I get the point but honestly: Why does that matter?
If we only accept judgement or action by ‘perfect individuals’ aka. ‘heroes’ the world won’t ever get better as influential humans are still humans and often have, by design, flaws and mistakes build within them and their character.
Does that mean we shouldn’t judge anyone for their actions? Obviously not.
But to claim that ones vision or ideas are outright wrong due to ad-hominem argumentation against their personal flaws is also bullshit.
You’ll always find something to point out, especially with historical figures. Since, ironically due to their imperfect actionism, our social norms have improved and we often rightfully so critizise things deemed normal during their time.
Because of the “no forgiveness doctrine” many leftist follow since their 4chan days. The biggest cancel culture fans originally were 4chan edgelords once, they just left the moment it became inconvenient for them to stay there, usually due to /pol/. After that, it’s usually imposed onto the others by the elders, because they mistook stupidity for radicalism.
If you ask: this problem is not exclusive to the left, at least the western loli community is insufferable thanks to them (and explains their performative transphobia since “many antis are transes”), allegedly thanks to someone who ended up in both communities.
It matters coz how could I ever take a wife-beating racist serious in whatever he preaches or says?
Noone is perfect, but you also don’t need to be a hero to not be a racist moron beating your wife.
Seriously? If that’s already a hero the world is broken.
I dunno who said it, but to quote freely: “the best index to a person’s character is how he treats those that can’t fight back and offer no benefit”
If ghandi (or anyone else) beats his wife and is a racist, that’s all I need to know about what person he is.
I get the point but honestly: Why does that matter?
If we only accept judgement or action by ‘perfect individuals’ aka. ‘heroes’ the world won’t ever get better as influential humans are still humans and often have, by design, flaws and mistakes build within them and their character. Does that mean we shouldn’t judge anyone for their actions? Obviously not.
But to claim that ones vision or ideas are outright wrong due to ad-hominem argumentation against their personal flaws is also bullshit. You’ll always find something to point out, especially with historical figures. Since, ironically due to their imperfect actionism, our social norms have improved and we often rightfully so critizise things deemed normal during their time.
Because of the “no forgiveness doctrine” many leftist follow since their 4chan days. The biggest cancel culture fans originally were 4chan edgelords once, they just left the moment it became inconvenient for them to stay there, usually due to /pol/. After that, it’s usually imposed onto the others by the elders, because they mistook stupidity for radicalism.
If you ask: this problem is not exclusive to the left, at least the western loli community is insufferable thanks to them (and explains their performative transphobia since “many antis are transes”), allegedly thanks to someone who ended up in both communities.
It matters coz how could I ever take a wife-beating racist serious in whatever he preaches or says?
Noone is perfect, but you also don’t need to be a hero to not be a racist moron beating your wife. Seriously? If that’s already a hero the world is broken.
I dunno who said it, but to quote freely: “the best index to a person’s character is how he treats those that can’t fight back and offer no benefit”
If ghandi (or anyone else) beats his wife and is a racist, that’s all I need to know about what person he is.