[newacct583]

But the presence of BLM-related riots simply isn't relevant to the stuff under discussion, where an upthread poster made a sideways argument that evidence for right wing violence was presumptivly suspect in the fact of multiple examples of exactly that kind of thing. The police station in Minneapolis that was burned down (to pick what most people would accept as the worst example of BLM-related violence) just shouldn't be part of a discussion about whether or not there was a threat against Amazon's data centers from the right.

This is pure whataboutism, basically. Even if you're right (for the record, I think you're right), you're applying it to deflect an argument against "your" side. Isn't that making the problem you are explaining WORSE and not better?

Surely you'd agree that step one to being less divided is to stop reflexively defending "our" side when bad things happen, right?