Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by naasking 519 days ago
> He acted as an enabler to countless violent crimes.

I don't like this argument of imputing transitive guilt. If guilt is imputed indirectly, then all of us are guilty of many things, like atrocities that our countries have perpetrated during war.
1 comments
rbanffy 519 days ago
He actively and deliberately enabled those activities for self benefit.

Also punishing a people for actions of their government is a war crime.

link
naasking 518 days ago
> Also punishing a people for actions of their government is a war crime

Right, because we recognize that indirect, transitive blame is ethically problematic.

> He actively and deliberately enabled those activities for self benefit.

So did the Sacklers with the opioid epidemic, arguably even more directly than Ulbricht. Which of them is in prison?

"Enabling" is exactly the kind of weasel word that I find problematic. It has no strict definition and can be broadened to suit whatever is needed to condemn an action you happen to dislike in any given scenario.

link
rbanffy 518 days ago
> So did the Sacklers with the opioid epidemic, arguably even more directly than Ulbricht. Which of them is in prison?

Do you think two wrongs make a right?

link