Brazil president Jair Bolsonaro hospitalised with pneumonia - Polidicks

Who cares that he was democratically elected or whatever? He's a threat to Brazil and the world at large. Better off dead.

...and to add onto this, we're already at a point where insects and various species of animals (such as birds) are starting to show alarming decreases in population numbers. We don't have time to mess around, and are already standing at the edge of the precipice in some regards, or potentially even in the beginning of the endgame if we don't change our course.

yeah but no one cares what you think about them because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Then don't defend him when you knew 0 of these very public and easy to find facts??? Jesus christ

(Makes me wonder why it is that book burnings and arrests are "fucked", but the destruction of the Amazon isn't?)

This is what all enlightened centrists have to say for themselves, anything that leads to somebody getting harmed or potentially harmed even if they happen to be scumfuck bastards should be treated with the same sympathy as more deserving people have earned. You can bet my left nut that I stand 100% behind the people who hope that bolsonaro walks out of that hospital feet first.

Please, if you know so much about what he has and hasn't done, elaborate on his appointments of christian fundamentalists, the awkward convenience of Sergio Moro's new position and the newly proposed legislation he has for police killings, the measure to decrease transparency in government and withhold official records, something, anything.

I mean if you wanna argue with dacommie1, at provide sources instead of just defend this, that and that. I searched for bolsinaro book burnings on google, and literally the third result is this thread: https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/185359/15f07e85-6c0d-4c0b-9507-53a649c1a1ae/02C19D72-C834-462F-AA1F-3B5AE0FF29C6.png I know Zukriechen is more into this situation (and I trust that he isn’t super wrong), but at the very least this shit isn’t super easy to find on google, or worst case myxo just assblasted a guy for not knowing facts that don’t exist (and people are agreeing with). In a discussion, if you bring up facts, please source them (at least if requested), instead of doing these Gish-gallops that might be more or less factual. It’s a really shitty way to argue. With that said, I wouldn’t mind this guy dying a natural death.

What I'm trying to say with that sentence is that if you're someone who claims to know what he has and hasn't done, then those very well publicized developments I mentioned should already be known to you. Me needing to educate him on them would indicate that he shouldn't, in fact, be claiming much. No offense meant, but you misinterpret it as "here's a list, address it all" when it's "here's a list, are you familiar with any of it?"

I mean my post was really more pointed at these people (I mean one of them is a doctor ffs): https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/185359/e3699e73-1d48-436b-8afb-60989f452c13/image.png That's why I put "(at least if requested)" - I know it's not practical to source every single, minor, well-known fact, and you shouldn't have to. But at the same time, this makes this forum pretty susceptible to literal fake news. I don't doubt that you're probably right about what you write about (I'm not that well-versed in Brazilian politics, and it's too early in the morning to change that), but FP has become so endeared with this "you should already know the facts" when people literally are just asking for sources. It's a completely disingenuous way of arguing, even if you think the other user is an idiot. This also shows that some pretty well-respected users literally won't hesitate to believe shitty stuff about people they don't like. I mean I'm honestly a bit surprised.

What's wrong with wishing death upon people? It's not like you're actually going to murder them.

What do you want from me? He is casting a sweeping moral judgement over people for comments on an issue he clearly doesn't understand. If he can't differentiate why hating Bolsonaro and hating Obama aren't comparable on any level, what value should anyone place in his opinion?

Maybe I was a bit quick to include your post, but when you agree with a post accusing him of not knowing "basic facts" (that then turn out to be not so basic, and no so fact-y) when asking for sources, your post about his ignorance comes off as pretty hypocritical.

I don't see the hypocrisy because I know at least enough about Bolsonaro to know that comparing political outrage against him to political outrage against Obama is patently absurd. Also my agree on that post had more to do with the general idea that he should probably do more research into what Bolsonaro has done or said before making these sorts of comparisons and assuming it's just more radical lefty FP calling for death against regular every day right wing politicans. To try and discern some higher or more specific level of acknowledgement from a rating over a claim I never made is pointless and I have no idea why you are spending this much time browbeating everyone else except for the gay who shit his completely uninformed opinion all over the thread in a desparate bid to win the moral highground.

I don't really see how "let's not shit on people when they can't find sources for fake news" is much of a moral high ground. What I'm reacting to is that more likely than not, most of FP knows fuck-all about Brazilian politics, and uninformed or not, someone asking for sources on what's basically fake news being accused of knowing nothing is kind of hilarious. Again, I wouldn't mind people like Bolsonaro (from what I do know of him) dying from pneumonia. I don't think I'm morally superior. I just don't want FP to devolve into a place where as long as the other guy is more stupid, you can just post whatever you want, because "at least you know a tiny bit more". I mean, congratulations, you're now the king of shit mountain.

I wasn't accusing you of trying to hold the moral highground, though I could probably make the case for it. I was accusing DaCommie1 of doing it. I have no idea why you are you dug into this "sources for fake news" shit because I never made a claim or cited any sources, just pointed out that no one cares what he thinks because his opinions are uninformed. So you don't want FP to devolve into a place where a counter-argument is made with bad data, just a place where initial claims can be had with bad data? But nothing. If you are going to establish yourself as some sort of (completely unnecessary and unasked for) debate moderator/arbiter of truth you can't just throw out things like this to discredit people. You don't think someone should understand a topic before making a post about it but surely you don't believe people should just use words without understanding what they mean? Unless you are DaCommie1, I guess.

I'm sorry, this part was just ambiguous to me: "and I have no idea why you are spending this much time browbeating everyone else except for the guy who shit his completely uninformed opinion all over the thread in a desparate bid to win the moral highground. " But I get how I was supposed to read it now. I simply assumed you agreed with the claim that those were basic facts since... well, you agreed with them, and you thought he was stupid for not knowing these basic facts. I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding how the rating system works around here. What DaCommie1 said was (mostly) a case of personal opinion, whereas "Bolsonaro has held book burnings" is a case of objective fact. If you bring up cases to show that Bolsonaro is not just "right wing" and that's why people want him dead, bring up those cases - but those cases shouldn't be literal fake news. I understand what a Gish gallop is. I already apologised for using the term improperly and explained what my original intent with the usage was in my other post. Of course one should strive to be exact in their wording, but if you can't catch at least the gist of using "Gish gallop" as an approximation for a discussion where many people are making claims and then refusing to back them up with sources, I think you're being pretty uncharitable. Mistakes are okay. Owning up to them is key. I'll strive to be better in the future - I hope you will, too. If DaCommie1 said that Bolsonaro was working 70h/week at an orphanage I'd ask him to back it up. I might've even challenged him on his original post if I had been awake, but I wasn't. I'll - once more - stress that I said at least if requested. The problem isn't that sources weren't posted originally, it's that myxo (and by extension of ratings, you) called DaCommie1 an uninformed idiot for even asking. Even though the claims were bunk. None of you read his post and thought "hey maybe those claims aren't actually true, I'll check" - you just assumed they were true, and DaCommie1 was uninformed. Does that literally not trigger even a second of self-reflection? I don't think I can really expand on this any further, and I probably shouldn't.

Well, no, I didn't agree with those claims. Even if you include ratings I didn't rate that post agree. I don't think he is stupid for not knowing basic facts, I think he is out of lining judging people from a position of ignorance. You can say "mostly" but he emphatically made claims about both Bolsonaro and the people expressed a hope he would die. Also the claims made seem to have been false, not "literal fake news". I hate to be pedantic but I want to ensure debate on FP lives up to the high standard you seek to establish. I edited that part out because it's not really important but I appreciate the irony of being called uncharitable by the person who see's an unsubstantiated claim and immediately assumes malice. This doesn't trigger a second of self-reflection because it's a ridiculous caricature of the exchange that occurred and has absolutely no basis in reality. I already explained that I wasn't agreeing with the book burnings or the arrests. I never assumed they were true. My grasp on Brazliian politics are scant but I lurked in the election threads often. As for the claims, I googled them myself and came up with nothing. I was agreeing with the general call that he should inform himself before posting. Or at the very least inform himself before saying that everyone hates Bolsonaro just for "disagreeing with his politics" and trying to pass some smug moral judgement over them.

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/185359/358d1eb5-9ccc-4651-8d13-bcfd0e5022bd/image.png ? Unless you didn't read which claims DaCommie1 responded to. I don't really know where I assumed malice on your part? I never said anything about intent. You never assumed they were true but they are still "very public and easy to find facts"? Up until his post literally three claims had been made about Bolsonaro's deeds: Book burning, mass arrests of academics (though this one seems to have a grain of truth to it, in the sense that academics seem to have been harassed), and the Amazon jungle (potentially) getting cut down. DaCommie1 reacted to two of those claims, and said he weren't aware of them, and couldn't find anything to back them up. Considering no other claims had been made, I find it kinda of hard to believe that you agreeing with "Can't you find these basic facts" pertained to anything else. If we are to pretend that anyone were even trying to disprove DaCommie1's claims, 2/3 facts weren't facts and the last claim is kinda up in the air. Sure we can assume that DaCommie1 wouldn't seriously reconsider his position no matter what, but 10 ill-informed Facepunchers that basically leave the discussion at "just inform yourself lol" was never really going to work now was it. Especially when a perfectly reasonable "do you have any sources" is met with "lol you don't know???". It's also hard to argue this because this now seems like everything is directed at you making a giant grave, personal mistake, where I was really trying to get at more general issue on FP in the first place. Sure. I'll give you that one.

For what it's worth, this exchange is a big part of why I don't feel like posting in this section much these days so I guess you get the last laugh?

I'm not doing this to annoy you, and I'm pretty sure I enjoy this about as much as you do. I'm not trying to attack you as a person. I'm sure you're a good guy.

I made two point by point replies but nu-punch ate both of them so I'm just going to be blunt: Having to explain why I rated a post feels really stupid and I frankly don't really care if you believe my explanation or not.

ironic username? how can you be a commie and not want him to fucking die?

Between 8 people who rated a post saying they were basic facts and therefore didn't need to be sourced, no one decided to actually look them up. What was important was telling DaCommie1 that he was uninformed. Again, I'm not talking about you specifically, I'm talking about the general sentiment in the thread. You make it sound like it'd be ridiculous to you to understand the context of that post, but it's really not - DaCommie1's post was quoted, asking for sources, and what you agreed with was that those facts were basic and easily found. To agree with that sentence would only require you to read what DaCommie1 responded to on the very same page. Not really a big ask, I think?

Sure but one would expect that the person rushing to Bolsonaro's defense in this case knew more about him other than the fact that he is a right wing politician.

I already explained this part. We're both probably spending hours on this for the same reason.

But I didn't agree that those facts were basic and easily found. I already said that. If you don't agree with me then we are at an impasse because you are simply ignoring my posts so I remain in line with the strawman that you have constructed in your head.

I mean it's alright if you literally didn't read any context to myxo's post and just agreed with it (in a more general sense). I'm just saying that it isn't unreasonable for me to assume that those rating the post actually read the context, since it's literally just a few posts above that one. I honestly don't think I'm ignoring your posts - if we're getting to that point where you feel that, it's probably better to just bury the hatchet here and not waste our time.

I hope Bolsonaro makes a swift recovery, so that he and his entire cabinet are fully sound of mind and body when the mobs of the oppressed drag them out of Brasilia at gunpoint and throw every single one in a cell. He could also die like a true fascist, alone in a dark hole, hiding like a rat.

this has like never occurred to a fascist without foreign intervention weakening the army prior