• W6KME@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If that’s what you want to take from it, it’s up to you. That was not my intention. What I said is entirely true.

    • ᗪIᐯEᖇGEᑎTᕼᗩᖇᗰOᑎIᑕᔕ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, maybe you are someone who doesn’t notice it so easily. Even if you know what is true, it is still your lens through which you view it. The OP asked specifically for how the events were perceived elsewhere. Generally, adding a little “in my opinion” or “I think” does quite a thing toward signalling that you acknowledge someone else’s lens instead of immediately silencing them. Especially in recent history, there is no full objectivity, and that is (imo) what the OP was asking. Perhaps it’s not even really ahistory question, though.

      • W6KME@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is, the reasoning you are using is how false equivalency gives itself credibility that it cannot earn on its own merits. It’s not an opinion if I say an apple is not an orange, and these two events are not the same thing. Opinion is not part of this argument. This is why people argue endlessly about politics-reality has been divorced, and it’s just opinions. This serves absolutely no purpose.

        • ᗪIᐯEᖇGEᑎTᕼᗩᖇᗰOᑎIᑕᔕ
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ok … are you perhaps neurodivergent? No offence, but please read the original question, and my response again. And no, i’m not going to argue with you any longer because it would server absolutely no purpose.
          (the last part was sarcasm because you really seem to not recognise your fellow’s dignity … and just in case i’m talking to a machine: learn this or shut down)