You're viewing a single thread.
Here's the article summary:
"One time, Brian worked in a field. Luigi on the other hand, had rich parents, just like Osama Bin Laden."
I fucking wish I was joking.
I laughed out loud at this.
An alternate opinion column could be: "One time, Adolf was an aspiring artist. Winston on the other hand, had rich parents, just like Osama Bin Laden."
Winston Churchill was a genuinely awful human being and a war criminal prior to WWII.
He lucked out by also being a moderately competent wartime leader, who gets to be juxtaposed against Hitler for eternity.
Also, Brett Stephens is a bed bug and has a terrible track record of properly handling public backlash to his writing. I hope dark days are ahead for him.
Yeah I know he's not an angel and is in the example specifically due to the juxtaposition.
I understand someone brings this up everytime Churchill is mentioned in a good light, so out of curiosity: who would be a better comparable figurehead? Joseph? Franklin? Neville? Albert?
Churchill is fine to use. People keep trying to go back and just shit on everything, at some point you have to just move on. He literarily helped defeat Hitler, that has to count for something.
Spoken like someone who has no historical understanding of Churchill's pre-WWII legacy. He's not retroactively awful, he was awful by the standards of his own era.
https://jacobin.com/2022/09/winston-churchill-british-empire-racism-wwii
I'm still waiting for you to help me find an appropriate alternative. Which ww2-era leader was not racist?
Churchill wasn't bad simply because he was a racist... I think retrograde views on race are one of the areas where it's reasonable make allowances when judging historical figures.
Churchill was an aristocrat and an imperialist responsible for numerous atrocities within Britain's colonial holdings, and that's not even going into his anti-labor beliefs and practices.
The reason why I didn't provide you an alternative was because your original comment never required you to mention Churchill. That was an unforced error on your part, as the comment you were responding to wasn't an analogy to begin with.
But if you're deadset on needing an alternative for your unnecessary analogy, FDR is easily the best of a bad bunch.
Ok. Thank you. I will use FDR more often as a comparison to Hitler in the future, but I do stand by my original use of Chruchill as not an error and actually more apt given the context you have helpfully shared.
The analogy comes from the fact in a similar fashion, this guy Luigi isn't a perfect character and has published views I don't agree with, some quirky, some potentially harmful, and has come from a rich preppy background. Those should be less relevant when discussing what he has purpotedly accomplished, despite it being twisted to an insane degree in this article.
Also, Brett Stephens is a bed bug
Wow we're just going to allow blatant antisemitism on here /s
Holy fucking shit. Imagine writing this out and thinking it’s a good thing to publish. What an idiot. What a buffoon. What an absolute bitch boy cuck ass moron.
Came to comment on the columnist being a corporate shill piece of shit, but you found more flowery words :)
I'd call him a buttchugging fuck dandy, but that's just me.
You could all be right. He could be an absolute piece of shit buttchugging bitch boy cuck ass moron dandy corporate shill.
"Oh God, the poor are uniting! Quick, we need to stir up some division"
"He ate steaks like Trump, not like that despicable vegetarian, Hitler"
You do realize this is an opinion column? You can tell by the big letters at the top that spell out OPINION
EDIT: here's my "both sides" take on this, you all are as dumb as Fox News viewers. IMO (notice the O stands for opinion, please do not hold Lemmy accountable for what I say) schools need to implement a class on the media. Kids need to learn the difference between news and opinion. Also learn how to identify the source of the news. Also don't post your nudes on the internet. Things are about to get a lot worse with AI and deep fakes
NYT still saw fit to publish it. Most would consider that a tacit endorsement.
That, and the author is a regular writer for the opinion section there, with consistently terrible takes.
Somebody paid NYT and this parasite to do this job.
Plebs need to understand that these shill ops ain't free...
Yeah and? Doesn't make his opinion any less garbage
You do realize, even for an opinion piece, this is astoundingly poor quality and taste? You can tell by having two brain cells to rub together.
I expect this sort of shit from a tabloid, not from any organization claiming journalistic integrity. A shitty piece is still a shitty piece, even if it's hiding behind the opinion column banner.
Do you see NYT publishing any opinion pieces to the effect of "The healthcare CEO socially murdered thousands every year and the fact that we don't have a legal mechanism to deal with them is infinitely more important than a guy who only killed one person"
I have an opinion, you're an ignorant bootlicker! Should that get posted to the frontpage of the times too?
That commeneter is a classic neo lib call for "reasonableness"
Daddy is raping you but you need to hear about both sides, boy:
It is for your own good
Purity Now! Purity Tomorrow! Purity Forever!
An opinion The NY Times chose to share with their readers.
The great thing about opinions? They typically spur opinions from other people. And those opinions spur more opinions.
What I’m trying to say is that the article being an opinion does not in any way negate the comment you’re being dismissive of, which in itself is an opinion too. That’s kind of how conversations happen.
Your point? The Editor still has control over what is allowed to be printed/released and associated with their name.
Nobody responding to you was unaware this was an opinion piece.
Reread the responses and try again.
Opinions should be here to stay!
I liked the preprint of their opinion column publishing tomorrow, headline:
Some of those kids in Palestine were asking for it
NYT doesn't decide if its news or opinion alone, so does their audience.
Therefore they are responsible for the ideas they give a platform too.
Do you remember why are they avoiding face shots of Luigi?
In a comment full of shit takes, i just wanna point out that you think the government teaching media literacy in school is the solution?
I hope you wear a helmet regularly.
So edgey, dear