4/ This is an observation. It's not a moral claim, it's not an argument, it's not ... it's not really much of anything, really. And yet it's being made out to be ... something. I've asked a few people what exactly they mean when they say this. What's the moral valence?
-
-
Show this thread
-
16/ Right. I ENTIRELY agree that the prog elites are absolute hypocrites. This thread is not defending them, not defending lockdown-for-Thanksgiving-but-not-for-BLM. This thread is asking "what does X mean / hope to achieve?".https://twitter.com/scareduck/status/1328354469877309440 …
Show this thread -
17/ OK, guys, I'm getting a ton of people who are going off topic and telling me that progs are bad, that lockdowns are bad, etc. And ... fine. I agree with the first and have no opinion on the second. I'm trying to understand one PARTICULAR RHETORICAL POINT, that's it.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Step 2 is “these nuanced policy decisions should involve people with actual skin in the game, not dumped on them with the message that non-compliance is immoral”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I actually think, for a lot of people, it's not a fairness complaint, but a practicality/hypocrisy complaint. "Your proposal, which you claim moral superiority for complying with, is actually not universalizable, because your compliance relies on my noncompliance."
-
I suspect the desired outcome is not an alternate policy, but "I'm fine with you locking down, I'm fine with bringing groceries and working in the plant, but stop telling me that makes me morally inferior, and don't tell me I can only break lockdown for things that benefit you."
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.