Quote:
Originally Posted by Toy Soldier
I'm not telling you what to think or what your opinions should be - but you're not saying that you are insulted by it, or that you find it offensive, you're stating as fact that it IS inherently insulting and offensive in an attempt to shame people out of doing it. There's one person here trying to shut down opinion and dictate "appropriate conversation" Livia, and it certainly isn't me. I fully accept your right to find these comparisons and conversations difficult and offensive. I don't accept your attempts to shame other people out of having those conversations, and making those comparisons.
You also, presumably, know fine well that comparison and pointing out precedent in no way involves suggesting equivalency? That pointing out that there are valid comparisons to be made between current global politics and early-20th-century politics (which seems undeniable, to me) is not in the slightest the same thing as saying they're identical, nor is it an attempt to argue that Trump is identical to Hitler. The "comparison = equivalence" counter arguments are usually a strawman tactic employed by people who find the comparison confronting or uncomfortable.
I can compare apples to oranges, pears, plums, carrots, and small red family hatchbacks whilst acknowledging that none of them are the same thing.
You're in law. You understand that. You know that pointing out precedent in a previous case is not a claim that two cases are identical.
Why do you keep pretending that you're mystified by the concept?
|
Patronising.
You don't need a Jew in these threads, especially not one who's connected with Israel in any way. It just spoils the party.