You can tell yourself what you want, but I agree with your view, and still had to downvote just to reduce the toxicity hogging space from up top. I use the votes as signal boosters / signal dampeners. Lower voted, for most people, end up in the bottom, where most don’t reach them.
Some people don’t want to hear it, because they know it by heart already. Some because it’s not productive and only serves to lower morale. Some, because that’s just defeatist and/or escalatory. Whatever the reason, I’m certain most people do not need to hear that shit. What purpose would it even serve? Things are not as dire as that and you know it too, you are just being sensational for whatever reason you’ve conjured yourself. I even agree that things have to hurt before meaningful action starts to happen at a meaningful level, but hoping specifically someone to get hurt and/or not stay safe is just you being a prick. Nobody needs to be exposed to that.
What the fuck is wrong with you?! That is not even slightly what I said and you fucking know it. Telling hateful lies like that is 10000% more “prick” behavior than anything I did!
There’s a big fucking difference between hoping that somebody will not listen to cowardly advice, and hoping they get hurt. I shouldn’t have to explain that to the entire fucking thread, but I’m apparently surrounded by idiots.
What would you yourself deem “not being safe” to mean in context of people in general? Now what would you take it to mean when the commenter you quoted there said that the opposition is dangerous and deranged, hoping AOC stay safe, and you responding hoping AOC not to stay safe. In the same context where the clear danger and derangement is stated? In fact, quoting the very comment doing just that?
You can keep acting shocked and mistreated as though everyone around you is stupid or malicious or both… or, you know, you could maybe consider that maybe whatever way other people interpret your words might just be reasonable and you could perhaps stand to benefit from admitting that, then elaborating what you meant, instead of lashing out on everyone and playing a victim with overly dramatized tone that is pretty much guaranteed to get people confused and vocal about your behavior.
What would you yourself deem “not being safe” to mean in context of people in general? Now what would you take it to mean when the commenter you quoted there said that the opposition is dangerous and deranged, hoping AOC stay safe, and you responding hoping AOC not to stay safe. In the same context where the clear danger and derangement is stated? In fact, quoting the very comment doing just that?
What it means is that I hope AOC stays bold in her opposition instead of letting the threats dissuade her from defending democracy against fascism. C’mon, was it really that unclear?!
Well initially it was. Later down this thread in my second reply I was just trying to point out why it got the reception it got. As I said initially, I agree with the sentiment, it was just not well put at first, even I misread it. I get you now.
You should’ve probably responded with something like this from the start, but I’m glad it was my misunderstanding your message, not you advocating for what I, along with some others apparently, interpreted from it.
Sorry about the tone in my first reply. I hope you see it came from a well meaning place in defense of safety in terms of staying alive and unharmed, not in opposition to being bold, as the inverse of “safe”.
We lose a lot in the translation when our only medium is text, and we are all from across the globe, trying to communicate in a language that is foreign to me and many others, I bet. But c’est la vie.
There seems to be a real lack of basic comprehension in people’s responses. I agree with you. Staying safe, under fascism, means playing it safe, and the USA needs leaders like AOC who won’t do this but will speak out even if it puts them in danger.
You can tell yourself what you want, but I agree with your view, and still had to downvote just to reduce the toxicity hogging space from up top. I use the votes as signal boosters / signal dampeners. Lower voted, for most people, end up in the bottom, where most don’t reach them.
Some people don’t want to hear it, because they know it by heart already. Some because it’s not productive and only serves to lower morale. Some, because that’s just defeatist and/or escalatory. Whatever the reason, I’m certain most people do not need to hear that shit. What purpose would it even serve? Things are not as dire as that and you know it too, you are just being sensational for whatever reason you’ve conjured yourself. I even agree that things have to hurt before meaningful action starts to happen at a meaningful level, but hoping specifically someone to get hurt and/or not stay safe is just you being a prick. Nobody needs to be exposed to that.
What the fuck is wrong with you?! That is not even slightly what I said and you fucking know it. Telling hateful lies like that is 10000% more “prick” behavior than anything I did!
There’s a big fucking difference between hoping that somebody will not listen to cowardly advice, and hoping they get hurt. I shouldn’t have to explain that to the entire fucking thread, but I’m apparently surrounded by idiots.
That is a direct quote from you.
What would you yourself deem “not being safe” to mean in context of people in general? Now what would you take it to mean when the commenter you quoted there said that the opposition is dangerous and deranged, hoping AOC stay safe, and you responding hoping AOC not to stay safe. In the same context where the clear danger and derangement is stated? In fact, quoting the very comment doing just that?
You can keep acting shocked and mistreated as though everyone around you is stupid or malicious or both… or, you know, you could maybe consider that maybe whatever way other people interpret your words might just be reasonable and you could perhaps stand to benefit from admitting that, then elaborating what you meant, instead of lashing out on everyone and playing a victim with overly dramatized tone that is pretty much guaranteed to get people confused and vocal about your behavior.
Just saying.
What it means is that I hope AOC stays bold in her opposition instead of letting the threats dissuade her from defending democracy against fascism. C’mon, was it really that unclear?!
Well initially it was. Later down this thread in my second reply I was just trying to point out why it got the reception it got. As I said initially, I agree with the sentiment, it was just not well put at first, even I misread it. I get you now.
You should’ve probably responded with something like this from the start, but I’m glad it was my misunderstanding your message, not you advocating for what I, along with some others apparently, interpreted from it.
Sorry about the tone in my first reply. I hope you see it came from a well meaning place in defense of safety in terms of staying alive and unharmed, not in opposition to being bold, as the inverse of “safe”.
We lose a lot in the translation when our only medium is text, and we are all from across the globe, trying to communicate in a language that is foreign to me and many others, I bet. But c’est la vie.
There seems to be a real lack of basic comprehension in people’s responses. I agree with you. Staying safe, under fascism, means playing it safe, and the USA needs leaders like AOC who won’t do this but will speak out even if it puts them in danger.
If everyone around you is an asshole…