this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
663 points (97.8% liked)

World News

32509 readers
568 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Iran has banned a weightlifter from sports for life and dissolved a sports committee after the athlete greeted an Israeli counterpart on a podium.

Mostafa Rajaei, a veteran weightlifter, finished second in his category in the 2023 World Master Weightlifting Championships in Poland and stood on a podium with an Iranian flag wrapped around him on Saturday.

On anther step of the podium stood Maksim Svirsky from Israel, who finished third.

The two athletes shook hands and took a picture together, which led to the Iran Weightlifting Federation banning Rajaei from all sports for life due to what it called an “unforgivable” transgression.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 83 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Assigning human traits to governments is so weird lol

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

politics for liberals are just a big reality show

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hold up, assigning traits to a government made up by people (a group of people) is weird, but assigning traits to a different group of people isn't? I don't really disagree, but you can't agree with the comment above you and agree with your comment also.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you can't agree with the comment above you and agree with your comment also.

of course i can; if i couldn't, i wouldn't, but i did it, which is proof that i can do it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can't while being a reasonable, logically consistent person. You can if you argue in bad faith, which I expect but usually people don't take pride in that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Did he assign a trait to liberals? Because if not, there's no inconsistency.

Then a follow up question: is there a difference between 'liberals' as a group (i.e. not liberalism) and a government (i.e. an institution)? If so, there may be no inconsistency.

What I mean is, when people talk about governments it's often as a non-human legal person, which can act, omit, sue, and be sued, but which does not have the full range of human traits, like insincerity. Whereas a group that does not have legal personality and only describes a collection of humans, albeit in the abstract, like 'liberals', can demonstrate a fuller range of human traits.

Then, as an experiment, switch the terms and see if it has the same ring to it:

politics for [governments] are just a big reality show

Does this anthropomorphise 'governments' in the same way as attributing human emotions to them?

I don't necessarily have answers to these questions but it seems that you can't be calling someone out for bad faith unless you can strongly argue yes, no, yes, to the above questions.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i admire the willingness to spell it out lol but that other guy has big reddit debatebro energy and i don't think it can go anywhere

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It's often the way. Hopefully someone else reading will see the flaw in forever calling an alternative viewpoint 'bad faith' because it's presented with humour.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Did he assign a trait to liberals? Because if not, there's no inconsistency.

Let's see...

politics for liberals are just a big reality show

It sure seems like it. Liberals treat politics as a reality TV show seems to be a trait described.

Then a follow up question: is there a difference between 'liberals' as a group (i.e. not liberalism) and a government (i.e. an institution)? If so, there may be no inconsistency.

Sure, there is a difference. They're both institutions though. They can both be assigned traits in perfectly valid reasonable ways.

I don't necessarily have answers to these questions but it seems that you can't be calling someone out for bad faith unless you can strongly argue yes, no, yes, to the above questions.

I can strongly answer that "anthropomorphising" things made of anthropomorphic beings is perfectly reasonable. Giving traits to a building can be silly, but sometimes still useful literarily. Using human characteristics to describe humans is totally normal, useful, and reasonable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

They're not comprised of robots. Apply synecdoche.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are made by people in the end

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, yeah it's obvious, but when people say that X company or country looks weak/happy/pissed, they are refering to the board of directors or congress that are taking the decisions, naming the country instead of the whole sentence is easier.

You can still find it weird ofc, I was just trying to explain why people do it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Please teach me more of your liberal ways, I'm really starting to understand how the world works now.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really don't get the need of being so passive aggresive with someone trying to hold a conversation. Have a nice day.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you were actually interested in a conversation you would have answered my other replies to you.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I am answering them, although those are in a different thread of comments. I have literally 5 comments from your user in my inbox and all of them have been answered.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where are the links to hexbear users saying they are going to vote for Trump?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

sent in the other comment, I couldn't bother because I had to search for them again, but since you insist.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm going to vote for him in multiple states

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd expect no less from a user of such a liberal instance.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey now, only we are allowed to insult us

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From one lib to another I thought that was high praise sorry

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry, I was on mobile using the Connect app and it doesn't show the user's instance, didn't realise you are from the only other lib instance

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

No worries. We've got to stand together during tough times like these.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Some hexbear users really hate being decent when conversing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You get what you give shrug-outta-hecks

Same energy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If you think being treated with derision on a niche webforum made by Marxists is equivalent to being killed on live television, then yeah sure. If that's the case though you should logout

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

And here I thought I left reddit...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Well governments are made of people...

If you're assigning human traits to the building the government is in, sure it's stupid. Recognizing the traits of the people representing the state is pretty normal though.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

If they act like children...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Governments are made by humans so… I guess human traits carry over