this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
261 points (91.4% liked)

World News

39011 readers
3003 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Swedish human rights activist Anna Ardin is glad Julian Assange is free.

But the claims she has made about him suggest she would have every reason not to wish him well.

Ardin is fiercely proud of Assange's work for WikiLeaks, and insists that it should never have landed him behind bars.

“We have the right to know about the wars that are fought in our name,” she says.

Speaking to Ardin over Zoom in Stockholm, it quickly becomes clear that she has no problem keeping what she sees as the two Assanges apart in her head - the visionary activist and the man who she says does not treat women well.

She is at pains to describe him neither as a hero nor a monster, but a complicated man.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't substitute any word in that case because there is absolutely no excusing her at this point. Her actions are indefensible. Love her books, fine, but she is a horrible, horrible person and her bigotry does not deserve to be excused by calling it misguided or anything else but bigotry. If she said about black people what she says about trans people, that wouldn't even be a consideration in terms of talking about her.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Well now I'm a little confused. Did I find a point of cognitive dissonance in you? In one breath you defend Assange under fire for sexual assault and to consider nuance, but this is too far?

And since when do we care what Elon Musk has to say? He called someone a pedophile, too, remember? Should we jump on the bandwagon with that just the same?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Love her books, fine, but she is a horrible, horrible person

I am literally talking about separating someone from her work. I don't know how I could have been clearer on that point. But that doesn't mean what she says is in any way excusable or defensible. Bigotry is bigotry.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Okay I see what you're saying, I think. I went back to re-read your comment:

This, to me, is less important than the fact that this woman is publicly talking about how someone can do a bad thing but still be a public good, something not talked about enough in a world where when someone does something bad, it makes people ignore everything else they’re doing.

So your general perception of Assange is that he is an irredeemable rapist asshole who's done good work and you respect his accuser for distinguishing those in the same respect you view the character of Rowling as irredeemable and a hateful bigot who's done good work. Do I have that correct?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes. I feel that if someone has done good work, even if they are a horrible person, acknowledging the good work is the right thing to do. Even if they wrong you personally. That makes it much more difficult, but I still think it's something that needs to be done.

My former best friend ripped my mom off for drug money by lying about what he needed it for and is now in prison for possessing meth lab equipment. He's a horrible person in a lot of ways. But I will still acknowledge the good things he did as good things (he was always willing to give someone a place to stay if they needed it and for as long as they needed it, for example) even if he has done things I can't forgive him for.

I guess in my view, the bad has to far outweigh the good if you're going to ignore the good and I think that, while I also have a lot of criticisms about what he has done with Wikileaks, especially around the 2016 election, I also think that Wikileaks- at least when it began- did a lot of good. And credit does go to him for that despite anything else. His victim in the article seems to agree.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fair enough. Thanks for the elaboration and discussion.