upvote
It does, but both side's followers are blind to it when their side does it. Or they think it's ok for their side to do it. I'm not sure which is scarier
reply
You’re painting with an awfully broad brush, omitting both the magnitude of the difference and far overstating the homogeneity of one of those sides.
reply
"Yeah, but they did it worse" is a very. weak. argument.
reply
You’re still making the error of acting like there’s a single, simple “it”. For example, what you say is a very weak argument is a fundamental feature of our entire legal system: we have different penalties for not picking up after your dog vs. leaving toxic waste in the same place, stealing a hot dog versus a car, punching someone versus hitting them with a bat, etc.

In this case, it’s even more than the simple question of degree because intention matters, and we have enormous differences around that. Criminal charges are often far heavier if they can show intent, and it factors heavily in things like whether inaccurate business statements were honest errors or intentionally misleading investors. In the case mentioned, it would be especially key whether someone was trying to suppress misinformation in good faith because they honestly thought they were performing a public safety good by preventing dangerous advice from spreading during a crisis — and that shows why Martin’s threats to are at an entirely different level since there’s no emergency and they’re clearly protected speech which has no direct harm or even a path to substantially contribute to harm.

reply
I'm sorry, would you hire someone that regularly steals hot dogs and only punches people instead of using a bat on them? Especially for a position of leadership and great power over others? Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?
reply
[flagged]
reply
You’re not arguing in good faith if you’re not recognizing that the “pandemic authoritarianism” started under Trump, or asserting that the lab leak theory was ever suppressed (it was continuously discussed throughout - just check the comments here for the last 5 years!) or that the most criticized theories making wild claims about bioweapons or gain of function research are now widely accepted. Many assessments have included the possibility of a lab leak of a natural specimen from the beginning, but in the absence of evidence nobody credible is saying more than, say, the CIA’s “low confidence” back in January.
reply
> pandemic authoritarianism

Sacrificing people on the altar of your freedom is better? There was a reason for lock-downs and masks. They were implemented worldwide. It wasn't some fluke of US policy.

reply
A lot of what you refer to as "pandemic authoritarianism" took place under Trump as well. Vaccine mandates have been part of many jobs for years and years. It's not a Republican or Democrat thing.
reply
> Its inevitable we will face yet another worldwide pandemic in the next decade or so

If we do, the absurdities about masks and vaccines that were spread by some will make it last just as long as the covid one

reply
Wikipedia is not owned by “The Democrats.” Its editors are a pretty diverse and esoteric bunch.
reply
I'm demonstrably not, otherwise I wouldn't have been able to make the above commentary. But even if I was it would be irrelevant. It wouldn't cause both sides of this to be comparable, and neither does virtue signaling being above partisanship.
reply