,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
I identify on a spiritual level with the phrase "repugnant or imprudent".
As in, it's important to say that these things are morally abhorrent, but also important to point out how in terms of practical utility it makes it impossible for us to continue doing this.
As in, it's important to say that these things are morally abhorrent, but also important to point out how in terms of practical utility it makes it impossible for us to continue doing this.
Long time readers may have noticed I sometimes get lost in the weeds of how it just works out better, long-term, to be a square dealing, altruistic good neighbor than it does to be a greedy, conniving, ravenous marauder. Functional utility.
Lawyers in our legal system are called upon to defend people and conduct they find repellent, so this filing to withdraw from the defense of the neo-Nazi Chris Cantwell makes its case along two prongs, and one of them is "Look, this just isn't going to work, practically."
Whatever they're citing in their rationale there, whatever they're quoting from, it uses the language of either/or, "repugnant or imprudent" behavior, but the lawyers are making sure they cover both of those bases.
