[watwut]

> Trust in the matter that they’ve grievances with? Not really.

Does this automatox mistrust applies to all victims of aggression/imperialism/genocide like Yazidi, Jews, etc?

As in, this logic means that you are determined not to trust victims of something, purely because they are victims and talk about it.

[least]

Trust is earned; it should not be given freely. As I’ve already said, it’s already a gigantic burden to try to corroborate claims and distill biases from all media, so there’s little reason to spend time doing so from sources I already know are biased, especially if there are other sources available.

> Does this automatox mistrust applies to all victims of aggression/imperialism/genocide like Yazidi, Jews, etc?

It applies to any party that is making assertions about something where there’s a clear conflict of interest. It is not saying what is being said is false, just that it is not automatically true and requires more scrutiny because it’s from a biased source. I think Ukrainians are victims of a Russian invasion but that does not mean that I think that Ukrainian news sources are particularly reliable with regards to reports on the war. That isn’t asserting that they are lying either, just that those claims require more verification.

> As in, this logic means that you are determined not to trust victims of something, purely because they are victims and talk about it.

Determined to not trust implies that I’m actively going out of my way to think that anything coming out of a victim’s mouth is a lie or deceitful. I’m not saying that at all.