zlacker

>>todd8+(OP)
it's not xenophobic, but xenophobic people really love to talk about it. that's the problem with the discourse.

of course the irony is that it doesn't even matter. We already know China (1) tried to cover it up, screwing the rest of the world, and (2) has poor wet market sanitation practices that seem designed to cultivate these kinds of diseases. Those issues are already bad enough.

>>metall+dl
> but xenophobic people really love to talk about it

All too often I see this used as the standard for labelling someone a xenophobe and it becomes a classic case of begging the question. Since we all agree it's not xenophobic to speak about it, perhaps it's time we wait for actual xenophobia before making what should be serious accusations?

>>brigan+tq
What exactly are the good guys supposed to do in a situation where bad guys enjoy the truth: support the noble lie, or hiss "you are not supposed to talk about this"?

>>Viliam+q81
Perhaps not divvy up the world, or people, as "good" and "bad" and instead focus on truth?

Or perhaps consider that if truth is good, then more truth is likely to be more good, and good people would (should) embrace truth and bad guys speaking more truth would be better than bad guys using less (as surely that is one way to measure who is bad).

Given these options (and I could go on) I'm not sure why a "noble" lie or suppression of speech are the only choices, or better choices.