TL;DR: Half-truths are more dangerous than lies. I once asked my father to read the Bhagavad Gīta, just so he will be able to have a conversation with me. But that prompted him to just start watching the Mahābhāratam TV show. Now first of all, it is a TV show that alters the true story to suit the audience's feelings. But even ignoring that, there are bigger problems. Mahābhāratam is a story that illustrates all the wrong things people did that led to a war, with which Śrī Kriṣṇa illustrates the right path to live, in the Bhagavad Gīta. All anti-religious idiots too do the same thing by criticizing the actions of people in Mahābhārata. Then those same idiots would think that it conveyed the idea that it was moral to sit silent during the dice game and as Draupadi was being disrobed. That would give them a good rationale to criticize it. But then their opinions are irrelevant because they actively ignore the context or tātparya (what it's trying to convey). You see, half-truth ...
Basically, a good commie is simply someone who wishes that all people will attain peace. But he does not try to control others in order to attain that goal, as that is against the idea of giving peace to all people. For the same reason, it is one who meditates on: 🕉️ Asatoma Satgamaya, Tamasoma Jyotirgamaya, Mrityoma Amritamgamaya. 🕉️ Shanti, Shanti, Shanti Hi: A bad commie chastises others, and in the process, he destroys the very foundation on which he built the notion of communism. It is said that the idea that the nature of man is egoism is to say that the nature of a factory worker is to cough, and that it is only a problem of capitalism. However, they forget the fact that it is the nature of nature of man to be capitalist, and not the nature of something else. To explain this paradox, the bad commie simply dehumanizes the capitalist by saying he is not a man, but is a demon. So they bring in superstitions to make these claims. (I guess communism is not about peace for all, but ...
Steelmanning is a method used by super honest debaters, whereby they state the opponent's position better than themselves, before chopping it down. This is as opposed to strawmanning, whereby one makes a distorted version of the opponent's argument, or a strawman, and breaks it down. The goal is to break the opponent's argument in such a way that no part of the argument will survive the attack, as the edge cases are also included when you steelman the argument. However, when you steelman a fascist, you're playing right into their trap. A fascist wants to gain popularity, and they want you to strengthen their argument as well as possible. However, once you have done your part, they won't let you deal the breaking blow. They will silence you by whatever means necessary. A fascist is wicked. But the worst part is that, you never know you're steelmanning a fascist until you've steelmanned them. So if you ever encounter them, don't try to correct your mistake...
Comments
Post a Comment