General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe truth is quite often not "balanced". We are not obligated, when discussing the
Adolph Hitlers and Lon Nols of our world, to mention that they "liked kitties" or "never personally murdered a single person".
Monsters are monsters.
Racists are racists.
Sociopaths are---- you know.
marble falls
(56,359 posts)Igel
(35,197 posts)not focusing on the whole truth is called "bias." If you don't, you can totally substantiate your claim, but it's as valid as assuming that in a criminal trial either the prosecutor or the defense are telling the entire story so there's no need to even think about asking the other side what went on.
When discussing Hitler, we don't talk about the millions of Africans he killed in his extermination camps in China. Because he had none in China. And didn't kill millions of Africans. That doesn't mean he didn't have around 12 million people killed. It just means he didn't do a particular thing he didn't do.
When using analogies, it's the same. Analogies are only good for what's analogical. When you find something that can be the basis of an analogy, it really says nothing about other aspects of their behavior or acts.
That said, there's no context for this and I have absolutely no idea who this post is still trying to condemn.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)I'm sorry.