
Yeah, I agree that the image in the OP is ridiculous. Putin is not "based", and there's absolutely no sense in saying so. I just wanted to make the point that there are contexts in which focusing on criticisms, even if they are true, is still harmful.
In the context of what’s actually happening and being discussed here, to me it seems pretty weird to come in with “they have a point” in defense of someone arguing that it’s wrong to call Putin a reactionary.
Yeah, agreed. I initially read that user's comment as directed in general and not at you/RNAi specifically, but I think in retrospect that may have been too charitable a reading.
IDK, you're probably right that I picked the wrong place to make my point here. Sorry for any confusion I caused.
I hear you, it's all good. And to be clear, I don't think you owe any kind of apology, I just couldn't make sense of BeriaInocenceProject's comments, nor what I took as your defense of them.
Uh, that wasn't posted until well after the comment where he was making the accusation. And honestly, it's still not clear context, since you have to go read a twitter thread that has absolutely nothing to do with anything else here. I'm perfectly happy to admit I'm just totally missing something obvious, but seriously... what does that link, posted long after the fact, have anything to do with the rest of this thread?
Ok, here's the specific context of this conversation, BeriaInocenceProject was claiming that either what I was saying in my comment, or what RNAi was saying originally, (I don't know which is the case, this whole conversation is a little surreal imo) was aiding US imperialism. I counter that as being ridiculous, which it is, and it sounds like you agree. But then it seems like you come in with a "well ackshually" response for me.
I agree, it would not be productive to walk into a room full of liberals and start ranting about Putin. But that highly specific context is nowhere to be seen. That is not what was happening anywhere. If instead, someone is glorifying Putin as "based" I think in any following context, it would not be a negative thing to say "No. Putin is bad." I think this is all the more the case if the Putin-praising was being done in a leftist space. And that is what was happening in the original image.
In the context of what's actually happening and being discussed here, to me it seems pretty weird to come in with "they have a point" in defense of someone arguing that it's wrong to call Putin a reactionary. But I dunno. Whatever. I realize we're pretty much in agreement. This whole thing just strikes me as... odd.
My bad, when you added your edit to your comment, it replaced the first time stamp, so I didn't realize the order of comments.
Yeah, I agree that the image in the OP is ridiculous. Putin is not "based", and there's absolutely no sense in saying so. I just wanted to make the point that there are contexts in which focusing on criticisms, even if they are true, is still harmful.
Yeah, agreed. I initially read that user's comment as directed in general and not at you/RNAi specifically, but I think in retrospect that may have been too charitable a reading.
IDK, you're probably right that I picked the wrong place to make my point here. Sorry for any confusion I caused.
I hear you, it's all good. And to be clear, I don't think you owe any kind of apology, I just couldn't make sense of BeriaInocenceProject's comments, nor what I took as your defense of them.