We can agree with some of the points someone makes, without condoning all of their actions. It's not called critical support because we provide carte blanche and support everything the person says or does.
When I call for critical support of AnsarAllah or the Iranian government, that does not mean I agree with everything that they say and do, it means that in a specific instance they are definitely on the right side and I commend them for that.
Support for Luigi should remain critical. Perhaps less critical than we are of the Unabomber, but still critical.
(Assuming Luigi is actually the assassin. Perhaps we'll discover that the assassin is actually a totally cool and based Marxist who wrote a coherent manifesto and deserves our full support).
I disagree that they are analogous in their social effect/praxis. Luigi, whatever faults in his posting, had the foresight to make sure his message wasn't muddle by killing randos.
It's at the level of effect that things actually matter.
Were most Americans ever on the unabomber's side? No.
Were most Americans ever on the unabomber's side? No.
you'd be shocked tbh, even at the time the msm editorials agreed with some of his points. he was an awful and vehemently fascist crackkker but the general populace didnt disagree with his general ramblings about "industrial" ""society"", thats just revisionism
Removed by mod
Ted permanently disabled random people tho because of the bombings
Not to mention all the dead children.
We can agree with some of the points someone makes, without condoning all of their actions. It's not called critical support because we provide carte blanche and support everything the person says or does.
When I call for critical support of AnsarAllah or the Iranian government, that does not mean I agree with everything that they say and do, it means that in a specific instance they are definitely on the right side and I commend them for that.
Support for Luigi should remain critical. Perhaps less critical than we are of the Unabomber, but still critical.
(Assuming Luigi is actually the assassin. Perhaps we'll discover that the assassin is actually a totally cool and based Marxist who wrote a coherent manifesto and deserves our full support).
No, no, it was all worth it in the end you see because he destroyed capitalism
I disagree that they are analogous in their social effect/praxis. Luigi, whatever faults in his posting, had the foresight to make sure his message wasn't muddle by killing randos.
It's at the level of effect that things actually matter.
Were most Americans ever on the unabomber's side? No.
you'd be shocked tbh, even at the time the msm editorials agreed with some of his points. he was an awful and vehemently fascist crackkker but the general populace didnt disagree with his general ramblings about "industrial" ""society"", thats just revisionism
On second thoughts, I change my mind. He def injured, and disabled some people in the process. I guess my vulgar analysis was inappropriate.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod