I think it’s a safe assumption that literally no one in all of America wants fraud or corruption in our government finances and that we want something to be done about it. Stipulating that articles like this must include that caveat creates a “both sides” narrative that undercuts the concern expressed. It’s okay to simply say “Elon Musk …
I think it’s a safe assumption that literally no one in all of America wants fraud or corruption in our government finances and that we want something to be done about it. Stipulating that articles like this must include that caveat creates a “both sides” narrative that undercuts the concern expressed. It’s okay to simply say “Elon Musk is doing this wrong,” without having to say but but but of course fraud is bad!
I keep thinking about this too Ashley. I’m struggling to understand the origins of the sentiment that we *must* “say something nice” (for lack of better terminology) about the person/organization/philosophy we are critiquing in order for it to be a valid commentary. Where did this come from? I keep harping about universal standards of morality for this reason. Neutrality is not a virtue. Truthfulness is. Integrity is. Also, I’m a huge proponent of contextualization, but there are limits. We have to be satisfied with context that is relevant and meaningful, otherwise we need to return to the dawn of time in order to be “fair,” because how else will we know where it ends?
I don’t know that anyone has to be nice to illustrate both sides of the story. I think that context and framing of a perspective is impactful. If done well, you won’t know where the author stands politically.
I will use this opportunity to clarify what I’m saying here Amy, which is that the commitment to honesty, wisdom and democratic principles is not a partisan stance. It does not belong to either the right or the left. It should in no way indicate someone’s “politics” to call out dishonesty, poor judgment or anti democratic behavior. I say “should” because that’s not always the case. But I think both republicans and democrats and everyone else who calls America home should feel compelled to take ownership of the ideological stance that says “Elon’s actions are wrong.” Full stop. No qualifiers needed.
Anything criticizing Trump or his allies on here is quickly labeled as "biased" or "partisan". It feels like the implication is that the rest of us are blindly following anything Sharon writes here and are not getting the whole picture just because we read or liked this article.
Right. And that’s why I keep beating the drum against classifying every principled idea into either conservative or liberal buckets. Let’s have conservatives *and* liberals who are committed to integrity and democracy.
Why should republicans (in this case) want to cede the territory of virtue entirely to the Democratic Party? No one should desire to be the party of “achieves its goals no matter the cost.” Let’s have higher standards for ourselves. Let’s make sure some things continue to exist beyond and outside the scope of partisan political platforms. But we have to insist on it in our leadership and we have to be willing to engage in accountability even if it costs us our preferred policy outcomes.
I think it’s a safe assumption that literally no one in all of America wants fraud or corruption in our government finances and that we want something to be done about it. Stipulating that articles like this must include that caveat creates a “both sides” narrative that undercuts the concern expressed. It’s okay to simply say “Elon Musk is doing this wrong,” without having to say but but but of course fraud is bad!
I keep thinking about this too Ashley. I’m struggling to understand the origins of the sentiment that we *must* “say something nice” (for lack of better terminology) about the person/organization/philosophy we are critiquing in order for it to be a valid commentary. Where did this come from? I keep harping about universal standards of morality for this reason. Neutrality is not a virtue. Truthfulness is. Integrity is. Also, I’m a huge proponent of contextualization, but there are limits. We have to be satisfied with context that is relevant and meaningful, otherwise we need to return to the dawn of time in order to be “fair,” because how else will we know where it ends?
I don’t know that anyone has to be nice to illustrate both sides of the story. I think that context and framing of a perspective is impactful. If done well, you won’t know where the author stands politically.
I will use this opportunity to clarify what I’m saying here Amy, which is that the commitment to honesty, wisdom and democratic principles is not a partisan stance. It does not belong to either the right or the left. It should in no way indicate someone’s “politics” to call out dishonesty, poor judgment or anti democratic behavior. I say “should” because that’s not always the case. But I think both republicans and democrats and everyone else who calls America home should feel compelled to take ownership of the ideological stance that says “Elon’s actions are wrong.” Full stop. No qualifiers needed.
Well said, Summer.
Anything criticizing Trump or his allies on here is quickly labeled as "biased" or "partisan". It feels like the implication is that the rest of us are blindly following anything Sharon writes here and are not getting the whole picture just because we read or liked this article.
Right. And that’s why I keep beating the drum against classifying every principled idea into either conservative or liberal buckets. Let’s have conservatives *and* liberals who are committed to integrity and democracy.
Why should republicans (in this case) want to cede the territory of virtue entirely to the Democratic Party? No one should desire to be the party of “achieves its goals no matter the cost.” Let’s have higher standards for ourselves. Let’s make sure some things continue to exist beyond and outside the scope of partisan political platforms. But we have to insist on it in our leadership and we have to be willing to engage in accountability even if it costs us our preferred policy outcomes.
YES. This!
I agree Summer. Thank you for clarifying.
Yeah, being nice about it wasn’t the best phrasing.
Thanks for sharing your opinion, Ashley.