That seems like weak evidence. People frequently hate things that don’t really warrant it. For example, lenders provide a service to society, and the use of their service is voluntary. Their rates and terms are constrained by facts of money and risk management that are mostly out of their control. Yet they are still widely despised and have been for a long time.
I agree that it isn’t strong evidence. I should have made my point more explicit. My point is that Ooziegooen mentions the vitriol as if it is evidence that DiAngelo’s argument has value and should be discussed. If anything it’s evidence against that notion (however weak it may be).
That seems like weak evidence. People frequently hate things that don’t really warrant it. For example, lenders provide a service to society, and the use of their service is voluntary. Their rates and terms are constrained by facts of money and risk management that are mostly out of their control. Yet they are still widely despised and have been for a long time.
I agree that it isn’t strong evidence. I should have made my point more explicit. My point is that Ooziegooen mentions the vitriol as if it is evidence that DiAngelo’s argument has value and should be discussed. If anything it’s evidence against that notion (however weak it may be).