Two-thirds of the way through the article, it's made clear that that maxim serves on an individual basis, but that when dealing with totalitarian apparatchiks / apparats, a more combative approach needs be taken. Thus, calling out proponents of institutionalized contempt is fair game and consistent.
There's not much point in claiming to be compassionate and reasonable if, in the end, you're nor going to be. It's the old "You're making me do this to you" argument.
Oh I see: you don't understand the argument or refuse to acknowledge you originally misunderstood it, and now find comfort in an extraneous and false binary.
There's an awful lot of name-calling for someone claiming to support "treat others with love and respect"
Two-thirds of the way through the article, it's made clear that that maxim serves on an individual basis, but that when dealing with totalitarian apparatchiks / apparats, a more combative approach needs be taken. Thus, calling out proponents of institutionalized contempt is fair game and consistent.
There's not much point in claiming to be compassionate and reasonable if, in the end, you're nor going to be. It's the old "You're making me do this to you" argument.
"I don't want to do this to you, but you're forcing me to."
or
"I know I shouldn't be doing this, but I don't see any other way. It's your fault things have reached this point."
Just say it.
Oh I see: you don't understand the argument or refuse to acknowledge you originally misunderstood it, and now find comfort in an extraneous and false binary.
He could just drop all the "I'm a nice guy but" stuff and just get straight to the "the ends justify the means" part.