« … many western countries hesitated to use the same type of language against violations of international humanitarian law, for instance, that we easily apply when they are violated by Russia in Ukraine… »
@poligraf@palestine although world is united against Russia vs Ukraine, and most are also united against Israel attacks on Palestine, one deafening voice on the issue is what is Zelensky's position on it is. Yes he's busy with a war at home but all he has said about it is support of Israel and how he sees it taking attention away from his country. To me this is very alarming to say the least when far far more people have been killed indiscriminately in Gaza and with a genocide in progress...
however you try to reframe it, that was mere cynical opinion… and regardless of how near the next election, good luck substantiating that reelection is what motivates him…
sweeping statements that attempt to generalize the past into the future are defeated by the actuality of change and innovation…
however, you try to frame it... reposting a news story like this guy was being "exceptional" was irrationally optimistic.
I called it out for what it is.
Generalizing politicians is easy, and valid, when there is at least 2 centuries of historical examples. Disregarding history and, frankly, statistics is just childishly naive.
And expecting "change and innovation" from people who are clearly invested in maintaining the status quo is kind of delusional...
who here claims that this guy is « being exceptional » ? resorting to the strawman fallacy doesn't support your stance one bit…
you didn't call anything factual, you merely expressed an opinion… proof of that is that you didn't even mention when the next election is due (« his election must be coming up. »)…
trying to reduce history to such generalizations clearly leads to error, such as possibly completely eliminating change and innovation, of which there are myriads of historical instances, out of the picture…
and trying to make this about me seals the deal : truth needs no such artifice such as logical fallacy, like for instance personal attacks and strawmen…
a mass of data is not worthless… what can be worthless is the conclusions one draws from them, for instance when one tries to remove the nuances the data contains by reducing it to simple generalizations…
« All science, all statistics is about reducing data to a generalization » : good luck substantiating that one…
when the generalization is clearly counterfactual, then it's not about « disliking » it, but about pointing out how it is not representative of facts…
trying to justify personal attacks through more personal attacks (« you clearly need to do some growing up ») is just more fallacy on your part…
the point is not that such methods hurt their target ― they really don't ― but it's rather that they constitute ad hominems, which are logical fallacies as trying to shoot the messenger doesn't actually address the message, and thus certainly doesn't refute it…
« Also, I'm pretty sure "cynical" was thrown first » :
that's just more misrepresentation on your part, as my original comment was « cynicism only hurts those who accept it, » which clearly targets your reply, but doesn't target you personally, nor your mental abilities…
well, seeing as I made a snide joke at the guys expense, not yours... and you quickly called my comment "cynical", forgive me if that leads to an assumption that you believe it was "exceptional". I do not believe it was a strawman, even if incorrect, but if it makes you feel better.
as for opinion. It's politics, everything is opinion.
so, if « it's politics, everything is opinion » as you opine, then that defeats your « stark realism » claim…
suggesting that the only reason a politician would do something positive is because the next election must be coming up is indeed cynicism… whether or not you recognize it, some people do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, and some of those people are politicians…
the assumption that « it was exceptional » is merely more cynicism on your part… and that clearly doesn't justify the misrepresentation of my intent in posting the video…
recognizing that fallacy is not about me « feeling better, » it's about your proposition not respecting truth and facts…
posting the video does not constitute any form of « irrational optimism, » as it highlights the very verifiable and very factual actions of the politician in question… and by the way, he is not the only politician who is making such observations regarding double standards…