←back to thread

152 points xqcgrek2 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
iandanforth ◴[] No.45043708[source]
This is McCarthyism. You take a polarizing word, then you attack your enemies by claiming they are that thing, and couch the whole thing in an "investigation" whose outcome is predetermined.

There is no merit to discussing if the target is that thing, it doesn't matter. It's an ideological attack. If you take it on its face then the attackers win because you're treating them as if they were honest participants in a discussion, which they are not.

And remember even if the investigation (which is a farce) goes nowhere, allowing it to exist unchallenged means that some people are going to be harassed and intimidated. But, that too is the point, fear is what they want.

replies(9): >>45043799 #>>45043943 #>>45044019 #>>45044141 #>>45044186 #>>45044853 #>>45045770 #>>45047416 #>>45047503 #
bix6 ◴[] No.45043799[source]
Preach. How much time and money will Wikipedia have to waste defending this?

Don’t these people have anything better to do? Like lowering prices for everyday Americans instead of running up baseless legal bills?

replies(2): >>45043827 #>>45045267 #
aeternum[dead post] ◴[] No.45043827[source]
[flagged]
1. creativenolo ◴[] No.45044007{3}[source]
I’m not following this comment. Yes, it’s a true statement. But do you mean it changes the situation? Should your comment be read as support for them spending their money sourced through donations to defend the accusations?