Thank you, you have responded very thoughtfully! Re “either they should have condemned it wholeheartedly, or said nothing,” good on you to call out the implicature of non-statements. I think the dehumanizing nature of boilerplate-like speech goes generally unacknowledged.
It is calamitous that while candid critical questioning can be considered calm and composed, working within a parameter of imperative public positivity ends up sounding sarcastic if the scrutinizer isn’t skilled at “the spin.” The passive voice is not liked by anyone, and least of all by me.
Thank you, you have responded very thoughtfully! Re “either they should have condemned it wholeheartedly, or said nothing,” good on you to call out the implicature of non-statements. I think the dehumanizing nature of boilerplate-like speech goes generally unacknowledged.
It is calamitous that while candid critical questioning can be considered calm and composed, working within a parameter of imperative public positivity ends up sounding sarcastic if the scrutinizer isn’t skilled at “the spin.” The passive voice is not liked by anyone, and least of all by me.