I greatly appreciate the context you provided in the linked comment, and in general the attempt to explain why an underrepresented side views their choices as reasonable or necessary. I want to do what I can to support you continuing to bring up counterpoints and things people are missing.
This particular post reads to me as president-neutral, in that you could post it on a conservative-leaning forum under a democratic president and it would look equally in tune with local culture. Maybe I’m wrong about that, it’s easy to read things that match one’s own worldview as neutral, in which case I’m asking for specifics on what makes this not neutral.
One guess, based on your other comment, is that Habryka takes the legitimacy of the court for granted, in which case I’d like to dig into more detail on that.
I greatly appreciate the context you provided in the linked comment, and in general the attempt to explain why an underrepresented side views their choices as reasonable or necessary. I want to do what I can to support you continuing to bring up counterpoints and things people are missing.
This particular post reads to me as president-neutral, in that you could post it on a conservative-leaning forum under a democratic president and it would look equally in tune with local culture. Maybe I’m wrong about that, it’s easy to read things that match one’s own worldview as neutral, in which case I’m asking for specifics on what makes this not neutral.
One guess, based on your other comment, is that Habryka takes the legitimacy of the court for granted, in which case I’d like to dig into more detail on that.