←back to thread

1080 points cbcowans | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.214s | source
Show context
hedgew ◴[] No.15021772[source]
Many of the more reasonable criticisms of the memo say that it wasn't written well enough; it could've been more considerate, it should have used better language, or better presentation. In this particular link, Scott Alexander is used as an example of better writing, and he certainly is one of the best and most persuasive modern writers I've found. However, I can not imagine ever matching his talent and output, even if I practiced for years to try and catch up.

I do not think that anyone's ability to write should disbar them from discussion. We can not expect perfection from others. Instead we should try to understand them as human beings, and interpret them with generosity and kindness.

replies(31): >>15021858 #>>15021871 #>>15021893 #>>15021907 #>>15021914 #>>15021963 #>>15021998 #>>15022264 #>>15022369 #>>15022372 #>>15022389 #>>15022448 #>>15022883 #>>15022898 #>>15022932 #>>15022997 #>>15023149 #>>15023177 #>>15023435 #>>15023742 #>>15023755 #>>15023819 #>>15023909 #>>15024938 #>>15025044 #>>15025144 #>>15025251 #>>15026052 #>>15026111 #>>15027621 #>>15028052 #
1. weberc2 ◴[] No.15022898[source]
I strongly agree. The double-standard is remarkable though. Merely questioning the liberal position with less than a perfect rhetorical command is nearly criminal, but if you endorse a liberal position, you can be incorrect and even downright hateful toward your position, and lots of respectable (sometimes powerful) people will defend you against any criticism. I always catch a lot of flak for calling out liberal advantages (I'm a moderate liberal, for whatever that's worth), but pretending they don't exist hasn't exactly been doing wonders for the tone of our political discourse either.