Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I'm not aware that the demonstrators were toting guns.

The oft-displayed photos show bats, a spear, body armor, helmets, etc. The QAnon enthusiasts arrested in Philadelphia were armed. At least one individual has been arrested for carrying a loaded pistol on Capitol grounds. It is utterly fanciful to suggest none of the rioters were armed.

Have you even forgotten Trump's exhortation that the "second amendment people" might "do something" about Hillary Clinton?

In order to believe that Trump did not incite violence you must overlook the way he's been beating the drum and fanning the flames all along. Writing out his meandering, discursive speech tries to remove from the picture what we all know he means and intends.



You're arguing that you have other evidence that Trump incited violence. Maybe you do. But the comment I was replying to was quoting a statement made by Trump at his rally, implying that it is evidence that he incited violence. It simply does not demonstrate that. It is not evidence of incitement. It just isn't.

If you believe X because of evidence Y, it does not follow that Z must also be evidence of X, just because you believe X (even if this belief is correct).

Not having the critical self-awareness to recognize this is likely to lead you to believe all sort of things that aren't really true, as you start thinking that everything you see confirms your existing beliefs, even when it doesn't.


> It simply does not demonstrate that. It is not evidence of incitement. It just isn't.

Can you explain why exactly it isn't? This claim is repeatedly made, but it has no backing rationale which I would like to understand.


It looks like we're at an impasse: you believe I lack objective awareness, and I believe you lack the willingness to recognize the nuance of human communication.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: