What’s great about this, and Stephen Fry is brilliant, is not that he’s absolving Musk, or that he’s criticizing Tesla, but that it is an argument likely leading to Elon Musk protesting,
‘No, my cars are good enough that I can be a Nazi!’
What’s great about this, and Stephen Fry is brilliant, is not that he’s absolving Musk, or that he’s criticizing Tesla, but that it is an argument likely leading to Elon Musk protesting,
‘No, my cars are good enough that I can be a Nazi!’
You want to argue that armchair psychology is more important in this situation than condemning doing a Nazi salute?
Armchair psychology and armchair political rants are both armchair activities., so neither is more important, and they can both happen at the same time.
It’s just interesting that all statements about <bad guy du jour> are considered support if they aren’t condemnation. If you said Bill Cosby used to do funny standup for example, you would be flooded with hate because the only acceptable reason to mention Cosby is condemn him for being horrible. But understanding the psychology of horrible people is actually important. Think how it would be if you got a rectal disease and it turned out there was no cure because assholes are gross so nobody studies them and anybody who mentions them except to rant about how disgusting they are gets pounded with douchevotes and called a pervert. Objective talk about aspects of sociopaths should be okay. Don’t be the Christian who clutches their rosary every time somebody says “Satan”.